Adjudication on a NAP -edited please comment again

[Darkstone]

Globals that harm enemies, if you don't have dominion in your NAP neighbor, I can say they should hardly be concerned about it. If you do have dominion, you should either mention it in a message (as surprise is probably a pretty big harm multiplier, and most likely a bigger deal than the harm itself), or prepare for the consequences.

As for globals that bump off globals, that's part of the game. Only 5 global slots, nothing to be done about that. Everyone is free to recast their own if they really want to.

As for the atmosphere of honor, vs. the atmosphere of betrayal... I feel that the former gives an advantage to the honorable, the latter to the betrayers. As the minority wouldn't be taking optimal advantage of the situation as it exists.

So while it's certainly true that a moderate/strong level of deceit can be fun at least occasionally, or for certain types of games... I'd have to be pretty strongly opposed to anything which actively set the tables against honorable players as partaking in a fools errand. (Since betrayals are a stronger tactic than not, inherently.)

[Ironhawk]

Yeah, I think if the global you cast has no negative impact on your neighbor - like the gem generators, or something dominion based like Purgatory, then there is no problem. But if the spell directly and negatively impacts them, like Burden of Time or Wild Hunt, then you definitely need to warn them.

As for bumping existing globals with one of your own - there are two ways you can do this. First by recasting the same spell, and second by casting a different spell which bumps off thier spell due to the global limit. In the first case, if I was working closely with that nation I would probably take issue and end the NAP. In the second case there is really nothing to be done.

[Saulot]

Speaking of Global slots, how does everyone feel about it being raised to say, 10? Or possibly having it set up under game options?

It's been at 5 since at least Dom2, and that obviously made sense, but nowadays you can have some pretty large games with many many nations.

[Sombre]

I'd love for it to be set in game options. More options here is almost always a good thing.

[Agrajag]

I'd love for it to be set in game options as well, but if that's not gonna happen, then at least let it be raised to 10 or some other number >5.

[Cerlin]

For me I think the hardest part is juggling your boarders so you have enemies to fight. In a recent game I was a second rate power that was hemmed in on all sides by either allies, NAP, or people I couldnt attack. Sometimes at that point I want to ask someone to kill me! considering the fact it would come back to bite me on the forums if I break agreements. And even if you break the NAP or agreement honestly, many people seem to take it personally "You're attacking ME?!?!" This may just be my experience but too many layers of NAP can be dangerous.

[Karlem]

Even based on the new information I think that without a confirmaton message you do not have a NAP. It's like having an unsigned treaty, just worthless paper.

Of course there was a misunderstanding, one side though that he had a NAP and the other side was waiting for a confirmation (that never arrived) but one thing is a misunderstanding and other thing a backstab.

And about the explaining what a NAP is, well I try to say it allways to avoid misunderstandings. I had that problem once with Meister Miagi but was solved with mutual agreement and since them I always specify as much as possible.

[Ironhawk]

Cerlin said:
For me I think the hardest part is juggling your boarders so you have enemies to fight. In a recent game I was a second rate power that was hemmed in on all sides by either allies, NAP, or people I couldnt attack. Sometimes at that point I want to ask someone to kill me!

This is why my standard NAP is not a 3-turn NAP, but a a 3-turn NAP with a 10-turn duration. That way, both nations must renew every 10 turns or so thier commitment to the NAP. If someone wants out they just choose not to renew. This does not always even mean war.

I started doing this after another player offered me a deal like that and found it makes the game MUCH more fun. Way more dynamic games instead of being hemmed in by treaties the whole time.