Do you really think that you're fooling anyone?

[Gandalf Parker]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[Velusion]

Someone ignores a message of a NAP and I consider open war the only option. Of course - if they aren't moving forces to attack me immediatly and another nation is I'll concentrate on the other nation first.

But I'll always immediatly move to war footing if someone turns down a NAP and I have no other threats. They aren't replying because they want a war - just not at this moment. So hence, it's to my advantage to start fighting with him ASAP unless I belive I'll be in a better position to attack him later. But make no mistake... we are at war

The other possiblity is that he just missed the message... but I'll never put my money on that.

[Lingchih]

I always try and do my NAP requests through the board private messaging system. That way I can check "receive read response", and know if they have read the message. If I see they have read it, but have not replied, then I am ready for war.

I also always send a follow-up message to the effect of "I assume that your silence means you are agressive towards me". That sometimes will get people off the fence, and make a reply.

I don't consider the in-game messaging for NAPs. Too hard to remember, with no way to search back 10 turns or whatever and see what was agreed to. I only use it to break NAPs

[Jazzepi]

I maintain a text file on my desktop with all my alliances and stuff listed.

Jazzepi

[Sir_Dr_D]

You can request a read receipt? I have never noticed that before. That will come in handy.