NAP Breach?
Nation A and B have a 3 turn NAP. Both are experienced MP, so no definitions of the terms are given.
Nation A has high misfortune and loses a province to barbarians. Nation B after 2 turns and his scouts not seeing any army coming to reclaim the province, takes it from the barbarians.
I do not think this action is a breach. To me a nap means you will not attack the other player and will not cast hostile spells during the duration of the nap.
In this example Nation B took a province from independents.
Yes, it was formerly owned by Nation A, but technically Nation B did not attack him. A typical nap does not guarantee boundaries.
If player c had invaded A, took 5-6 provinces, then I think player B could go to war with Player C and take provinces from him that Player A formerly owned.
Of course an outraged Player A may be very unhappy and give notice of termination to B if he took the barbarian province. But I think that is his only recourse. I do not see Player A as having a good faith basis to state publicly that player B violated the NAP.
Thoughts?
__________________
"War is an art and as such is not susceptible of explanation by fixed formula."
- General George Patton Jr.
|