Reverse Nap

[Foodstamp]

cleveland said:
I've personally come to find the Dominions-Style-NAP tiresome and unthematic.

I think I'll avoid NAPs entirely in any future games. After all, if I can't fight off all my neighbors simultaneously, do I really deserve to ascend?

I tried this style of play for several games and it was fun to a point. In one of the games I got dogpiled by 4 nations, and in another game I got dogpiled by 10 of the 15 players who had formed an alliance in the game.

Finally I went back to diplomacy but very limited. Lately I have been finding myself back at the heavy diplomacy position.

I may give no diplomacy a go again, but I need to get a lot better at fighting off multiple enemies.

My advice: Give it a go if you don't take the game too seriously, because it is fun, but expect to lose .

[cleveland]

Foodstamp said:
Give it a go if you don't take the game too seriously, because it is fun, but expect to lose .

I always do.

[Zenzei]

I'm with cleveland here, no diplomacy for the win.
I'm currently playing in Pasha's RAND game and the free for all spirit of it feels like therapy after all the tiresome diplo you have to do in regular games.

[Tifone]

I have yet to try a MP game (I will surely, in a newbie game, possibly EA, possibly vanilla when I come back to holidays in a couple of weeks) but what I really hope for an MP game I will play, is "diplomacy" and "honour" to be something I can decide for myself. I laughed hard the time one person opened a thread (some time ago) to moan with the community because another player has broken a NAP in their game. Who would you cry to in a real war?
I think pacts seen as holy and unbreakable are boring and kill the fun of this game's diplomacy, where every alliance is one of convenience, and there is not a little box with a V inside to tell me whose provinces I can't attack.
I really like games (i think all of you here read matryx's AAP at somethingawful) where someone can take 80 gems from me as a peace tribute, and then attack me anyway 1 turn later. Or use the astral perls I gave him to dispell another player's global, to summon a bunch of Abominations and shot at my borders.
And of course, to do it myself too

[Dragar]

I can't imagine many players willingly entering a reverse NAP..

The simplest way to avoid the declarer ending a traditional Nap X is to instead have it of fixed duration, rather than ongoing.

The diplomacy does get really tiresome, in this and many other games. The thing is, if you don't and everyone else does, you're toast more often than not. And it is the best way to stop early leaders running away with the game. I just wish diplomacy wasn't quite so widespread.

It would be great to play a no diplomacy game (which everyone honoured). No trading, no peace, no giving out info on others.. you'd just possibly need to exclude a couple of races to make it work

[chrispedersen]

Originally Posted by Tifone

I have yet to try a MP game (I will surely, in a newbie game, possibly EA, possibly vanilla when I come back to holidays in a couple of weeks) but what I really hope for an MP game I will play, is "diplomacy" and "honour" to be something I can decide for myself. I laughed hard the time one person opened a thread (some time ago) to moan with the community because another player has broken a NAP in their game. Who would you cry to in a real war?
I think pacts seen as holy and unbreakable are boring and kill the fun of this game's diplomacy, where every alliance is one of convenience, and there is not a little box with a V inside to tell me whose provinces I can't attack.
I really like games (i think all of you here read matryx's AAP at somethingawful) where someone can take 80 gems from me as a peace tribute, and then attack me anyway 1 turn later. Or use the astral perls I gave him to dispell another player's global, to summon a bunch of Abominations and shot at my borders.
And of course, to do it myself too

There are two camps on this matter. Those of us who keep our word, no matter what. And those that don't.
The former would like to know who the latter are. The latter would prefer (for obvious reasons) to remain anonymous.
At least in my case, it isn't a case of moaning about being attacked. Life happens, get over it.

But, knowing once I know a person keeps his word etc - then it affords a great deal more options. For example, I have freely given away artifacts. Exchanged territories. Loaned the use of a magic site.

Obviously, as I proposed the RNap - I would enter into it freely.

[Ironhawk]

It would be very unlikely that I would enter into an agreement like this. Its better to bind someone closer to you with beneficial trade agreements and war pacts or alliances. This seems like an unneccessary half-measure b/w a regular NAP and an alliance.

And as others have noted, I also prefer time-limited diplomatic agreements because they relieve the often tiresome nature of the standard NAP-3 fever which seems to permeate Dominions.