Play Free War Battle Games Online, Multiplayer Games, Strategy Games, Top MMORPG

sjohnson · **Joined:** Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:42 pm **Posts:** 42

for those of you who are not aware...

an NAP, that is a NON-AGGRESSION-PACT does not mean the same thing, never has meant the same thing, and never will mean the same thing as being ALLIES

if someone extends their hand to you and asks to be allies it means they want your help and if you accept you want their help

-if you decline such an invitation and they attack you, it is NOT backstabbing
-if you accept such an invitation and they attack you, that IS backstabbing
-
if someone messages you for an NAP again, a NON-AGGRESSION-PACT this means they don't want to fight you at the time, maybe this NAP is to extend all era, maybe just for some number of ticks

if you say no and they attack you it is NOT backstabbing

if you say yes and they attack you it STILL is NOT backstabbing, yes it is a dirty play but it is NOT backstabbing...why?

YOU CAN'T BACKSTAB SOMEONE WHO WAS NEVER AN ALLY TO BEGIN WITH
YOU ARE NOT ALLIES JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVE AN NAP
being allies means an NAP is INHERENT
having an NAP does NOT mean being allies is inherent

its like saying all squares are rectangles therefore all rectangles are squares...only an idiot would believe such a statement

anarchy69 · **Posted:** Fri Mar 16, 2012 8:46 pm

If you attack someone during a NAP that IS backstabbing. You must give the alliance warning prior to breaking the NAP. By the way, I like your topic name and then the post it's hypocritical.

sjohnson · **Joined:** Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:42 pm **Posts:** 42

anarchy69 wrote:

If you attack someone during a NAP that IS backstabbing. You must give the alliance warning prior to breaking the NAP. By the way, I like your topic name and then the post it's hypocritical.

not hypocritical in the slightest- in fact i'd say it served exactly its purpose...backstabbing falls in line with with betrayal, you cant betray those who were never allies in the first place, an underhanded trick is NOT the same thing as backstabbing

all rectangles aren't squares

anarchy69 · **Posted:** Fri Mar 16, 2012 10:14 pm

Attacking while a NAP is in affect is backstabbing. You must give the other alliance warning prior to attacking that's just common courtesy that all leaders have been accustomed to since OC. If you're not following that and are being called a backstabber than their word is more believable than yours.

You said whiners in the topic and it appears like you're whining that someone is calling you a backstabber for attacking an alliance during a NAP. Not even playing on M3 nor do I care but if you're leading an alliance I'd recommend not getting the reputation of being a backstabber or you will have a rough career with this game.

sjohnson · **Joined:** Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:42 pm **Posts:** 42

anarchy69 wrote:

Attacking while a NAP is in affect is backstabbing. You must give the other alliance warning prior to attacking that's just common courtesy that all leaders have been accustomed to since OC. If you're not following that and are being called a backstabber than their word is more believable than yours.

You said whiners in the topic and it appears like you're whining that someone is calling you a backstabber for attacking an alliance during a NAP. Not even playing on M3 nor do I care but if you're leading an alliance I'd recommend not getting the reputation of being a backstabber or you will have a rough career with this game.

i never said we attacked during an NAP, in fact we havn't, that being said, naps are made with enemies, depending on your POV i suppose you could argue that hitting during an NAP is considered backstabbing, that i dont agree with, but i do believe we can both agree that:

being allies means an NAP is INHERENT
having an NAP does NOT mean being allies is inherent

and attacking someone when an nap has expired (or been intentionally violated) is NOT backstabbing and to assume having an NAP makes you allies is simply foolish

HutchyDog413 · **Posted:** Sat Mar 17, 2012 12:18 am

What if u msg their leader while he is offline, then attack after u have sent the message, instead of waiting for a reply, IS THAT BACKSTABBING?! or how about making an NAP with some1 then on the tick BEFORE it is broken, ATTACKING! IS THAT BACKSTABBING?! :twisted:

anarchy69 · **Posted:** Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:09 am

Being a NAP is same as being allies but for a set duration of ticks and has "usually" a set terms of agreement that both sides willingly agree to. But either side can cancel a NAP at leaders desire.

HutchyDog I believe your question was already answered. Bye troll.

sjohnson · **Joined:** Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:42 pm **Posts:** 42

anarchy69 wrote:

Being a NAP is same as being allies but for a set duration of ticks and has "usually" a set terms of agreement that both sides willingly agree to. But either side can cancel a NAP at leaders desire.

HutchyDog I believe your question was already answered. Bye troll.

no english? NAP=/= allies, never has and never will mean that
NAP=neutrals or enemies agreeing not to attack each other, generally for a mutual benefits especially in a game environment when it is clear they are still enemies...

example:
you have an NAP until tick 300, if you dont leave the area in that time we WILL come for you, if you try to expand close to us we will deny those expansions

i suppose that makes us allies? if you believe that your a fool

aister · **Posted:** Sat Mar 17, 2012 3:22 pm

no...

a NAP is a temporary allies between two alliance. U can't attack during that time, unless as anarchy said, give a warning first. If u can attack at any time during a NAP then why the hell did u make the NAP in the first place?

Dawnice · **Posted:** Sat Mar 17, 2012 3:34 pm

I've seen territorial NAP's before. Don't cross into the other's "territory", and you'll be fine. The map was literally divided into pieces if you showed top 12 alliances. :lol:

Dear politicians, whiners, leaders, diplomats-backstabbing