Non-Aggression Pact

[Wegadin]

I love that we can have diplomacy with the AI, but are Non-aggression pacts too powerful or easily abused?

I have never once seen an AI break a pact with me out of 20+ times of having them.

This was even abused quite a bit, as I made an NAP with Asphodel and cast Enchanted Forests. All his forested lands started to become my dominion and the enchantment was causing scores of ivy men/ogres to freely spawn/take over his lands for me with no retaliation from him.

You would think something like this would cause him to break his NAP with me, but nope.

[joiss90]

Yeah the AI doesn't seem to break NAP's though if you don't get NAP's the AI does seem to dogpile if they are on the same aggressiveness probably because they use the same considerations on when to declare war leading to them often declaring war at the same time.

[Miko]

I have no idea what causes the AI to, but they absolutely break NAPs. I got a message in the middle of a war that the AI on my other side would be attacking me 3 turns later, and I lost that game due to insufficient resources for a two front war.

[Andkat]

I have never seen an AI break a NAP even when there were e.g. three nations left and the third (Our mutual enemy) was down to one unforted province. I mostly play on defensive or standard AI however as aggressive has a bad tendency to ignore indies to beeline forever war nearby nations early on, leading to most AIs being underconsolidated in my experience; maybe aggressive actually breaks NAPs.

[Glorf]

I had an AI maintain a nap even as we were the only two left.

I also had an AI agree to my nap and send me a declarationnof war at the same time.

[Sombre]

In general I would say if you find making NAPs with the AI is making the single player game too easy or you believe you are exploiting them, then you should just not do so - you're only cheating yourself out of fun.

[Zane87]

Originally posted by Sombre:

In general I would say if you find making NAPs with the AI is making the single player game too easy or you believe you are exploiting them, then you should just not do so - you're only cheating yourself out of fun.

That does however not solve the underlying issue the AI has with NAPs though as they also make them with other AI factions and that can result in a very stale game without much challenge rather quickly.

[Draken]

The AI might only cancel NAPs if it wants to go to war against that player and they think they can win.

So if that particular player is too strong, I can see them never canceling it on their own.

Might need some fine tuning, but on the other hand, it kind of makes sense not to cancel a NAP if you don't think you can win the resulting war.

[1337Dude]

Originally posted by Sombre:

In general I would say if you find making NAPs with the AI is making the single player game too easy or you believe you are exploiting them, then you should just not do so - you're only cheating yourself out of fun.

Seems like the NAP is a really half-baked feature if you think about it that way.

Really, I can't help but wonder what is the point of the NAP feature? I'm having a difficult time pinpointing the intention. Was it meant for single player? Multiplayer? Both? I get the impression it's not properly integrated enough for anything, really.

[boozermonkey]

It rarely works in my test games. Sometimes all AI nations take a NAP and sometimes none do. Doesn't seem to follow any rhyme or reason.