• lamb
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 489

Re: Take away core clause's in NAP's for a round...

Basically as the title says....

So family A naps family B, but neither family can demand a certain number of system's for their core...

This would make things a lot more interesting as the top family's would be less likely to nap each other early on in the round, so there would be a lot more skirmishing between the bigger family's. This could potentially give the smaller family's a chance to catch up and get back in the game...

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 4,527
  • Tag points: 68

Re: Take away core clause's in NAP's for a round...

this should be in http://imperialconflict.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=170480

Proverbs 11:14 "Where there is no guidance the people fall,
But in abundance of counselors there is a victory."

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • lamb
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 489

Re: Take away core clause's in NAP's for a round...

i was going to post it there, but than i thought its more of an idea than an actual nap...

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 960
  • Tag points: 58

Re: Take away core clause's in NAP's for a round...

You can't take it away. Theres no existing way in the game to prevent families from making cores. If you don't facilitate it with ingame functions people will just do it through ingame messages.

But yea would be great if cores could be banished. It would improve gameplay in many more ways than what you mention here. I remember one of the rules in old IC (or was it in the honor code?) was that families aren't allowed to reserve or claim systems for themselfs which are more than 1-2 ticks away from their home.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 4,527
  • Tag points: 68

Re: Take away core clause's in NAP's for a round...

if it was reported, mods can still check ingame msgs and forums for anything illegal

Proverbs 11:14 "Where there is no guidance the people fall,
But in abundance of counselors there is a victory."

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 6,555
  • Tag points: 90

Re: Take away core clause's in NAP's for a round...

Then they'll just P\NAP without cores lol, nothing different really.

~*✠ ]PW[ Forever ✠*~

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • lamb
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 489

Re: Take away core clause's in NAP's for a round...

p/nap without cores is not a bad thing... then it still leaves u vulnerable to other fams attacking the fam that u are p/naped with to get shares with u...

once a large fam has there core set and have naps in place with the other top fams its basically just an explore fest for the bankers/ressie's while the attackers can worry about spread/sci jumps etc.....

this way it would bring in more tactics early on the the larger eco fams and not as much infra whoring i think, make the attackers do a little more too rather than get core naps with the closest/biggest fams and just eco the first few weeks of round

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • lamb
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 489

Re: Take away core clause's in NAP's for a round...

i just think the game needs to steer away a bit from napping and economy and try to bring back more conflict too the game...

there seem to be more conflict back in the day because there was 10x as many players and 3-4 gals running at the same time...

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 3,202

Re: Take away core clause's in NAP's for a round...

thats just an apearence, not backed up by anny fact.
we had more people, there is bound to be more conflict overal. but % wize? its the same.

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