Page 1 of 1

The problem with NAPs

PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2017 3:29 pm
by muscatred
I've started refusing NAPs which, so far, had been a terrible idea. Basically all the other players decide I'm an enemy and wipe me out. The problem is I don't want to change, I believe NAPs are one of the worst parts of the game and I refuse to play along.

My problem is that agreeing to a NAP is rarely in your own interests. Players ask for a NAP because they want to do something without fear of reprisal. No player should ever agree to give another player an easy time as it reduces their own chance of winning.

What do you all think? Do any of you think that NAPS make the game better?

Re: The problem with NAPs

PostPosted: Mon Dec 25, 2017 11:56 pm
by niverio
I don't think the NAPs are good for the game either. However, without them, nobody would be able to commit to an attack fully (or get screwed by doing so), especially when we are in a state of the game that everybody loves making them.

Re: The problem with NAPs

PostPosted: Tue Dec 26, 2017 8:10 am
by dane69
100% agree. NAPs are poisonous, and have robbed this game of a lot of its fun. The first time I was offered a NAP (by the person who invented the dastardly things, I presume...) I laughed in the guy's face. I eventually took the NAP, immediately broke it, and ran him over. He was number 1 at the time, and went on to badmouth me to all the other top rated players until my rating plummeted too far for me to play with them.

Whether or not I was in the wrong (by today's standards I totally was), the point remains: (UNFORTUNATELY) NAPs are an integral part of today's game. And I don't see them disappearing. Though games w/o NAPs are much more intense and exciting, imo.

Re: The problem with NAPs

PostPosted: Tue Dec 26, 2017 2:50 pm
by high commander jay
Personally I don't like agreeing to permanent NAPs. They just create akward situations in the late game where you can't attack the player that you need to take out to win.
If I agree to one, I always attach a condition to the NAP, like time, Neptunium count or number of remaining players.
I usually prefer asking for a temporary demilitarization of the border. It's effective, not trust-based, both players can play more agressive on the other side immediately, but don't commit themselves fully.

Also if you hate NAPs, you probably love anonymous mode, where they are as meaningful as a tinkerer on a shieldless factory. Players still make them for some reason, but no one respects them anyway.

Re: The problem with NAPs

PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2017 3:30 am
by muscatred
I think I've decided how I'm going to handle NAPs from now on. Anyone asking for one needs to tell me what they're plans are. If they deviate from that plan in any way the NAP is voided.

Re: The problem with NAPs

PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2017 12:26 pm
by dane69
^^^interesting. Never thought of putting conditions on a NAP, nor have I ever seen that. I will certainly be trying that out in my next game.