DeletedUser1933
Guest
What IS the difference between an ally and someone we have a Non-Aggression-Pact with?
DeletedUser
Guest
You coordinate with allies and alliances are generally long term things but NAPs just mean that you're not going to attack the tribe, these are often short term and might one day be upgraded to an alliance or it might be part of an arrangement where two tribes don't attack each other until they're ready for/ it might be a quick way of ending a war.
I think those are the main differences ^_^
I think those are the main differences ^_^
DeletedUser
Guest
Everybody has their own definition of what an ally or NAP is. It's probably best if you work it out with the tribe you want relations with, including boundaries and conditions.
In my opinion allies should be few and far between - they should be tribes that you actually want to work with and forge a long-term relationship with - perhaps just broadly in terms of defending one another if needed or maybe towards a specific goal such as controlling a continent or area.
NAPs are relationships that aren't very close at all, they basically involve not attacking each other, but they can be broken very easily and in my experience they are just temporary while you focus on a different area.
The bottom line is that in reality the only thing stopping an alliance or NAP being broken is a wave of surprise attacks or a few clicks of the mouse to remove the tribe from your list.
For the best tribes they're just a formal way of distinguishing between short-term and long-term targts.
In my opinion allies should be few and far between - they should be tribes that you actually want to work with and forge a long-term relationship with - perhaps just broadly in terms of defending one another if needed or maybe towards a specific goal such as controlling a continent or area.
NAPs are relationships that aren't very close at all, they basically involve not attacking each other, but they can be broken very easily and in my experience they are just temporary while you focus on a different area.
The bottom line is that in reality the only thing stopping an alliance or NAP being broken is a wave of surprise attacks or a few clicks of the mouse to remove the tribe from your list.
For the best tribes they're just a formal way of distinguishing between short-term and long-term targts.
DeletedUser1933
Guest
Hmmm... OK. Thankyou.
I'm gonna have to take some time to get my head round the boundaries/y between these two things. :\
Ah. The penny drops! Thankyou both.
I'm gonna have to take some time to get my head round the boundaries/y between these two things. :\
Ah. The penny drops! Thankyou both.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Guest
The main difference is you don't attack allies. You can attack NAPs then claim you are colour blind and didn't realise and nobody will care.
DeletedUser
Guest
Or you attack an allie and say your colorblind and nobody cares?
That explanation was rediculous. Phropp has it.
That explanation was rediculous. Phropp has it.
DeletedUser
Guest
Something tells me he wasn't being entirely serious.
