Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Another player had Sauro as his first choice while you were on Kailasa, Black. So Sauro is taken. We can't go create a game with all kinds of nation dependencies for players I am afraid.
It makes dividing the nations amongst players needlessly burdensome.
I hope you have fun with Kailasa, welcome aboard!

Game name on Llama is: Oceans_of_Land. It is ready to accept a pretender for your nation.
I have updated the first post with a direct link to the game page on llama.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Good Job, I will have my Pretender in by this evening. Remeber guys to use the underscore in the title

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

little offtopic question, but is it possible to send PM to me? i cant find how it can be turned on/off. thx!

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Earcaraxe. no I have sent a PM test and introductory message to all players, but you and Doo are unable to receive PM's.

Please make sure you enable PM messaging by going to your 'User CP' in the horizontal navbar at the top of this page (the black line with the white texts). You can enable PM messaging in your User CP somewhere.

Doo, please do the same.

*shameless plug ON* Oh and why hasn't anyone thanked me yet for creating this? I am still at '4 times in 3 posts'? *shameless plug OFF* ;)

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

I for one wouldn't mind starting on friday. It would give everyone time to work on their strategies, pretenders, etc... get the changes in CBM for those who never played it. Not to mention it could be frustating for Yskonyn having his start not done the way he wanted it.

Plus it would mean we can do the first few turns during the week-end and not wait 24 hours each time to recruit 15 guys and a mage.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Ok guys, can you expalin me what have i to do?
i delete worthy heroes 1.8 and i use CBM with worthy heores 1.6right?
and worthy heroes is already within cbm or i have to download it?
Something i should know about name on pretenders or we have no limit?

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Worthy Heroes (1.8?) is included in CBM 1.6 so you don't have to download or enable it, just enable CBM 1.6 ;)

By the way, will diplomacy be binding or not?

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Swan indeed, like DK said, all you need to do is delete WR 1.8(if you have that installed atm) download CBM from the link in the first post of this thread, install that, enable it in game and you're set.
I am not sure what you mean by a 'limit' on pretender names? As long as they're nothing offensive I'd say you can name him 'Snake on a Stick' if you wanted that.

Diplomacy will be diplomacy. I am in favour of roleplaying diplomacy a bit to add to the game. If you want to be known as 'Player X the Deceiver' after this game, be my guest.
But it's rather awkward if you have an alliance with someone to suddenly kill off all his troops, so in that respect, yes diplo is binding.
If you wanted to attack your ally later on, I think it would be normal to at least make it known to him/her prior to attack that you will not be allies anymore.
Roleplaying (lightly) or adding flavour to your texts in this case is a nice way to create a setting IMO. I'll update the first post to be a bit more clear on this.
Good question!

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Here's what has been ammended in the first post regarding diplomacy:

A bit more on diplomacy; I am in favour of roleplaying when engaging in diplomacy, but I am aware there are lots of players who don't like RP, so this is not required. But it does create a nice setting and adds to the atmosphere.
Because we are playing with new people I think we need to have a few diplomacy rules. In my last game diplomacy turned out to be highly unreliable which was quite confusing for me, so let us abide by some simple rules:
1 - Allies are not to be backstabbed. If you want to attack your ally, you first have to break your alliance with that player before attacking. So this means there is a one turn buffer limit between declaring the end of the alliance and the first attack. This is to prevent the new players from being confused about what happened. And it gives the players' mind some rest about who to trust for now (see rule 3).
2 - Same goes for a Non Agression Pact or other nice examples of an agreement of no hostilities between two nations, whatever you may call them.
3 - This does NOT rule out deceit. You can still catch your victim quite unprepared, so deceitful acts are allowed, but remember to abide by rule 1 and 2 at all times. If there's some sort of disagreement between two players please contact me or Grudge.

If there are questions about this or if you disagree or have a better idea, please feel free to express them!

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Just as a suggestion to all the newbs here, diplo is much easier to keep track of if you use the forum message system, as then you have backups of all your communications.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

If the others would feel the same, then sure! It would solve a lot of problems, right there. I also know, however, that people do not like to wait and tend to drop out of a game when things are slowed down. :bug:

We are playing with new people, though, so the extra time available to think about a pretender and strategy for your nation might be a welcome oppertunity.

You can all make your wish known here.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Actually it's not really necessary to delete WH 1.8, it just needs to not be enabled in your preferences. If I had to delete a mod every time I wanted to play CBM... ouch. You just need to never enable WH 1.8 and CBM at the same time.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Yes but there might be one problem: CBM installs a folder called Worthy Heroes as well and it overwrites the seperate WH install. Some people have said CBM 1.6 comes with a WH older than 1.8?
If that's not true then indeed. No need to delete WH.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

i guesss i managed to turn my PMing on.
and btw: thanks for creating this! :)

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

I have turned PM on. I thanked you in post #61 Yskonyn, cheers for setting this game up.

I'm all for starting ASAP, but am happy to have more time to plot your downfalls :). I like the feedback about CBM, I thought Vanilla better because its easy to find all the info about it on the wiki, eg what Construction 4 allows you to forge. Does anyone know if this info for CBM 1.6 is around?

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

There is a post in the Forum called 'Naps", A number of vetern players give examples of Naps and different results, I reccomend you read it...it could make or break your game, AND reputation in the game.

Following is MY post in that discussion

Wow.....Nap's, it seems like it comes up every now and then and after that we get a bunch of angry players.

I will give you some options and then what I do personally.

1. MAKING A NAP.... Some people (like myself)think it is best to 'register' a nap in the forum. Something very simple (Arco and Ulm agree to a 3 turn nap)clear up to a three paragraph document where they (I actually have seen one of these)spell everything out agreement.

Others think it wise NOT to list it as it may give away where you are (if Arco has a Nap with Ulm and you know where Ulm is...then you can approximate where Arco is). As well as being able to ask for Arco's help if you want to break the Nap with Ulm.

Canceling a Nap...

All the options in the above posts are 'Correct' as there is no absolute right or wrong.

I always cancel a Nap in the forum but I don't always notify the person by PM. Some cancel by PM but do not put it in the forum.

Let me explain the 2 differences...

1. Cancel in the Forum..if you cancel it in the forum it is there for all to see, I feel that you should run by the forum everyday to see what is going on, extensions, wars, etc (a lot of good info). I also feel it is not my fault if you DON'T read the forum and all of a sudden you are attacked.

However, if you post in the forum, the others may see an opportunity to wait a few turns and pile on, Guess the choice is yours.

There is ALWAYS a question of what '3 turns' is and they can be crucial. You read the example's in earlier posts, now let me give you one some of the older guys have used before, (and it makes perfect sense...but it is REALLY a LOT different).

Announcement in forum...

"Arco breaks nap with Ulm turn 21 hostilities may begin on turn 23." Think about that for a moment, if it is before the turn hosts then 21 is turn 1 and 23 is turn 3. Some have different feelings of what 3 turns are and when you can attack...but if they spell it out in the forum and there is no rebuttal...then on turn 23, they fire away, 1 turn earlier than others may feel is right (AND catch you unaware).

Not saying it is right, but it iS right there in the forum for you to dispute.

I think everyone will agree that ANY troop of any kind (Skeptic, Stealth Troops, even an Arco Oreo that can cause damage to a nation can NOT go thru the nation without permission and CERTAINLY not have Stealth armies in position INSIDE the borders of your foe when the nap expires.

I saw a mention of 'official' nap breakers (Arcane Nexus, Burden of time, Utter dark, etc (and there are more)....

But let me pose a question (this is actually happening in a game on here (starting of end game)right now.

There are about 6 nations left, 4 are very strong and vying for position and short treaty type agreements. 1 almost dead and ONE that is right in the middle and has no army to speak of or any deterrent at all, EXCEPT..he IS in the middle and separates the potential warring factions (kind of like Switzerland in WWII).

He cast Arcane Nexus and there was an uproar, but he asked this simple question...."Would you rather I had it with enough gems that it cant be over written or dispelled, Or would you guys rather one of the other nations have it (of course he promised not to give, loan to or help a faction in any way).

I suppose if he was attacked he could wreck the game by casting some pretty nasty spells (I think they call this the 'Doomsday Defence). But he couldn't win it anyway.

So before you lock in what a Nap is or isn't in your mind...what the conditions are or start declaring war brcause someone cast something...think about what works for you.

I personally have a reputation that I will NEVER stab anyone in the back, Makes it pretty easy for me in early game and midgame. Some will stab you in a heart beat or just take a Nap so you quit preparing to attack them while they start preparing to attack you...

So make your decisions based on your play style and how YOU want to play the game...just remember, although they say it stays inside the game, people remember when they play with you agian.

Hope this helps some of you, MY way isn't the best way...it it just one way

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

yeah NAPs are a very complicated issue, especially when it comes to stealthy units(somewhat avoided under these settings but not entirely), say scouts, black servants, etc. for example, if you have some black servants equipped as thugs, you send them deep inside your NAPed neighbor, than at some point you tell him you cancel the NAP, than after 3 turns you attack with the stealthy units you sent deep into his territories. would that be called a violation of the NAP if he never caught your forces before hand(patrols, PD, etc)? what can be done in this case? personally I think that in this case it isn't cheating unless you get caught, and if you do than well, the NAP ends anyway...

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

I would be happy to start on Friday. I don't have a clue how to set up Caelum, especially expansion. Also, is independent strength 5?

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

I'm pretty sure worthy heroes is more out of date than cbm is, and cbm is using all the WH heroes. But, if you are worried about it, there's an easy fix. Just attempt to copy all WH images into the WH folder that comes with cbm. Then delete the WH image folder, and use the one from cbm. This will not cause any problems ad will ensure than you have all the images from both mods.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Scouts are non combatants, and as such are no problem or danger.

A black servant, Skeptic or anything with a stone idol etc IS doing damage anyway and if caught (and there ARE ways to catch them...I will let you guys work on that between now and Friday as your homework assignment)I would say you are free to attack right away.

You are best to ask permission or announce that you are running a (whatever) thru their territory and will do no damage or linger.

Again, personal opinion but this ISN'T the NFL. Where there is holding on every play and it is only holding if you get caught.

If you have a NAP then someone is putting their trust in you...Break that trust and be prepared to be bombarded with spells, stealth units and sneak attacks every time they play you.

It is supposed to stay in the game, but I have never seen someone just say "Good Game and GREAT backstabbing" to a person (unless the game is based on it in the description).

I know people who actually keep a list of Honorable and dishonorable players and in other games have their allies target them also OR won't play in a game with you. If you don't care, then more power to you. But if you DO value your reputation, then I suggest you take pains to protect it.

Again, just an opinion.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

well, if no damage is done during the NAP, so Skeptics, Harvester of Sorrows, etc are out of the question, than was the NAP broken if I just positioned stealth troops for future damage once the NAP breaks? a black servant with some equipment isn't spreading unrest, disease, or whatever, so why is he actually causing damage, before the NAP is over that is...?

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

To celebrate Earth Hour I have uploaded an environmentally friendly Pretender. Name is Getafix.

Should be enough clues there for you to work out what it is.
Actually I'm expecting somebody to say "The number of games I've played with an X Pretender called Getafix....." :)

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

ANY unit that can cause damage to a Nation whether it is overt or covert is breaking the nap if you have it in their lands.

It is no different than having a NUKE in the middle of London Just IN CASE we might go to war with them.

If you want to do it...go ahead. But be prepared from then on though in any game you play to have more Skeptics, Black Servants, Assassins, and anything else that can hide and wait because it will flash around this community like a lightning bolt that you are untrustworthy.

For the most part, this isn't a win at all costs game (though I suspect some do it).

Do you really think that people will trust someone that did that once, or even play with them.

They won't be feared, they will be shunned.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

I am for waiting until Friday if everyone else is..

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

yes, NAP's are a complicated issue and there is plenty of disagreement about what is and isn't okay. I am happy with whatever rules the admin decides on - just please put them in the first post and explain exactly what you mean.

Something like this (change around as you please but please be specific so we won't have arguments later):
Non aggression pact / alliance agreements are binding. When you enter one, you should specify a number of turns of warning such as a NAP-3 or NAP-5.

You are not allowed to make any direct attacks against that player until the warning is given by PM or forum and the warning period is passed. Direct attacks include:
1. An move-attack with units carrying your flag
2. A assassination by a unit carrying your flag
3. A global enchantment with a harmful effects
4. A ritual attack spell that informs the victim of who sent it

These are not considered direct attacks:
1. Anonymous spells or anonymous actions like inciting unrest
2. Non-harmful global (such as gem generators, gift of health, etc...)
3. Dominion-related actions such as preaching, stealth-preaching, or blood sacrificing
4. Moving stealthy units through an allies' territory
5. "Attacks" that have been agreed up on in advance as territory trading or unit suicide.

If one member of the NAP feels that the other is behind indirect attacks then they always break the NAP, but the appropriate warning must still be given.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

I disagree about stealth preaching (and I play Arco) or moving stealthy units thru a territory during a nap without permission. If you have no nap with a nation, have at it.

I find a stealth preacher messing with my dominion or an army going thru my lands with a nap in effect and I will attack without warning.

Agian, do you think that causing unrest or inciting to riot in London who is in a peace agreement with the USA is OK?

spells that attack you and you have no idea who they are, well you don't KNOW it is them.

I Guess I am saying, if you can't trust the guy you made a nap with, and I have seen his tactics before, I won't abide by it...I will sneak him in a heartbeat.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Well its your game so you can make whatever rule you want (just put it in the first post please).

However, I think that an all-out ban on "any unit that can cause damage" really messes up the game balance. First off there is no such thing as a non-combatant in the game. Even an indy scout can take a province or kill some units under certain circumstances. However, some nations' default scouts have abilities such as assassination or incitement or stealth-preaching. By forbidding these, you are seriously weakening these nations - especially since indy scouts are not always easy to find.

It makes more sense to me to say that just having stealthy units in an allies territory is fine as long as they don't attack. That seems consistent with the way its been in the games I've played so far. Sure this means you could launch an attack at multiple points when the NAP ends instead of just walking in through a choke-point. But you can do the same thing with flying, teleporting, and remote attacks anyway so its not that big of an advantage.

And, no, from an role-playing perspective doing a bit of sabotage or heresy is hardly the same as having a nuke in someones' territory. Whether in a fantasy setting or in real-life nations with peace agreements or alliances have spies, saboteurs, and heathen preachers in each others' territories all the time doing all kinds of crap. As long as you can't officially trace it back to the allied government, it's all part of the "game."

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

I agree with part of what you say....what I don't understand is why you would make a nap and then try and undermine him. Or better still PREPARING to undermine him.

Take a Skeptic...as long as he is on the move he doesn't cause harm. but say I put 7 skeptics and 3 stone idols in your cap and in about 5 turns you have over 100 unrest, just so you can't recruit and then I move them out and go to another of your forts, just to keep you weak, it is OK? Maybe I have it wrong, but if you have a Nap with me, you can pull your troops away from the border and use them somewhere else, where they are needed.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Technically nothing stealth should be in my lands if I have a nap and its a 100% honorable game.

In a game where nap's are not set in stone then if I found a Scout in my lands I wouldn't get too cranky, because I would most likely have Scouts in theirs. I might ask for no more Scouts in the future or if I'm doing well ask for tribute for the infraction. I wouldn't class this as cause for immediately ending the nap.

However, if any army of any size or a stealth dominion influencing unit or whatever found the nap can be instantly dissolved.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

well Grudge, even the CIA has operatives in London and MI5 in Washington, despite Britain and the US being close allies for a long time now... also I think you misunderstood my line of thought, I gave these things as an example of things you can/can't do during a NAP but in preparation to break it, say you signed a NAP-3, now you decide to terminate the NAP, instead of waiting 3 turns before you start moving stealthy units inside your soon to be enemy you're sending them in advance, but actually using them(aka causing harm) only after the NAP actually ends. no trust issues there, your intentions are very clear, it's just the matter of what a NAP does or does not include/allow during its fading turns...

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Well (lol) as you can see there are a LOT of different interpretations of a nap and how people will react to them....Science Pro has a good point about CTing in vs stealth armies already in your territory.

Just do what you feel is right and people will take it as they will I guess. I will take it different than alot of people but I also treat naps different than a lot of people.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Just saying i'm ok starting fryday

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

This question probably shows my noob status: But aren't the only units able to move into territory of other players the stealth units?
As far as I know you can't designate an ally or a NAP in game so the game knows what is friendly territory, can you? It's only between players via a message or out of game comms. I thought moving an army into another players territory will always start a battle if there is a defending force present?

Am I missing something here?
(Good morning, by the way! :) )

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

I'll agree to starting Friday then as well.

As for "I thought moving an army into another players territory will always start a battle if there is a defending force present?" yes this is true.

As way of further explanation: CTing vs stealthing in. To start a battle in a distant province on the turn a nap ends you could either spend the remaining turns of the nap to slowly move a stealth army to the province and unstealth once the nap ends, or on the last turn you can use the Cloud Trapeze (http://dom3.servegame.com/wiki/Cloud_Trapeze) spell to "teleport" there. One way contravenes the nap, the other way doesn't.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Like Grudge said; NAP's are a very complicated thing and we'd have a hard time to make specific rules up for it outlining what will be deemed fair and what not. As seen from the discussion a few posts back people have different sentiments about it and what one does find appropriate, the other doesn't.
So I guess we will have to freewheel a bit here, but remember what Grudge told you; people will remember.

I do, however, want to outline a few basic points as I already did in the first post. But I feel it's incomplete or not correct as it is now.
What is the common 'buffer' used in games after a break of any pact/alliance and before the fighting can start? 3 turns? It's now listed as only 1, which I made up myself.
I seem to gather from your discussions here that a 3 turn buffer is more common?

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Any amount of turns is OK, some like 3 and others like 5. I have even seen a 10 turn no attack rule for the first 10 turns (I think David and Golith was like that) because it was a noob game and they wanted everyone to expand freely, to give them a chance to get their feet on the ground.

I played in that game and I like that rule for new guys.

But I would let nations set there own time frame.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Ok I hereby confirm the buffer is set to 3 turns. So when you declare an alliance is void you cannot attack the victim for three turns.
On the matter of NAP's we need to keep it simple; IF the NAP is registered here on the forum it is binding. If you have secret agreements (ones not made public here on the forum) they can be broken at your own risk.

Secondly, how do you guys feel about a player vs player hostilies-ban for 10 turns? This mean people can build up their empire for 10 turns where you are allowed to expand and attack independents, but are not allowed to attack other players?

Also the first turn will commence on friday. So everyone has enough time to think about pretender and his/her strategy with the nation played and I can go abroad without having to worry about my first turns being played out like I want. Many thanks for the consideration.

The first post is updated accordingly. :)

Oh and one question I missed earlier: Yes, independents are set on 5. ;)

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

We also had a no attack for 10 turns rule in NvV2, which was thoroughly abused by the vets to destroy one of the players' potential economies. :)

As far as NAPs go, most tend to require 3 turns before hostilities can commence. But I've signed an NAP 10 before (never again), and shorter ones occur as well. Generally these are based on the needs of the individual nations. For the record, as some of you seem to be thinking of NAPs as quasi-alliances, I don't think that most players think of them like this. Whatever the case for this particular game, you should go into most games with the expectation that, at some point, the guy you have an NAP with may try something funny even if you are still under the NAP. Usually you will not get attacked under the flag of an NAP with no warning, but there are players who will ignore this even in binding diplo games.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

That's why I only listed the 3 turn limit rule for Alliances. Maybe we should up that to 5, to indicate its significance in relation to NAP's.
See the first post for the current 'rules'. NAP's are only binding if they're made known publicly here in this thread. Any secret agreements are at your own risk.
I've seen NAP's been signed with a specific turn count right from the start; say player A and B agree upon a NAP-5. This means, afaik, that for 5 turns they will not attack or otherwise harm eachother (including economic harm). After 5 turns it ends and it should be renewed by both players to keep it intact. Now, if this agreement was registered on the forum it is binding. If it is not, they're on their own when one decides to backstab the other.

