Maybe others know/believe A will ultimately lose to C (the attacker) unless they attack C. In addition, C loses the units/gold/gems/logistic capabilities those provinces provide that could be used against A. It's easy to say "I could have stopped C on my own eventually", but that doesn't necessarily make it true.
That aside, I would expect some veterans and more powerful nations to try to dictate/manipulate others with what they want/expect, but not by telepathic means. Since it's obvious everyone has a different interpretation of the "spirit of the NAP" one cannot assume their own interpretation is universal... especially with new players coming from different backgrounds and experiences in other games/communities.
Quote:
Next time, you could always ask him if he's planning on taking the province back from the indies.
|
Or next time maybe A should have said something during the NAP discussions so this would have been less of a problem for A. If it is such a big deal for A then A should have something about it before the issue arises.