• Posts: 752

Topic: 24/48/72h Naps

Me and a fam i have a nap with have a core agreement. Some of our fam members have violated this core agreement by exploring into the wrong systems.
Handing over the planets is what has to happen but when we try to take the planets in question we get this msg.

'We have signed a Non-Aggression Pact with this family. Sadly this actually involves not attacking them.'

Well its nice that this is ingame to prevent anyone srewing over your fam by attacking the napped fam but agreements like this can't be carried out with this ingame.

My suggestion is: Give leaders of the family (maybe vice leaders aswell) an option once both parties agree that a planet has to be swapped the leader or vice leader can than make this planet attackable for napped families, maybe somekind of box that says: "are you sure you wish to make this planet attackable by fam xxxx?"





Your thoughts

PS: If there is a way around this: 'We have signed a Non-Aggression Pact with this family. Sadly this actually involves not attacking them.' pleaso do tell.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 4,312
  • Tag points: 4

Re: 24/48/72h Naps

good Idea i like it.....

.>   )\;`a__
(  _ _)/ /-." /~~  (rawr)
`( )_ )/
  <_  <_

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 3,202

Re: 24/48/72h Naps

thats to much hassle just add the 'core list' to the check list when exploring a planet.

Colorado: even in the 11/01 war i made more hits.
Colorado: 447 blow jobs.
Big Gary:  Only a fool cannot admit when he's wrong...
AW:    i love rim jobs
RisingDown: I know you do

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

4 Reply by Render (edited by [Render] 05-Feb-2012 14:44:49)

  • Render
  • Guest
  • Tag points: 76

Re: 24/48/72h Naps

this is an old problem with an easy solution, I posted in ideas long ago about this, you dont need much hassle to add if you can use wise the "rogue" tag.  By declaring a player rogue it means his planets are attackable even for those fams you have naps signed at relations

It is the best and easieast way to give planets in violation status

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 3,202

Re: 24/48/72h Naps

stil better to prevent violations ;p

Colorado: even in the 11/01 war i made more hits.
Colorado: 447 blow jobs.
Big Gary:  Only a fool cannot admit when he's wrong...
AW:    i love rim jobs
RisingDown: I know you do

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Rin
  • Rin
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 7,907
  • Tag points: 21

Re: 24/48/72h Naps

yeh +1 to render

<parrot> there is also the odd  possibility that tryme is an idiot
<KT> possibility?
<genesis> tryme is a bit of an idiot
<Torqez> bit?

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 4,031
  • Tag points: 671

Re: 24/48/72h Naps

good idea, render

NEE NAW NEE NAW

Primo

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 1,808

Re: 24/48/72h Naps

One problem I can see, is that the "rogue" tag means a player will need to have it on for the period of the swap...so 1 of 2 things needs to happen, instant family communication, or the rogue tag needs to stay on for the period of the transfer...part 2 is the real problem, because I can imagine some of these core breachers will be attackers, who cant have the rogue tag on for long periods of time...

I would actually suggesting changing the NAP agreements to prevent people exploring/attacking in these cores OR changing it so planets within the cores are attackable dispite the NAP...ie, you have to enter in core systems that you both agree on at the time of the signing...

I give your invention the worst score imaginable. An A minus MINUS!
~Wornstrum~

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

9 Reply by Render

  • Render
  • Guest
  • Tag points: 76

Re: 24/48/72h Naps

Wornstrum thats the penalty they have to pay for exploring where they shouldnt

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 752

Re: 24/48/72h Naps

Make a new tag and make it work that you can take planets of that person.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points