Of course there is no game system in place to limit players from doing stuff to other players even when we say here those agreements are binding. But there is no way to counter this anyway. Like Grudge said, people will remember.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

That is a good policy i think.

that's fine by me.

Thanks!

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

I think the forum binding rule is a good thing..I am all for it.

I think if a person wants a shorter nap, that it be left up to the player's doing the nap. We don't want someone NOT making a nap because they think 3 or 5 turns are to binding.

I have no problem with the 10 turn rule (we had that in David and Goliath and it worked very well) But I think you have to make a stipulation that you can NOT take a province in those 10 turns that border another nations Capitol. If you don't have that provision, I may take 2 provinces bordering your Capital and stock them with troops, on turn 11 I attack your cap and besiege it. You are done for the most part.

If you take it by accident (can't always see whats next to it), you must back out leaving NO PD in it...if it has not been taken back by turn 10...its yours.

Friday is fine for the start wth me.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Can we have renaming ON please?

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Great idea Grudge, I will update the first post accordingly!

Doo, renaming has already been enabled on Llama. So yes, you can have it. :)

To clarify a bit more in the 'buffer' I was talking about a few posts back (and as explained in the first post of this thread):
The 'buffer' I was talking about was the amound of turns you cannot commence hostile action against the other player after you have broken an alliance.
So if you want to cease having an alliance with player X, you notify him or her, then the 3 turns start where you cannot attack player X so he has some time to prepare and settle for the broken alliance.

This has nothing to do with NAPs. You make and brake NAP's just like Gudge suggested. You agree with the other player how you want your NAP and if its then registered on the forums its binding, if not you're on your own.
How many turns you want the NAP to hold is entirely up to the two players to decide amongst themselves.

First post is ammended accordingly. Feel free to post any questions.

I am all for the first 10 turns no hostilities pact myself as well. Including Grudge's tips to prevent the abuse rdonj was talking about.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Ok people a few things:

First, I've misunderstuud the common NAP practise and to prevent us new players ending up in discussions over this in other games, the NAP rules are a bit different than what I have outlined before.
I thought if two players would agree on a NAP-5, for example, this was a non-agression pact for 5 turns. After this you either renew or you cease to have it.
It turns out that the most common use is different:
If two players agree on a NAP-5 those two players have a NAP until either of them cancel it, but then those 5 turns start where you are NOT allowed to attack still. Only after the 5 turns have passed you can commence hostilities.
For a NAP-3 this would be three turns and so on.
My appoligies for the confusion. The first post is ammended.

We have about half of the players now who like the idea of the 10 turn no hostilities pact at the start of the game, but I need you all to cast a vote please so we can decide if we add it to the game or not. Most votes wins.

Finally, I will be out of the country from now on, so Grudge is the man to turn to.
He ammends any rules might there be any changes needed and otherwise the game starts like we have decided upon now. The latest version of the first post in this thread should always be leading. (Except we are waiting for the 10 turn no attacks upon start at the moment).

Good luck with your preperations and I will see you all on friday!

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

10 turn no hostilities: Yes

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Far be it from me to tell you guys how to run your game, but imo a ten turn no-rush rule is warping the game experience and simply putting off the need to learn how to defend against a rush. Since you lack experienced players, presumably any early rushes that do happen will be fairly straightforward and should be perfectly counterable. There really aren't many rushes that can happen inside ten turns anyway, and your settings have left out many of the nations capable of them, so I feel that the rule might not be necessary.

It is of course your game, and feel perfectly free to ignore me at your own discretion. :)

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

I'm also in favor of no hostilities during ten turns.

