![]() |
Re: RNap II
OK that was not so nice.. I'm an especially mean person but here I tried to be nice.You are the one with the mean post, ignoring the OP specific request not to post what you did (basicly his request was exactly the thing you say to me "just skip it and don't bother me with your mean thoughts."
/me slaps Herode on the head so his IQ drops even lower PS since I AM an especially mean person your remark as such didn't offend me, just the sillyness of it. |
Re: RNap II
I think he just misread your post Aezeal.
|
Re: RNap II
Considering the things he wrote down he should've double checked it.
Well let's not waste more of my precious mean words on this :D |
Re: RNap II
Chris sorry this discussion seems to have killed your thread, but considering all the reactions here and when you brought it up in the past I don't think it will a generally accepted way to agree on NAP's.
Don't let it stop you to try and get pplz to agree on a NAP like this in game though. |
Re: RNap II
So, if I read the example right, Arcosephale can attack immediately, but even once he has done so, Ermor can only fight defensively until turn 15? Cannot even try to retake lost provinces?
That's a huge penalty. And a strong motivation to get the other party to break the NAP, which could be fun. And of complaints and whinging on the threads, which is not. Or did you mean only initiate, so that once Arco attacks, Ermor is free to attack at will? Which isn't so bad. Gives a fairly small disadvantage to the party breaking the deal, which is good. |
Re: RNap II
Thejeff, what you say is just a regular NAP right - once someone breaks it all agreements are off...
|
Re: RNap II
Quote:
In this case Arco has more flexible position which is really a small and fair advantage. Quote:
|
Re: RNap II
Quote:
|
Re: RNap II
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:10 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.