Nap Turns

[chrispedersen]

There are some spells, that upon casting should void a nap, at least oneway.

I would place:

Burden of Time
Arcane Nexus
Strands
Wish for Armageddon
Forge of the Ancients

In this category. Are there others?

[konming]

While BoT, Utter Dark, Astral Corruption and like should automatically void NAP, I do not see other spells end NAP unless specified clearly in NAP agreement. BoT and alike all directly damage other players (friendly or not). So it is considered offensive spell casted to your land. I do not see Arcane Nexus and especially FoA automatically end NAP. But you can always say that when you sign NAPs.

[Edratman]

I agree with Konmeg. By no stretch can Forge or Arcane Nexus be considered a violation. Might as well forbid all forging, summoning and recruiting.

I would think any spell that causes damage or hinders some aspect is a violation of a NAP, even if it is a global.

[thejeff]

If I was a water nation, I would consider Sea of Ice a violation, at least if I hadn't been consulted.
How about the random attack ones? Not that they're cast very often in MP, but Wild Hunt, the random lightning strikes one and isn't the Ghost admiral a global?

Dispelling a global would be a violation? How about stealing one? Casting a different global that overwrites yours due to a lack of slots shouldn't be, but overcasting the same one?

[konming]

Random attacks certainly voids NAPs. Globals that attacks in your domain only should void NAP if you have domain over friendly countries. Dispelling a global would not be a violation, and it is anonymous anyway. Overwriting one is kind of hard to say, but I would say it does not violate NAP unless the original caster consulted and got approval from you before he first casted the global.

[konming]

I think as a general rule of the thumb, any globals which can realistically hinder or attack friendly nations should void NAPs. OTOH, spells that only benefit caster without hindering friends (all gem generating globals, FoA, Gift of Nature's Bounties, even Carrion Woods and like) should not void NAP unless specified in NAP agreement.

[Ironhawk]

Dispelling or overwriting a global is definitely an attack on the resources of another nation and thus grounds for voiding a NAP.

[Ballbarian]

My own personal view is that overwriting or dispelling a global should not be seen as breaking an NAP, but instead should be viewed as a tool for forcing your opponent to break the NAP for you. Think diplomacy and real world politics. Of course I fall more into the playing for fun camp than the playing to win camp. (Not that I dislike winning mind you. )

The whole contention over the interpretation of NAPs is the biggest reason my multiplayer games are reserved for close friends instead of the public boards. Not knocking anybody, just giving my $0.02.

[Aezeal]

lol I think the discussion over naps and all is what is fun about MP.. nice to play with new pplz and see what happens.

[Archonsod]

I agree. Never seen the point of the whole NAP wrangling.

If you're powerful enough to worry me then I won't cast anything likely to annoy you in the first place, obviously. If I do cast something which annoys you then it's a fair bet I believe myself powerful enough to take you down regardless. If I'm casting globals likely to annoy every other player in the game then I'd start worrying if I were you