Perhaps that's one reason why many have fallen back on the old strategy, but everyone wants too much.  Core agreements, time constraints, border systems, etc.

Everyone is agreeing themselves out of action.

More agreements = Less Action.

Less Action = Less Fun.

Less Fun = Less Players.

Snowball effect.

"NAPs outside of the game's parameters are old and outdated and in my opinion is a poor strategy."

So you're complaining, essentially, that it's not good to have NAPs outside of the relations page?

I don't know - I see this as a war game.  And war warrants diplomacy.  There is so much variety when you talk about wars and who has strength over who.  If you're in a position to exert power - you do it.  Why? Because you want to win.  This may involve conditions which cannot be limited by the game (the in NAP in relations page).  Eg, cores - sectors, attacking certain areas, nap payments, area restrictions etc etc.

Bottom line is if you don't agree to a NAP made out of the game, then DONT AGREE WITH IT?  You know what I hate about IC?  Fail people making or agreeing to NAPs that they should NEVER do in the first place.  And when they agree with it, they go along with it for a while.  Then later on the track, there's a realisation process and they go "hold on, wtf ....this NAP is sooo BS its screwed and unfair".  Well, hello?  You're the one that agreed to it.

Imo, this doesn't need to be changed.  But what needs to be changed is how people use NAPs to their advantage, and don't agree to it if it's gonna screw you over.  Rather fight for what you want and need.

Learn to lead and make decisions which help your fam.

Go read up on Parrot's Leadership Workshops - 95% of people would benefit from them and automatically become better players.

Yeah, Gondor I agree 100%.

I agree wtih you as well Torqez - you have some very valid points.  However, I think it's harder for the players to all become self-diciplined - especially when I refer to new players who join, rather than implementing a change in the game parameters that would end a lot of bickering.

agreed

NAPS are required these days.

The maps are so big that expo phase almost never ends. People can't have wars during expo
phase, so they have to NAP.

And since there are so few people, a war usually means a full-on savings war. There aren't
any extended skirmishes anymore -- its either war or nothing.

Probably would.  But every round we reduce the systems and fam numbers

I even posted the trends earlier somewhere

/me doesnt like where the trend is heading

Naps are important Mangoza, I'll agree that the only naps that should be allowed are the relations page ones, but the 'trust' naps are just that. Trust. The Relations page is used (in most fams I've been in) for pnaps, while 48 hours were listed in leader message

the only real thing that needs to change is the concept people hold. EVERYONE wants to win. there's maybe a small minority of 14% or so that plays for fun. I'm one of those people. If you don't think so, look at our fam chat I hump KT almost every day and call my fam fags and gays The thing that needs to change is the concepts and perceptions people hold. Of course everyone wants to win, but if you're going to backstab people who are trusting you to hold your word, then why play? Course, some might call it a pre-emptive strike as warrants in a war game, but it's dirty and underhanded when you begin farming that fam (or farming lower fams).

So yes, naps need to change. Complaining needs to change. Nolio and Parrot need to get married. And KT needs to join me in a duel (with fencing swords). Arnor and Elrohir need to go bungee jumping. But none of that is ever going to happen, why? Because people are narcissistic, lethargic, wretched, cruel, ignorant, apathetic, ignominious, double-dealing, backstabbing, egregious, intolerable, avariciously stuck-up ho-bag bitches with little common sense.

That sums up about 75% of IC right there. Save for most of the people I know and talk to on irc. I'm probably somewhere on that list but I don't really care because I don't cheat, backstab nor am I avaricious. If I accidentally break nap I really do work at trying to give compensation so yeah, go screw yourselves you who fit on there. And in case you're curious, if you don't think you fit in there, you do because that means you're ignorant and narcissistic

In real wars no one plays for fun.  It's a war game.  Yes it's supposed to be fun while you play, but EVERYONE should be playing to win in my opinion.

I also think that you should do whatever it takes to win.

Being Honourable...and Dishonourable....shouldn't even exist in IC.  You should trust no one outside of the game parameters as everyone should be looking out for #1, and maybe their allies, whether single-serving, or round-lasting.

Maybe if you're having an easy-inactive round, then you might not be playing to win, and that's understandable I suppose.......

but the long-term goal of every player should be to win, to be part of a winning team, and to participate in victorious wars and rounds.

Speaking of which - this bring me to the topic of WARS.

WARS - why do we declare war and hit a specific family? 

Because it saves us morale, we can attack more, and once you get positioned and take out their infra and fleet....to the victor go the spoils.  THAT'S IT!!!

It's to get planets.  Not to get planets EXCLUSIVELY from ONE family, but to get planets IN GENERAL.

I think Fams need to declare war LESS, and attack more targets.

This is why I think a smaller map, with smaller family sizes, and more families, would make the rounds much more interesting and competitive.

No, not at all.

How many spots are filled in Capri per round? ...417.

make 7 or 8 player families.  This would mean 52 families.  There would be way more interaction between families, and the rounds would be a lot more competitive.  People would want to fight more to gain the upper hand, rather than infra whoring.

On a smaller map, there would be less space for everyone which would mean more fighting for position, and less NAPing.

I say less NAPing because people wouldn't want to write 15-20 NAPs.

Very good idea Twillight Archon. I really like it!

"what you really should do is have the vets split up. So take for instance, the randoming system should take a look at how long people have been playing IC and place them accordingly. Split the vets evenly so that way you have more vets in different fams. THAT's what will make rounds more competitive. THAT"S what will make more interaction."

You couldn't be more wrong.

The length of time you've played IC is NO indication whatsoever on how good you are at the game.