.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

BCT Commander- Save $7.00
winSPWW2- Save $5.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > Illwinter Game Design > Dominions 2: The Ascension Wars

View Poll Results: Do you think there should be standard terms for common diplomatic terms, such as NAP?
no 6 60.00%
yes 4 40.00%
Voters: 10. You may not vote on this poll

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #1  
Old March 1st, 2006, 11:17 AM
OG_Gleep's Avatar

OG_Gleep OG_Gleep is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 590
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
OG_Gleep is on a distinguished road
Default Multi-Player Standard Community Terms

I talked to a couple newer players and a couple of the Vets and everyone seemed to agree that different players have different views of the word NAP.

I myself was very confused when I kept getting different responses from people regarding our agreements. I generally keep the wording very very similar when setting up deals (a few times I cut N pasted), and was suprised to see that I had actually formed very different deals.

Right now, there are two types of NAPs. I will use 3 turn as an example for both.

a) 3 Turn NAP: Both players agree that no offensive actions shall be intiated by either player. If either player wishes to do so, he must give 3 turn notice prior to attacking.

Example: Jotun and Van form a Non Agression Pact on turn 4. On turn 18 Jotun Declares War on Van. The Earliest he could possibly attack on turn 20 (issue orders on turn 19).

b) 3 Turn NAP: Both players agree that they shall not attack eachother for 3 turns. Any and all agreements end in 3 turns.

Example: Jotun and Van form a Non Agression Pact on turn 4. Van has not responded to any messangers. On turn 6 Jotun issues orders, and attacks on Turn 7.



I always assumed a NAP is option A. Option B is something totally different, and imho needs a seperate term. Option B is more like a ceasefire, or TCF (Temp Cease Fire). Personally I don't like the term, as it implies that there was hostilities, which most of the time isn't the case. If anyone else has a better term, by all means....

Imho this is a community issue, and since we are a fairly small one, it wouldn't be that hard to get everyone to participate in coming up with a solution that everyone sticks by.

The second issue is when can someone attack. Multiple people stated that different people interpret the same agreements differently.

Again, even though its a small world here, its a pretty tight one.

Using the example from option A, could Jotun attack on turn 20 or 21? The original statement states that 3 turns notice have to be given. That means 3 full turns. Turn 20 is the beginning of the 3rd turn. The second Jotun hits end, he will have competed the 3rd full turn.

Anyhow, what do you guys think? I don't think anyone wants to go over every word of every deal like a lawyer. IMHO it would be a much simpler world if we all looked at the same agreement and saw the same thing.
Reply With Quote
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.