It is currently Mon Dec 17, 2018 1:59 pm


The forum is READ ONLY. Please direct any future discussions to our Facebook page


 Page 1 of 1 [ 13 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Suggestion: Formalized NAP's
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 9:54 am 
AA Trader
AA Trader

Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2004 1:02 pm
Posts: 217
Add an offiicial function to the game where two teams can enter into a No Attack Policy (NAP).

The NAP screen should have:

A list of current NAPs agreements showing terms and length of time left.
A drop down menu to choose a team to enter into a NAP with
A selection for the length of the NAP (no less than 3 days, no more than 14 days).
A term selector (% Total Worth Lost if NAP broken. Total worth could come from cash on hand, IGB accounts, planet cash, planet levels, ship levels).


The NAP process

Team A wants to NAP with Team B. Team A goes to the NAP screen, notes that Team B is not in a NAP, selects Team B, selects a 7 day NAP, types in 25% of total worth forfiet if NAP is broken, a mail message is then sent to the Coordinator of Team B. Team B can reject the NAP terms and write his own and send it back or he can accept the deal.


Stock Value tie-ins:

The formalized NAP can be tied to the stock market.
A team that breaks a NAP with another team will see a reduction in its stock price.
A "GOOD" team NAP'ing with an "Evil" team will see a stock value hit.
An "Evil" team NAP'ing with a "Good team will see a stock value hit.
A "Good" team NAP'ing with a "Good" team will see a slight stock value rise.
An "Evil" team NAP'ing with an "Evil" team will see a slight stock value rise.
A neutral team NAP'ing with Good, Evil or another Neutral team will see no stock value movement.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:15 pm 
Gamer
Gamer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 12:21 pm
Posts: 175
NAP's amuse me..... They exist only in the imagination of the believers.... This is true in real life also.....



_________________
Why make sense, when you can make pizza! -Zippy the Pinhead.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:39 pm 
AA Trader
AA Trader
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 11:24 am
Posts: 244
Location: In the Shadows
I dont think its necessary to create a formalized NAP for a couple reasons.
You are making it in good faith that the other party will abide by it. Its more of a promise then a contract and should be seen as just that a promise. If you break the NAP while you will probly get wealth you also lose integrity. I think what should be added is a player notes section. So you can type information about the players you play with and against. For this to work properly it would have to be integrated into the profiles server. If the notes are saved somewhere in the profiles server then the player notes could follow you from game to game and you wouldnt have to start anew each time. This would also be an amazing feature for team tournaments, maybe you can selectively publish some of your notes in the form of a blog to help a team leader out, or if you are a leader you will be able to look at your own notes to decide some maybe less known players you would like on your team rather then someone elses.

Another reason NAPs should be informal is because if you look at the game as a battlefield, alliances are created and broken when the time arises, and if you break them badly, you always have to hope that the person you crossed doesnt get big in the future, and that they dont hold a grudge, these would be more information you can add to the player notes too, who is going to hold a grudge, who has a slow but consistant gameplay that gets to the top in a longer termed game.

NAPs in my opinion are like a verbal contract, they hold well if both work to keep the agreement, but if one side breaks it theres pretty much nothing you can do except enact revenge or give up.



_________________
Waiting in the shadows for the time to strike.
RP Enterprises
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 6:08 pm 
AA Trader
AA Trader
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 11:24 am
Posts: 244
Location: In the Shadows
But really if you start a NAP with someone it would be the 2 leaders forming the agreement, and then each leader should just send a team message out alerting everyone. I think actually adding an alert would not be too hard but still think is unnecessary since the tools exist to tell the team from the team forums to simply sending a team message out. If you really wanted a way to be warned prior to attacking another team specifically maybe the leader of a team can have a list of all other teams, they check which teams they do not want to attack either because of fear or because you are have agreed to not attack each other, then like the bounty warning comes up prior to attack a similiar alert that states you are under a ceasefire.

Im not sure how difficult that would be to implement, and do not think it is very necessary. If a team wishes not to attack someone, then all members of the team should be told by the leader. If they still go out and attack that other team then maybe as a leader you have chosen the wrong person to invite to it.



_________________
Waiting in the shadows for the time to strike.
RP Enterprises
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 6:12 pm 
Developer
Developer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2003 6:07 pm
Posts: 2930
This kind of sounds like Diplomacy. ;)

That doesn't sound like a bad idea as long as the normal attack/bounty rules still apply. In otherwords even though your team has a NAP with another team you can still get tagged by their sector defense. You cannot go through their defended areas as if you were a team member.

