Do you really think that you're fooling anyone?

Jazzepi · #1 August 16th, 2007, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Meglobob said:
I would ignore usually as well.

Ignore sends a clear and consise message as far as I am concerned, sooner or later I will be at war with you so do not want a inconvenient NAP.

I have had a situation sometimes in MP where the player in question mathers me with alot of messages. They don't get that ignoreing there message was the answer.

I like pestering Meglobob until he replies.

My messenger was eaten by a grue! Again!

Jazzepi

Cor2 · #2 August 16th, 2007, 05:52 PM

I often take ignoring my offer to a NAP as an act of war. Is that too harsh?

Lazy_Perfectionist · #3 August 16th, 2007, 06:16 PM

Probably. But by a thin margin.
It's not unreasonable to consider it cause for war footing, or reason to pick one nation over another to attack.

But I don't think ignoring an offer to a NAP is an act of war. I consider an act of war something that requires retaliation, such as ghouls or assassins, and results in you suffering harm.

If ignoring nations was an act of war, why guess where America would be, these last few years.

Tichy · #4 August 16th, 2007, 07:23 PM

Agree with Lazy P: I would take ignoring a request for NAP as a presumption that war *will* occur, but not the same as a declaration that we are at war. Just that we aren't not at war.

...which I think is my guess for that last bit as well.

Gandalf Parker · #5 August 16th, 2007, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Cor2 said:
I often take ignoring my offer to a NAP as an act of war. Is that too harsh?

"If you arent my friend then you must be my enemy." Is that it?
Thats not really how I take it. I try to be selective of who I NAP with (hmm, interesting pun). Because I think of it as the first stage to an alliance. I dont want to accept all naps that are offered because eventually I will have to choose who to keep and who to break. And I HATE breaking naps. Id rather hold off on making one than to have to declare it going down at a later point.

Sir_Dr_D · #6 August 16th, 2007, 10:11 PM

The problem is, if people do not reply you don't know if the person actually got the message, which can be annoying.

Lazy_Perfectionist · #7 August 16th, 2007, 10:36 PM

I'll keep that in mind next time I get a message I don't want to answer, Sir Dr D.

Can you suggest any canned replies I can use when I'm not really interested in replying, or rather, am too tired to carefully phrase a message that won't imply anything unintentionally.

Sombre · #8 August 16th, 2007, 10:59 PM

Some people don't want to use the crappy ingame messages so they intend to send a PM or email response, but they never get around to it (these forums often get very unresponsive for me, for example).

If people consider it rude, well then I suppose I can consider them sending me a "NAP 3 turns yes/no?" message out of the blue equally rude. But I don't, because it's a freakin game, usually one of many having turns played in a day.

quantum_mechani · #9 August 16th, 2007, 11:19 PM

I would not take a lack of a reply for a NAP as declaration of war, or even eventual war. I must admit I have been occasionally guilty of making no response out of pure laziness or forgetfulness.

sum1lost · #10 August 16th, 2007, 11:31 PM

Not by any means.

What does bother is people who make NAPs to protect themselves, and then announce cancellation if they think they can get a province or two out of it. Something like that, and I won't agree to anything with you in any other game, likely as not. I also make wiping you out my main priority, even if the other guy is a bigger threat.