The following is an article that was published in the December 2007 Echo Cluster Newsletter and just happens to parallel my own sentiments.

---

NAPs, Alliances and MAD.

by theAdmin

For new players there can be much confusion on what is a Non-Aggression Pact. For that matter, there are even differences of opinion between experienced players on the differences between Alliances and Non-Aggression Pacts. The only thing that appears to be consistent is that when an agreement is broken a vendetta of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) is applied to the offending party! It is my hope this article can both clarify what these agreements are and to supply some guidelines on what the agreements should encompass in the hope of avoiding MAD.

To simplify the discussion I believe there are 4 levels of political interactivity. From most cooperative to least they are:

1) Alliance

2) NAP

3) Neutral

4) War

Alliances encompass a wide range of cooperation ranging from an exchange of minerals for MCs to complete sharing of information and RSTs.  This would represent Limited and Full Alliances. Additionally I would propose there is a state of ceased hostilities that does not really encompass either Neutral or NAP. This is the period of time where the warring factions are trying to work towards peace or they have a something else they temporarily need to focus on other than each other. This agreement could be called a Blood Truce. So now the Political “Friendly” scale looks like this:

1) Full-Alliance

2) Limited-Alliance

3) NAP

4) Blood Truce

5) Neutral

6) War

This article does not address the definitions of War or Neutrality. Suffice it to say that in these two states there are no agreements between the parties so there is nothing to break or violate. In all the other states some agreement exists between the parties hence each has an obligation to the other.

The key to any agreement is communication. Things run afoul when one player’s interpretation of the agreement does not match the other’s expectations; 99% of failed agreements fail because there wasn’t a complete understanding of what was expected to begin with. The other 1% fail because someone actually intended to break the agreement. This means communication is VERY important. If you think an action of yours may be misinterpreted by the other party it is better to ask first or you may find yourself subject to MAD.

A player entering into an agreement assumes certain responsibilities to that agreement. Not abiding by these can result in a player being accused of breaking the agreement. I call these the Golden Rules and all parties should respect them:

1) During the term of the agreement neither party will do anything to proactively undermine the other.

2) There is implied confidentiality relating to any information exchanged during the agreement. This information may not be shared with races outside of the agreement and remains confidential for the duration of the game, even if the agreement terminates.

A couple of caveats are appropriate to mention here. Neglecting to do something is not necessarily a violation of an agreement. Also, information garnered from sources outside the agreement is not necessarily confidential and may be shared but the onus is on the player to show the information came from outside the alliance, and even then the offended party may still subject you to MAD.

All agreements should contain at a minimum a Statement of Expectation along with the duration for the term of the agreement.

A Blood Truce is a very simple agreement. The Statement of Expectation is “The parties will not attack each other for a specified period of time.” The only violations of such an agreement would be to break the Golden Rules listed above or if one party attacks the other during the time of the agreement. Once the specified period of time expires the parties become Neutral unless some other type of arrangement has been entered.

Now for some definitions: Wikipedia defines an alliance as “An agreement between two or more parties, made in order to advance common goals and to secure common interests.” A NAP is defined as “ … an international treaty between two or more states, agreeing to avoid war or armed conflict between them and resolve their disputes through peaceful negotiations. Sometimes such a pact may include a pledge of avoiding armed conflict even if participants find themselves fighting third countries, including allies of one the participants.” The fundamental difference between an alliance and NAP is that the alliance is a cooperative effort to “advance common goals and secure mutual interests”. The common goals and mutual interests are the reason the two have allied. Conversely, a NAP is an agreement not to interfere in the interests of the other, no cooperation is implied. An alliance ends when the goal has been achieved or the item of interest is no longer relevant. A NAP ends when the parties cannot find agreement or when the specified time expires.

When players enter into an agreement they need to state if they are going to strive for a common goal or mutual interests (ally) or stay out of each other’s way (NAP). If players enter into a NAP the Statement of Expectation is “The parties will not encroach into each other’s territory or interfere with each other’s assets.” Other required items needed to be agreed upon are:

• Description of the boundary. This area becomes the “no-fly” zone and encroachment is considered a violation of the NAP.  For purposes of fairness this area should not contain areas of space where the player has not populated the majority of the planets within the zone.
• Duration: a time frame for the agreement, usually the remainder of the game.
• Escape Clause. This is a statement that describes how either party may terminate the agreement without violation. A typical example is, “Either party may terminate this agreement by providing notice to the other. The agreement will terminate 10 turns following the notification.”
• An agreement to continue ongoing negotiations on the borders of the no-fly zone as each player’s territory expands.

So what happens when player A and player B have agreed to a NAP in the following scenarios?

• Player A knows of a cloaked ship that is entering into B’s territory. Since there is no obligation of cooperation A does not have to notify B of the encroachment.
• Player A provides information to player C about player B’s boundaries (planets, ships, etc). This is in violation since it breaks one of the Golden Rules.
• Player A orbits a planet owned by player B outside of the no-fly zone. Player A is not in violation of the agreement but the players may want to discuss what their next actions may be.
• Player A provides player C with a ship that is used against player B. Not in violation of the NAP if Player A did not know what the ship was to be used for.