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

I oppose the 10-turn no-hostlities rule. My reasons are:

1) won't help you significantly (or at all) if you are on the receiving side of rushing.
2) takes out excitement from the first 10 turns.
3) its an extra rule with very minimal effect (and it will make our game even more special).

and in my opinion these outweight the benefits.

...

I think the same (3rd point) about "overmaking" the rules of NAPs, for instance: making it mandatory to announce on forum or making it "binding", etc.. to sum up: making it an "official" term with given rules.

A NAP-breaker will be "punished" - given publicity - by community (for example with loss of popularity which i consider important in a game with diplomacy), just like it happens with breakers of given words in life. Of course, one can get away with it with skill and under some circumstances (just like in life), but this natural reaction adds price to agreement-breaking. My opinion - which is based on my experience ofc - is that its rare enough case for one to break his word to consider alliances and NAPs unstable (and im not living in some utopia).

To sum up: i think the argument (about NAPs) is about this: is it worth to improve reliability of NAPs (and other in-game agreements) by adding new rules?

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Just a quick note on offensive global enchantments and NAPs.

Something like Utterdark and BoT will almost always be seen as a violation of a NAP and justification for immediate reprisal, but something like Wrath of God may not be, and something like The Wild Hunt or the admiral guy almost certainly won't be. It is of course best to talk with your treaty partners before casting a global which will negatively impact them, but if your ally does drop something kind of inconvenient, you might consider your allies intentions in casting it and his ability to target it.

(Wrath of God is strongest in caster's dominion, so if his dominion doesn't impinge on your lands, its not as threatening to you. Wild Hunt cannot be steered at all, and effects random commanders, so he isn't trying to specifically attack you. it may be worthwhile in such cases to formally announce ending the NAP instead of considering it broken, or it may be worthwhile to press your ally for an accomodation regarding it - such as a fee every time the global targets you.)

Re: EA Oceans of Land - (Noob game) [full]
 

Earcaraxe, I understand your point and sometimes you can OVER CORRECT for anything.

However, The binding part of the nap. You have never been in a game that an argument goes on in the game forum for 3 days and gets VERY bitter because someone has broken or misunderstood a Nap in the amount of turns or the provisions etc. It spoils the game for the rest of the people and sometimes brings in other comments that start bad blood.

So, most of us have found that the 'easiest' way to stop those kind of arguments is to put the Nap provisions (if any) and the amount of time in the forum for all to see...IF you want it to be 'binding'.

Just because it is in the forum doesn't mean someone WON'T break it, it just means that the Nap breaker is exposed for who he is, and some of the people will either put 'Sanctions' Financial or otherwise, hit him with spells like hurricane, monster boar, or outright take the side of the other Nation and break off ties and attack.

Depends on your outlook, but for the most part it goes to how you view that person when playing with him agian. I mean, even if you think it is ok to break a nap, you will still keep an eye out for him in another game. I guess that is all it does.

As far as the 10 turn rule goes, it is a 2 sided coin. Example, my first MP game I got the bad luck to be placed close to Argatha. I played Marverni and had Baal's guide in my lap and eager to go. On turn four, while my army was trying to get my expansion going and was away....Argatha stumbled upon my capitol and I was for the most part out of the game (I managed to last 12 turns). It was a miserable experience for a first game and I learned absouletly nothing except to perhaps be too cautious.

I have played in 2 10 turn Nap at start games, and both I think went well. While I agree with my friend Trumanator, I also think that it gives a new guy at least a chance to get going and maybe defend himself a little and see what it is all about.

Early rushers are early rushers, and they will just have more time to prepare. Turtles will still turtle and give them more time to prepare. And new guys will stumble around some and give them more time to find there balance.

So I guess it took a dissertation to say I agree with Yko's thinking. IF the majority wants it, we will have it, I can take care of myself either way so I have no axe to grind.:up:

BTW, it is not MANDATORY that you put the Naps in the forum, just no whining if you get stabbed in the back if you have a private Nap. I myself usually have both kinds.