Inviolate NAP, First Draft

[sector24]

You definitely need to spell that out in your first post then. I guess 17a should say something like: He has made an agreement with another nation without informing me, is this a violation of the NAP? Yes (apparently)

Again, something I would never agree to but good for people to look at and reflect upon.

[LoloMo]

Originally Posted by sector24

You definitely need to spell that out in your first post then. I guess 17a should say something like: He has made an agreement with another nation without informing me, is this a violation of the NAP? Yes (apparently)

Again, something I would never agree to but good for people to look at and reflect upon.

The Inviolate NAP is a NAP between PLAYERS in good faith. The spirit of NAP is quite apparent from the example situations in the first post. It would be quite difficult for me to spell out every single situation, and would take a book to write it out.

If the NAP can be superceded by any NAP with another nation afterwards, no NAP would have any value in this context. For example I have a NAP with Niefelheim. But I want to be dastardly and attack Niefelheim now. Can I just then forge an alliance with say Ermor and tell Niefelheim "Oh by the way, I've just made an alliance with Ermor, and he is going to attack you now, so that's why I just dropped an army onto your capital"?

But it is good that you brought it up, so that it can be clarified. Unfortunately, I can't edit the first post, but this is a good and constructive discussion.