You should be aware of the battlefield.If you have an alliance,it''s for the mutual gain of both parties,right?If the enemies goal suddenly becomes impossible to fufill,be ready for an attack...by the way,shouldn''t your castle always be defended?If they try to attack it,they''ll have to bust through your defenses just like any other enemy.Never beleive you have allies.Your "ally" doesnt care about you,he just wants your aid to get something he wants.

I couldn''t agree more with Firon''s assessment. Alliances are only valid for as long as both parties deem it valuable. Whenever one side of an alliance evaluates that they have a greater gain in breaking the alliance by attacking the ally, they will. It is up to the other party to be ready for this eventuality or suffer the consequences.

Jmacattack D~S

That''s not an alliance, that is deception, exploitation and plain-out lying.

If you agree to something, keep your promise.

if the game will become boring (game''s are supposed to be fun, remember?) then you can discuss with your ally how to best break the alliance, since for example, you''re locked out in a corner all bored.

if he agrees to help you out, fine, if not, tough deal. Plan next time you agree to something, so such event''s don''t happen to you.

But unilaterally breaking an agreement, is by all ethical values of gaming a blatant deception ... deception is a close cousing of lying ... people that lie have no culture, no education, and are despicable.

*before some of you go all ballistic, this is a GENERAL remark, it's not aimed at anyone*

Last Edited : Saturday, 19 May 2007 - 05:12

*stands up and leads a cheer for gueritol*

Yep, I remember a game...long ago...when you were with another clan, FSA.. *clears throat and spits on the ground*...hmmm, had a bad taste in my mouth for some reason...now back to what I was saying..

You and I had an agreement/nap...and a certain BigAmigo wanted you to break it and attack me...you held to our agreement and as you see...I haven''t forgotten.

As you state...your word IS your word...and no matter, in BoS or FSA...I''ll always trust you and have your back if needed.

And BA and i were clan mates at that time ... but that doesn''t change ... you and I agreed and that''s it. Besides in an FFA there is no clan ... ok, there is clans, of course, but it doesn''t have priority over NAPs.

I would rather choose to attack someone not in my clan, than someone in my clan. Not just because members of my clan they usually kick butt hard, but well ...were clan mates.

Yes,

It is very deceptive to make an alliance and then break it - but I think Firon and I are simply pointing out that we''ve witnessed alliances being broken - and have evaluated the reasons why the deceivers have broken those alliances. My warning is valid - if you make an alliance with someone (other than those of us who have proven to be honorable without question), you should be prepared for the possibility of it being broken, and you should also understand the reasons why someone might feel compelled to break it. (So that you can forecast the possibility).

Jmacattack D~S

P.S. Gueritol, I very much appreciate your input in these topical "discussions" - our two differing viewpoints and ways of expression create a more well-rounded explanation - but even if our combined diatribes were devoid of benefit, I would probably enjoy your input.

Jmac

Last Edited : Saturday, 19 May 2007 - 14:17

Yes, of course ... anyone can break a NAP.

It''s good to know upfront who does!.

Yes, Jmac..
To be cautious is only wise, especially for the lower ranked games in which back stabbing, gang banging and agreement breaking are more likely to occur.

There''s only a few players (gueritol being one) that I would blindly trust without posting border patrols along a border or frontier.....but more than likely, there would still be a 5 pop scout(s) patrolling and on constant duty. As long as you maintain lookouts or even a small force for a skirmish, you''ll never be caught by surprise.

This is all well and good, Sugar - and I KNOW that you know what you are talking about - your record, ranking and levels speak for themselves in that regard - but I must say that there are several scenarios in which even my 5 pop scouts OBSERVING the initial attack of a pact-breaker is not going to necessarily stop the pact-breaker from inflicting some serious damage unless I also have a garrison or local support troops. Fact is, in some of the more expansive campaigns, I could see a pact-breaker smashing me pretty good without the defensive support troops that I maintain. Why? Because the bulk of my forces are more than 2 turns away fighting on other fronts.

My initial statement is valid and was meant to be informative - as were all of the replies. I hope that newer players find this information helpful when they engage in NAP's.

Jmacattack D~S

Last Edited : Saturday, 19 May 2007 - 18:30