|
|
|
|
March 25th, 2008, 06:52 PM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 167
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
A novice question about MP.
I posted this in a thread in the MP forum, but it may have been kind of off-topic, and nobody felt like answering/addressing it. Perhaps it will get more traction here.
Quote:
Darkstone said:
I'm confused.
Some of you say that NAP's are not necessarily honored. You say you should be prepared for betrayal at any time. But what is the point of having a NAP when you have to devote mages/troops/resources to defend against betrayal & invasion, and essentially act like the NAP doesn't exist in the first place?
(I may be a novice to MP, and I'm certainly not suggesting that a war game, should be anything other than a war game, but as far as I can see, these 'honor if you feel like it NAPs' is a contradiction in terms, or just rather meaningless.)
|
So, what is the point?
|
March 25th, 2008, 07:22 PM
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 5,921
Thanks: 194
Thanked 855 Times in 291 Posts
|
|
Re: A novice question about MP.
Most people here consider than NAPs should always be honoured, and will not break them. However, all these discussions recently have shown that there is some variation in how binding people assume these pacts to be. But I would say on the whole if you have an NAP with someone you are pretty safe from them. Or rather, they're not likely to attack you without giving you the stated warning period.
|
March 25th, 2008, 07:25 PM
|
|
Major General
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,198
Thanks: 90
Thanked 32 Times in 22 Posts
|
|
Re: A novice question about MP.
I have played loads of MP, lost count of the games, 20?, 30? and no one has ever broken a NAP with me and I have never broken a NAP with someone else.
Only on one occasion have I had a problem with a NAP, the other player accused me of breaking it but I had never signed one in the first place. I did string him along with false promises but always intended to attack and made sure I never said NAP 3 signed or anything similar. He was convinced I had though. Sometimes misunderstandings occur but in 90% of cases a NAP is honoured by both sides in my experience.
NAP's are very important, in order to go on the offensive you after be sure your borders with other nations are secure, otherwise everyone would be too scared to attack in case they then got jumped on.
|
March 25th, 2008, 07:32 PM
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,327
Thanks: 4
Thanked 133 Times in 117 Posts
|
|
Re: A novice question about MP.
One interesting use of NAP is that if you offer someone one and they refuse, or more usually don't answer, it's usually a sign they're planning an attack.
Most people at least hesitate to break them, so where you don't want to be in the early game is the last neighbor to get one with a dangerous enemy.
|
March 25th, 2008, 07:41 PM
|
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 2,968
Thanks: 24
Thanked 221 Times in 46 Posts
|
|
Re: A novice question about MP.
Out of probably over a hundred NAPs I have signed though playing MP games, I have never once had one betrayed, and only maybe 10% canceled with notice.
|
March 25th, 2008, 08:13 PM
|
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, ME (USA)
Posts: 3,241
Thanks: 31
Thanked 65 Times in 18 Posts
|
|
Re: A novice question about MP.
I would say it is very bad practice to break a NAP, except as provided in the terms of the NAP (such as with a 3-turn termination warning). Otherwise, a player will acquire a bad reputation and not be trusted in future games.
|
March 25th, 2008, 08:19 PM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 167
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: A novice question about MP.
Thank you all for your responses. I'm glad that NAP's are taken pretty seriously. That is quite reassuring.
I am in my first two MP games, and I'm certainly using NAP's and utilize heavy diplomacy. I also enjoy diplomacy as much (if not more than) as any other aspect of the game.
As I understood it, NAP's reduce the chaos of the game, reduce border you have to defend, allowing you to increase force concentrations on your opponent. Furthermore, since the total is greater than the sum of the parts, there is also a force multiplier effect. (1 army with 100 troops and 9 mages is more than 3 times stronger than 3 armies with 33 troops and 3 mages). (Or at least allow you to divide your force into as large chunks as you feel is necessary). If you are proactive in diplomacy, they also let you pick an opponent you would likely do better against (one who has few counters against whatever strategy you employ at that point in the game).
I also agree about the part where listening to people's responses, or lack thereof, is extremely helpful in determining their attitude, philosophy, goals in the near future, etc.
I was just concerned that a betray heavy environment tends to negate the effect and purpose of NAP's, and also favors the betraying players.
|
March 25th, 2008, 08:34 PM
|
Private
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 11
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: A novice question about MP.
One thing I've learned from competetive online games (MMOs and Strategy games in particular) is to treat everyone around you as a potential enemy, and expect to be betrayed. Don't be afraid to network and use diplomacy, but always have a backup plan in case someone tries to stab you in the back. So, if you do agree to a NAP, don't leave yourself entirely open to unexpected aggression from the person you've entered a pact with. If they uphold the NAP, all the better for you both - but if they don't uphold it, atleast you won't be caught with your pants down.
Always be wary of the teeth behind the smiles.
__________________
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|