From this last example it should be obvious there could be some misinterpretation of the intents of Player B but without supportive evidence of deceit it should be assumed Player B was honest in his or her intent of honoring the NAP. These examples also point out what a NAP does not do. A NAP is fundamentally a Non-Aggression agreement. A NAP is not an agreement of cooperation. Therefore a NAP does not promise communications concerning other races activities or a promise to defend each other’s space. Actions requiring cooperation imply the agreement this is no longer a NAP but an Alliance.

An alliance requires further definition. To restate, an alliance is formed for some common goal or mutual interest. Alliances can be broken into three types:

• “one-shot” alliance. These are alliances used for one-time transactions like ship exchanges, minerals for cash, etc.
• Full Alliance. This is sort of like a Pact of Brotherhood with complete information exchange, intelligence reports and each other’s RSTs. These could also include a best effort promise to intercept and destroy enemy ships encroaching on each other’s territory and efforts to come to each other’s aid.
• Limited Alliance. This would be an alliance formed for a specific goal or interest.

Items to be discussed for an alliance are:

• Statement of Intent for common goal or mutual interest. For a full alliance the statement may be “To squash everyone else”. If it is a Limited Alliance then it may be “Until the Privateer Threat is eliminated” or “For mutually beneficial mineral exchange”. This Statement is the most important part of the agreement since it describes the intent of the alliance. If a party accuses the other of a violation of agreement that is not specifically spelled out in the expectations and restrictions then determination of if a violation has been made will have to be determined by if the action was in violation of then intent statement.
• Duration: when does the alliance end? In the case of a Full Alliance the agreement most likely will end when the game ends. For alliances directed at a specific goal the termination gets a little tricky. If the goal is the elimination of the Privateers it should be stated when that goal has been satisfied. Is it when the Privateers have lost their last Starbase? Is it when their score drops below 1%? This should be clearly and definitively stated.
• Escape Clause: Things change. Minerals can dry up or the agreement becomes antiquated and is of no value to one party or the other. A way to gracefully exit the agreement should be stated. As previously discussed it usually is a time frame but it can also be “upon payment of 1,000,000MC, 5 planets, 1 Homeworld and your first born.” The important thing is to have one else the only way out is to violate it which allows the other person to claim a defense of enslavement.

The next two items help to clarify what is expected, is allowed and is not allowed as a result of the alliance.

• Expectations & Exceptions Clause: Do you expect information regarding where the minerals are you wish to trade? How much are you getting for the minerals? What ship do you want and when do you expect it? How much does the ship cost? The advantage of stating the expectations is if it is stated the alliance is for information then the other party shouldn’t be expecting you do come to their defense if you get attacked. This clause can also set up exceptions. Let’s say the alliance states each party must come to the aid of the other but you already have setup a NAP with the Rebels. You could state an exception stating you will remain neutral in any situation involving the Rebels.
• Allowance & Restrictions Clause: What may each party do or not do as part of the alliance. Is the other party allowed to freely cross your boundaries? Do they need to stay 500ly away from Disney World? Can they only take minerals from a specific set of planets?

Finally, I’d like to discuss No-Alliance and One-Alliance options. These are add-ons the host may place into a game resulting in enforcement by the host software so that information and RSTs are not exchanged as part of the Host run-process. This add-on only applies a small part of what could constitute a No-Ally or One-Ally game, additional clarification should also be provided by the host. For example, are all communications between races prohibited? Is providing intelligence about other races prohibited? How about the exchange of RST information? In a One-Alliance game may the players enter into a number of alliances as long as they are not at the same time (exiting one before entering another), or only an alliance with one race for the duration of the game? Is a Non-Aggression Pact allowed in a No-Alliance game? These are questions each Host should address to help their players understand the requirements of the game.
theStarbase policy: In no alliance games information exchanged for mutual benefit (I give you this, you give me that) are not allowed but NAPs are. In one-alliance games sequential single-alliances are allowed.

As with any agreement an element of trust must come into play. How do you know you can trust someone you are entering an agreement with? Fundamentally, you don’t! The good news is that most experienced players report a very low number of players that back-stab and break their agreements, and the few that did have been remembered for time-eternity. This is a small community and memories run long. The players at a true disadvantage are the new ones. To new players I would advise to enter NAPs and alliances with any player that would be beneficial to your situation and honor that arrangement! The majority of players are honorable and they want to help new players to learn the game so you may even benefit from free advice. To experienced players I would ask them to give the new players the benefit of doubt. At best you’ll be grooming a new player into one of the greatest strategy games around. At worst you’ll have a memorable experience to talk about and a chance to practice your MAD tactics.

Acknowledgements:

The material for this article was derived from a lively discussion on theStarbase Forum. I would like to thank everyone that participated. Without their valuable input and opinions this article would have been incomplete. The full thread is viewable here.