Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 12:13 am     Post subject: FKQ NAP Terms

1. No attacking each others guild members. Unless asked to complete a bounty on said member. After bounty is complete send back all gold that was stolen.

2. Sharing info on bounties posted on the board.

3. Sending info on kicked/banned members and why.

4. Each NAP will list each other in their guild forum and/or website upon signing of the NAP and remain there for the duration of the NAP.

5. Absolutely NO recruiting from each others guild.

6. no guild to guild conflicts unless agreed upon by both Guild Founders.
_________________

Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:39 pm     Post subject:

How do these rules apply to relics? I know that in the past we have had a few allies capture a relic from us. I would have assumed that a NAP would also include relics, I consider that attacking.

Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 8:19 pm     Post subject:

There's fine line there and actually that decision came from a discussion with the high council members. Since nobody loses XP or gold in those attacks, it is not considered an attack against the other guild members.

This, like all things, is open for debate, but that is what was previously considered when making this decision. We can open it up for debate if you wish.
_________________

Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 9:10 pm     Post subject:

There may be no direct loss of xp or gold, but a group was needed to take the relic in the first place. That takes a small amount of xp from a number of players. Then there is the loss of the benefits given by the relic.
To me it seems that an alliy shouldn't do anything against the guild it is allied with. Otherwise it really isn't an alliance or an NAP.

Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 12:36 am     Post subject:

I see where you're coming from Frzzt, but virtually no guild will write a NAP that includes relics. All the NAP's I've ever seen exclude them.

And on our side, we kind of want to take any relic we want anyway
_________________

Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 1:40 am     Post subject:

yeah, i see your point. It just seems a little backhanded is all. It doesn't fit my idea of an ally.

Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 7:39 am     Post subject:

Are we differentiating, as some guilds do, between an alliance and a non-aggression pact? Historically the two are very different things.

An alliance presumes that the parties are actively working toward a common goal, and that not only do they do nothing that will deliberately compromise their allies' position, they strive in whatever way possible to better that position. The US/France/UK agreement in World War II was a true alliance. In game terms, I would expect that not only would we not attack an ally's people, nor initiate a conflict against them, but that we would not attempt to usurp their relics, and that we could count on one another for support during delevelling parties, conflicts with other guilds, etc.

A NAP, on the other hand, is FAR more limited. The cosigners to a NAP simply agree to take no aggressive action against one another. Witness the Germany/Russia agreement in the middle parts of WWII. A NAP doesn't mean you won't scheme against your partner, nor does it mean that you won't encourage others to unseat them. NAPs typically occur as part of the capitulation of a weaker power to a much stronger one as an alternative to being completely overrun. In game terms, I can easily see how taking relics from the other guild's possession would be COMPLETELY in line with the precepts of a NAP. After all, if the other guys are too weak to defend a relic properly, we are not being "aggressive" to want to ensure that said relic is properly protected.

Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 3:04 pm     Post subject:

Yes we are differentiating between the two. I have not negotiated a true alliance, yet. I am currently working on one more NAP. You are correct, the NAP is more of a binding friendship. And for most of the guilds who ask for this, I want no more than the NAP. We are currently the highest level among our allies, this is not such a great thing. I would like to have stronger allies.

In the near future, Frizzt and I have begun gathering information about some guilds who are similar to us and who we think we should strike an alliance pact with them. Hopefully, if we are smart about this, we can strike deals with guild who will be able to compete with that alliance DS is in. Then the balance of power can shift our way.

So, if you're looking at guilds...please leave us a note in our lounge those guilds who you think will help us in the future.
_________________

Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 10:32 pm     Post subject:



I agree with what Aliantha and WJ have said here.

Allies don't take each other's relics (let's eqaute that to bases) while a benign 'friends' very well might out maneouvre you to get it.

That's entirely in keeping with the concept in my book. And Roosevelt's book too for that matter ;P

Posted:       Post subject: ForumsLand.com