Nap-3

Procyon Lotor · #1 April 11th, 2012, 05:53 PM

Mattyburn's definitions is the one I had in mind. I've been going around agreeing to these. As a pretender god, I feel that I have to pretend to know everything, otherwise I'll be exposed as a mere pretender. But I didn't want to get a weasel reputation due to a misunderstanding. I can breathe easier going forward.

I like the suggestion to declare the turn of expiration in your message terminating the NAP, to avoid charges of weaselry.

I'm not sure I agree with bbz that mere scouting is a violation of the NAP. It's a "non-aggression pact," and scouting isn't aggressive. Spies with other effects (like Arco sceptics, summons who cause disease, etc.) are more aggressive, and I think would violate the spirit of a NAP. Anonymous attacks are DEFINITELY agressive, and would violate the NAP.

bbz · #2 April 11th, 2012, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Procyon Lotor

I'm not sure I agree with bbz that mere scouting is a violation of the NAP. It's a "non-aggression pact," and scouting isn't aggressive. Spies with other effects (like Arco sceptics, summons who cause disease, etc.) are more aggressive, and I think would violate the spirit of a NAP. Anonymous attacks are DEFINITELY agressive, and would violate the NAP.

I didn't say that scouting is agressive, I said that If I find spies in my territories it is save to assume that they are there to be used and thus its breaking of the nap.

The thing about spies is that they can shut your whole economy if you didn't expect them. So I find them no different than someone trying to sneak in troops in your territories to attack all your provinces once the war has started.

dojango · #3 April 11th, 2012, 07:03 PM

spies are definitely a cassus belli and a legit pretext to break an NAP. Scouts are not. Direct overcasting of a global, sounds like there's room to disagree on it. I would say that it isn't a violation of the NAP, because it isn't an aggressive action aimed at the other party.

bbz · #4 April 11th, 2012, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dojango

spies are definitely a cassus belli and a legit pretext to break an NAP. Scouts are not. Direct overcasting of a global, sounds like there's room to disagree on it. I would say that it isn't a violation of the NAP, because it isn't an aggressive action aimed at the other party.

Would you say that if someone targets your global with a dispel that is violation of the NAP?

Direct overcast of the global is no different than dispel with the added benefit for the person that is casting it that he gets a global up.

dojango · #5 April 11th, 2012, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bbz

Quote:

Originally Posted by dojango

spies are definitely a cassus belli and a legit pretext to break an NAP. Scouts are not. Direct overcasting of a global, sounds like there's room to disagree on it. I would say that it isn't a violation of the NAP, because it isn't an aggressive action aimed at the other party.

Would you say that if someone targets your global with a dispel that is violation of the NAP?

Direct overcast of the global is no different than dispel with the added benefit for the person that is casting it that he gets a global up.

Well, like I say, there can be disagreement over it. If you wanted to use it as a cassus belli and a de facto break of the NAP without triggering the 3 turn warning, go for it. After all, the best time to end an NAP-3 is when you can do it without giving notice.