In otherwords, we won't shoot you if we see you outside our house but if you try to come in we will blow you away. :)



_________________
PJ's Annoyingly Useless Blog
ADOdb Lite
Template Lite
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 7:07 pm 
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2003 12:17 pm
Posts: 2619
Actually its just a way they can hold people to that agreement. A formal game based nap agreement while interesting, I prefer to keep it like a verbal agreement, before long everyone will want lawyers and small claims courts added ;)


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 7:27 pm 
Developer
Developer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2003 6:07 pm
Posts: 2930
Something else to add to the Alliance Casino port. ;) Lawyers. :evil:



_________________
PJ's Annoyingly Useless Blog
ADOdb Lite
Template Lite
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 10:22 pm 
AA Trader
AA Trader

Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2004 1:02 pm
Posts: 217
I never said that the other team would get the credits that team #1 forfieted. As far as I am concerned it should just go *poof* into thin air.

NAP's now are about worthless as the people who attempt to honor an agreement are always backstabbed.

NAP's would not interfer with the bounty system
NAP's don't create allies teams they merely mean we won't attack you

Formalized NAP's would actually add some teeth to the agreements that are
made by certain people and never honored. Then those same people laugh at you and tell you how stupid you are.

Deceit tips the balance of games more often than not and unfortunately it's only the people with honor that get burned.

I would love to see formalized NAP's as I think it would add a new dimension to the game and add a little flair to the stock market idea. Teams would be classified as good, neutral or evil which would really bring some flair to potential attacks as you could have a good rating being attacked by another GOOD player because your team is evil.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2005 6:06 am 
Gamer
Gamer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 12:21 pm
Posts: 175
Kwae Zar wrote:
NAP's now are about worthless as the people who attempt to honor an agreement are always backstabbed.

Formalized NAP's would actually add some teeth to the agreements that are
made by certain people and never honored. Then those same people laugh at you and tell you how stupid you are.

Deceit tips the balance of games more often than not and unfortunately it's only the people with honor that get burned.



Deceit, makes the game fun......... I do not want trust in a war based game. It also adds drama..... I enjoy being on the losing end of a NAP just as much as I enjoy being on a winning side of a NAP.



_________________
Why make sense, when you can make pizza! -Zippy the Pinhead.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2005 9:46 am 
AA Trader
AA Trader

Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2004 1:02 pm
Posts: 217
If you enjoy being backstabbed... don't use the new formalized NAP feature.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2005 12:00 pm 
Gamer
Gamer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 12:21 pm
Posts: 175
Kwae Zar wrote:
If you enjoy being backstabbed... don't use the new formalized NAP feature.


The Huns had a NAP with the Romans...... Germany had a NAP with the Russians...... USA had a NAP with the Indian Natons.....

NAP's are used by agrressors to keep the peace until they have time to wipe you out.... They are all about backstabbing, nothing more nothing less.



_________________
Why make sense, when you can make pizza! -Zippy the Pinhead.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2005 1:34 pm 
AA Trader
AA Trader

Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2004 1:02 pm
Posts: 217
Lucky Starr wrote:
USA had a NAP with the Indian Natons.....


And we are still paying cold hard cash to modern day "Indians" for doing that....

Thank you for proving my point.


Just because you have a NAP doesn't mean you can't break it. If you have an informal NAP with someone then enjoy the wide open backstabbing without the recourse of fiscal penality.

On the flip side one could go one through history to name hundreds of agreements that were made between countries or nations and honored.

If you don't want to use the new formalized NAP - then don't.
However, just because someone has a formalized NAP with you doesn't mean they won't attack you.

Think of Federation and Alliance support of the new NAP system as a modern day United Nations.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2005 2:40 pm 
Gamer
Gamer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 12:21 pm
Posts: 175
Kwae Zar wrote:
Lucky Starr wrote:
USA had a NAP with the Indian Natons.....


And we are still paying cold hard cash to modern day "Indians" for doing that....

Thank you for proving my point.


Just because you have a NAP doesn't mean you can't break it. If you have an informal NAP with someone then enjoy the wide open backstabbing without the recourse of fiscal penality.

On the flip side one could go one through history to name hundreds of agreements that were made between countries or nations and honored.

If you don't want to use the new formalized NAP - then don't.
However, just because someone has a formalized NAP with you doesn't mean they won't attack you.

Think of Federation and Alliance support of the new NAP system as a modern day United Nations.


http://forums.aatraders.com/viewtopic.php?t=2376



_________________
Why make sense, when you can make pizza! -Zippy the Pinhead.
Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 1 of 1 [ 13 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

cron