Dear all,

As a newcomer to BD and by far not as seasoned and experienced like Kane for example, who has over 5 years of BD and oh so many glorious victories, I would like to ask the vets of BD two technical questions.

1. When two alliances have a NAP and they have Iceland set as border (one being north of it the other one south), would a relic floating NW of Iceland qualify to be in which alliance's territory? I dare to say that it would belong to the alliance whose territory is North of Iceland, as per the NAP

2. Assuming 1. is irrelevant and two alliances have a NAP and they both launch at a relic in neutral territory, unless anything else has been specifically agreed, who should get the relic? Again in my limited BD experience I would say the alliance that lands on the relic first, as then any attack on the relic would become a breach of the NAP.

I do not know why (I must be paranoid), but given Kane's history this era, I fear that he will disagree with both of the above and cause Gift to breach yet another NAP and sink again even lower in terms of moral standards this era.

Of course that may not be true and then I deeply apologize to both Kane and Gift, but just in case I am not wrong, please share your objective opinions about questions 1. and 2.

Many thanks,

I would tend to disagree, but I seem to view NAPs differently than you.

In every NAP I agree to in my alliance we have a very small range of "Owned" territory and I don't consider it a breach if someone attacks into it.

I have this policy, because all of the strongest players simply don't care about territories and areas and their attitude arrises from a First come first serve viewing of the game. If you aren't going to attack that dude they will. So my policy generally comes to a "Stay on top of things" and the other people won't want to come over here.

If I had considered our NAP broken for every time an ally or enemy ran into our territory to attack something they wanted then I wouldn't have any allies and I would be at war with the entire front page of alliances. Maybe you can afford this, and have followed this policy up until now, but your alliance is much stronger than mine is.

I know my viewpoint on the subject is a little jaded but I think it's a more reasonable and realistic way of approaching the game.

If you still think it's a breach of the NAP then that's your right. Go ahead and attack GIFT and take the relic by force. Might generally makes right in Battledawn.

I would say the area is neutral, where the relics were released. But after 1 alliance gets the relics, the other has to turn back, since both teams have a NAP.

And Twilight, if you make an NAP and create territories, then yes you are not supposed to attack in the other alliances's territory. But you are right, if your alliance is not as strong, then you might wanna ignore a couple of attacks in your territory, that might be considered a break of NAP by teams that are stronger. But if I make a NAP, and even if its a weaker alliance, I wont break my word and cross borders and if I have to for whatever reason, first let people know

GIFT is not a NAP alliance

Yeah Mfreak, that's pretty much how I view it. I suppose if you have a greater power you can demand more from others. We're a medium strength alliance so we have to waltz about the players above us to keep playing so I suppose that gives me a more lenient point of view on these things

hmm, sounds like a sniping issue there cosmin, its definate terms to break a NAP. Thats what they used on SNN, why would it change? They felt it was free to jump ahead of SNN on posts and say you attack them so ya your at fault......

Really? Is that the answer to this question? Hell no. This is the same exact reason he used on SNN. This issue has been resovled and discussed, sorry kane 3/3 in one round. A new record even for you.

Skwrel out.....

As soon as it was clear NO would get there first we turned, despite launching first.

Just goes to show how ignorant people are. Especially when they post something chastising us well after the fact that we turned. Skwrel your idiocy never ceases to amaze me.