\"Stasis\" - strange diplomacy
 

Something strange is happening in this game.
First I was betrayed by Jotunheim now the situation is nearly the same with Oceania. We had peace with these water inhabitans and according to our treaty were sending them 400 gold per turn for the possibility to control some land provinces they took form us before. I am not sure if it was a fair deal because those provinces had about 100 unrest but that is not the issue...
The issue is that we had a NAP with Oceania and we were sending him gold each turn and now we are heavily attacked without any warning. I am a new person to this forums but I'd like to ask if it is considered fair play here? I just don't get it.

Re: \"Stasis\" - strange diplomacy
 

I generally assume that it's under the honor system unless the host specifically says at the start of the game that NAPs and other agreements between players are not to be broken. You are quite unlucky...over many games I have yet to have someone break a NAP against me. The best you can do is to let everyone know of R'lyehs backstabbery and encourage those who currently have NAPs with R'lyeh that not only is he not to be trusted, but that since he has no respect for NAPs they should not respect the NAPs either and should go ahead and attack him and engage him in a 2 or 3 front war while he is fighting you.

More often than not though when someone breaks a NAP it is just a misunderstanding and the person who broke the NAP thought that they were within their rights. Most people do try to protect their reputation.

Re: \"Stasis\" - strange diplomacy
 

It seems that karnoza was speaking about Oceania, not R'lyeh.

Re: \"Stasis\" - strange diplomacy
 

Karnoza was definitely speaking about Oceania, not Ryleh. I have had dealings with Seej (Oceania) before, when he broke a NAP in a previous game. I've never met a more untrustworthy player; he seems to take delight in breaking his treaties. A duck should trust a scorpion before you place faith in one of Seej's pacts.

Re: \"Stasis\" - strange diplomacy
 

Wow! Maybe it's worth tracking the "untrustworthy" people by adding them to some black list...
I doubt karnoza could have known about that...

Re: \"Stasis\" - strange diplomacy
 

I like the list thing. Maybe we should start a thread listing those dishonorable people and their offenses. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

Re: \"Stasis\" - strange diplomacy
 

Peaceful nation of Pythium is now open to trade. We can forge the following items, among others:

Air boosters (helmet, bag)
Staff of storm
Water booster (bracelet, robe)
Astral booster (cap)
Ring of Soccery
Ring of Wizardry
Frost Brand

Price will be reasonable. Please inquire by PM.

Thanks for your attention.

Re: \"Stasis\" - strange diplomacy
 

Hi all,
I wanted to answer the charges. First, yes I attacked Ulm this turn.

Second, I am sending him back his 400 gold for last turn.
For what its worth, I had not intended to keep that $$. Third, there was no warning-ahead clause on our NAP, so I gave none.

Rest easy, oh neighbors of mine with whom I *do* have notification clauses.

CJ

Re: \"Stasis\" - strange diplomacy
 

Isn't the whole purpose of NAP to get some warnings ahead?

What is the difference between "no warning-ahead clause NAP" and no NAP at all? It seems to me that both are attacking at will.

Can someone explain this for me?

Re: \"Stasis\" - strange diplomacy
 

Know to some nations as the "Ring of Futbol". >.>


And I've never heard of a NAP0, that is indeed like no nap at all. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif In my experience, it is universally accepted that unless otherwise specified, the standard duration of the NAP is 3 turns between notice, and attack.

Not that I am entirely fond of Ulm in this game. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif