Nap Turns
 

There are some spells, that upon casting should void a nap, at least oneway.

I would place:

Burden of Time
Arcane Nexus
Strands
Wish for Armageddon
Forge of the Ancients

In this category. Are there others?

Re: Nap Turns
 

While BoT, Utter Dark, Astral Corruption and like should automatically void NAP, I do not see other spells end NAP unless specified clearly in NAP agreement. BoT and alike all directly damage other players (friendly or not). So it is considered offensive spell casted to your land. I do not see Arcane Nexus and especially FoA automatically end NAP. But you can always say that when you sign NAPs.

Re: Nap Turns
 

I agree with Konmeg. By no stretch can Forge or Arcane Nexus be considered a violation. Might as well forbid all forging, summoning and recruiting.

I would think any spell that causes damage or hinders some aspect is a violation of a NAP, even if it is a global.

Re: Nap Turns
 

If I was a water nation, I would consider Sea of Ice a violation, at least if I hadn't been consulted.
How about the random attack ones? Not that they're cast very often in MP, but Wild Hunt, the random lightning strikes one and isn't the Ghost admiral a global?

Dispelling a global would be a violation? How about stealing one? Casting a different global that overwrites yours due to a lack of slots shouldn't be, but overcasting the same one?

Re: Nap Turns
 

Random attacks certainly voids NAPs. Globals that attacks in your domain only should void NAP if you have domain over friendly countries. Dispelling a global would not be a violation, and it is anonymous anyway. Overwriting one is kind of hard to say, but I would say it does not violate NAP unless the original caster consulted and got approval from you before he first casted the global.

Re: Nap Turns
 

I think as a general rule of the thumb, any globals which can realistically hinder or attack friendly nations should void NAPs. OTOH, spells that only benefit caster without hindering friends (all gem generating globals, FoA, Gift of Nature's Bounties, even Carrion Woods and like) should not void NAP unless specified in NAP agreement.

Re: Nap Turns
 

Dispelling or overwriting a global is definitely an attack on the resources of another nation and thus grounds for voiding a NAP.

Re: Nap Turns
 

My own personal view is that overwriting or dispelling a global should not be seen as breaking an NAP, but instead should be viewed as a tool for forcing your opponent to break the NAP for you. Think diplomacy and real world politics. Of course I fall more into the playing for fun camp than the playing to win camp. (Not that I dislike winning mind you. ;) )

The whole contention over the interpretation of NAPs is the biggest reason my multiplayer games are reserved for close friends instead of the public boards. Not knocking anybody, just giving my $0.02.

Re: Nap Turns
 

lol I think the discussion over naps and all is what is fun about MP.. nice to play with new pplz and see what happens.

Re: Nap Turns
 

I agree. Never seen the point of the whole NAP wrangling.

If you're powerful enough to worry me then I won't cast anything likely to annoy you in the first place, obviously. If I do cast something which annoys you then it's a fair bet I believe myself powerful enough to take you down regardless. If I'm casting globals likely to annoy every other player in the game then I'd start worrying if I were you ;)

Re: Nap Turns
 

Heartily agree with you Archonsod!

Re: Nap Turns
 

The point isn't which spells cause attacks on the person with whom you have a NAP. Rather it is spells that are so powerful that they provide overwelming advantage, such that the terms lof a longterm nap should immediately be cancelled.

So, for example if you have a nap+8, and you are the only neighbor of someone that casts forge - the duration of your NAP is untenable.


I will definitely add Astral Corruption to the list and utterdark to the list.

Re: Nap Turns
 

You might as well add "if you expand faster than me" to the reasons for NAPs to be automatically canceled. If you're justification is that your opponent has cast a spell that gives them some sort of advantage in their growth rate over your own in terms of raw power, then you should just abandon the idea of forming an NAP in the first place. The whole point of an NAP with another person is that you're gambling that you can grow faster than them in the long run. OR that you're growing faster than them in the short run, and then you can cancel it and attack them.

Jazzepi

Re: Nap Turns
 

While you will never get a consensus, i will say this: Casting the Forge could well have your allies with naps attacking you the very next turn.

And no one will blame them. Whether it ends naps or not is the subject for scholarly debate, but casting the Forge without being able to fight the world, or without having told your friends and gotten their ok is a mistake.

Re: Nap Turns
 

Ummm... the Forge is a great spell, but certainly not worth breaking a NAP over.

Re: Nap Turns
 

What about Gift of Natures Bounty? I personally rank it's power even with the Forge and a little bit ahead of Arcane Nexus. A true game breaker of a global.

Re: Nap Turns
 

Quite frankly money isn't as good as gems. Which makes forge and nexus much better. Forge helps boost your mages forging paths, too, which is a huge boost.

Jazzepi

Re: Nap Turns
 

I think this discussion may point at a fundamental disagreement. Some view only direct attacks (or indirect damage from globals) as breaking a NAP, others view some globals that put the caster in a dominant position as sufficient.
Essentially, this doesn't hurt me directly, but if you're not stopped quickly you're going to win, which doesn't just hurt me, it destroys me.

Similarly, would a sudden attack which leaves the NAP partner on the brink of winning via Victory Conditions justify breaking a NAP? Say siegeing enough VP castles to win on the next turn.

I'd be happier living with some globals that do hurt me directly than with some of the power boosting ones. The random lightning strike one should count, but I'd rather live 3 turns under that than wait 3 turns while a someone has the Forge or Arcane Nexus up.

Re: Nap Turns
 

I don't know - what's more powerful - reaching const 8 first and grabbing all the good artifacts or casting FoA? Maybe we should add forging chalice to automatic voiding NAP list?

Re: Nap Turns
 

Jazz, some people will not break a nap regardless of consequence. So I am trying to provoke discussion of what a nap entails, and craft a nap that
a) has a consensus of understanding of what it entails.
b) handles issues of current concern.

I get that none of this is of value to you. If you're (generic you, not you personally) going to break a nap, it doesn't matter what the terms are. However, if you intend to keep it, then there are certain common circumstances that should be thought about, and perhaps be reason for an out.

Re: Nap Turns
 

If you think FoA or AN are too powerful a spell for NAPs to continue, you should listed them when NAPs were agreed to. Otherwise, it is a breach of NAP and badboy points are assessed against you. ;)

Re: Nap Turns
 

Forging chalice is impossible to confirm, in most cases. Aka, you can know its been forged, but you generally don't know who has it until a stack of tartarians shows up on your door step.

So, nah I'd not add it.