Goblin Squad Member
|
@FMS Quietus
It's a start. :) Trying to hammer out something like this into detail would be a futile exercise because we even do not know how reputation or alignment or Feuds or Wars or DI or Caravans or the criminal flag or contracts or looting-rules or SAD or fast travel works.
Or if there will be a boob-slider.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@FMS Quietus
It's a start. :) Trying to hammer out something like this into detail would be a futile exercise because we even do not know how reputation or alignment or Feuds or Wars or DI or Caravans or the criminal flag or contracts or looting-rules or SAD or fast travel works.
Or if there will be a boob-slider.
I doubt I would find much interest in a boob-slider. As for my question, I don't believe I'm asking about details. I would just like a clarification on my question, since there is an offer on the table for others to join.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The idea at the moment (which most of the signatories have expressed in this thread anyways) is that they won't attack each others' holdings, but small scale combat, bandit vs. merchant interactions, and other similar PvP is acceptable. You can fight each other, but it won't escalate into full-blown war.
Where exactly the line there is drawn still needs to be decided; is raiding a PoI for resources taking it too far, or is that still acceptable as small-scale PvP? These specifics are things they need to determine still; however, you can be sure with Pax involved that all the possible specifics will be covered in writing and everyone will understand what the purpose to the agreement is before the formal agreement is reached (if nothing else Pax loves putting things in clear writing). At the moment it just seems to be pledges from interested parties.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I doubt I would find much interest in a boob-slider. As for my question, I don't believe I'm asking about details. I would just like a clarification on my question, since there is an offer on the table for others to join.@FMS Quietus
It's a start. :) Trying to hammer out something like this into detail would be a futile exercise because we even do not know how reputation or alignment or Feuds or Wars or DI or Caravans or the criminal flag or contracts or looting-rules or SAD or fast travel works.
Or if there will be a boob-slider.
Non aggression at home and abroad unless there is a mechanical conflict. If you accept a contract to guard a caravan of someone who a member has a war dec against, you'll likely get attacked.
If you are raiding pois with a third party and the group comes across a members POI, you be expected to stand back and not engage.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I doubt I would find much interest in a boob-slider. As for my question, I don't believe I'm asking about details. I would just like a clarification on my question, since there is an offer on the table for others to join.@FMS Quietus
It's a start. :) Trying to hammer out something like this into detail would be a futile exercise because we even do not know how reputation or alignment or Feuds or Wars or DI or Caravans or the criminal flag or contracts or looting-rules or SAD or fast travel works.
Or if there will be a boob-slider.
Non aggression at home and abroad unless there is a mechanical conflict. If you accept a contract to guard a caravan of someone who a member has a war dec against, you'll likely get attacked.
If you are raiding pois with a third party and the group comes across a members POI, you be expected to stand back and not engage.
Awesome. Thank you very much Areks.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It seems there is a little bit of confusion about the specifics of this agreement.
I'll try to do as much as possible to assuage you your concerns with regards to what this agreement means for the member companies and settlements.
Quite simply, the Northern Coalition is a non-aggression pact[NAP]. Now basically put that means any disagreements between the members will be solved diplomatically over resorting to armed conflict.
Now, that doesn't mean there wont be the odd scuffle here and there due to specific scenarios that made it very difficult for the members of this coalition to avoid conflict with each other. Additionally if such scuffles do occur we currently do not have a "Zero Tolerance" policy on this agreement. Any infractions to this agreement will be discussed by the appropriate representative of the participating belligerents - hopefully if/when such a scenario does occur we will be able to find a diplomatic solution to overcome the speed bump.
Talking about specifics right now seems a bit hasty, as each situation that may cause conflicts with the agreement will need to be handled on a case by case basis with regards to making sure the priorities, goals and rights of each member is respected to the highest level.
In essence, we agree to avoid conflict amongst the signatories at every venture humanly possible, and where conflict is unavoidable it will be discussed with the leaders pre or post such an event.
Thank you for the further clarification Mr. Potato. :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Exactly as Potato put it.
It is a Non-Aggression Pact. Simple and plain. We will not attack each other unless there is no choice.
Any aggression between members should be rare or non existent. It will be handled when it needs to be handled, if it happens.
We are all of the understanding, that if things like Areks suggests happens... The Merc group (who took a defensive contract with an NC members war target), will know full well that they may be attacked by an NC member. That is their choice.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
though personally, I would lend a healing hand to anyone I know is from the Northern Coalition if I saw them in need.
I might help someone too, but I won't feel obligated to. This was an important point of distinction I was trying to make.
you mean some prearranged PvP activity that the UNC is mutually interested in enjoying with you
Yes. This is what I mean.
Don't worry, I won't just attack anyone else in the NC without out making sure they are ok with it first.
The idea at the moment (which most of the signatories have expressed in this thread anyways) is that they won't attack each others' holdings, but small scale combat, bandit vs. merchant interactions, and other similar PvP is acceptable. You can fight each other, but it won't escalate into full-blown war.
As long as the Coalition sticks to this light touch, it's all good.
If it starts getting stricter (or the people who prefer a stricter interpretation of "Nonaggression" win out)...well, we'll see what things look like when the game starts. ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If it starts getting stricter (or the people who prefer a stricter interpretation of "Nonaggression" win out)...well, we'll see what things look like when the game starts. ;)
So what you are saying is... you aren't supporting me in my push to be the King in the North?
Who will I have stab people in the shins now!?
I've got a needle and thread with your name on 'em, if you catch my drift.
The Lame Kobold Cleaver, you all called me...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I fully intend to keep the PvP skills of certain members of the UNC nice and sharp by ambushing them on the regular, but it will be good-natured fun ;)
Depending on whether it gives rep hits and if there are good revive mechanics I'll definately engage any willing partners inside the NC in random incapacitate / revive battles when there are no immediate threats present.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Circumventing Combat? Courting Combat =)Central Coalition?
Central Coalition of Committed Communities Circumventing Combat?
Well, those specific communities are avoiding combat with one another. Unless this is really a super secret fight club, where you vow to fight each other a lot and not let outsiders interfere....
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well, those specific communities are avoiding combat with one another. Unless this is really a super secret fight club, where you vow to fight each other a lot and not let outsiders interfere....Circumventing Combat? Courting Combat =)Central Coalition?
Central Coalition of Committed Communities Circumventing Combat?
Uhhh....first rule.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Ok for all you "central axis" nugget-heads
is the projected entirety-ish of the PfO game, give or take. but most likely give.
They are the "Northern Coalition", and in no way is their EE position a contradiction of it.
We are the little red square.
Was originally just going to put the image alone, but whatevs.
Jus' throwin that out there mates.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What I am concerned of, is the fact that there are so many settlements so close together. I have no doubt some will be erased by OE and repositioned in light of the larger geography.
For all the distance, it seems cramped for the long run.
We might even see an expansion of the settlement hex range. But idk. I'm crazy.
Edit: to give you an idea of my concern, on the linked map it shows an area roughly 50x larger as having about 15 settlements (Echo to Exalted to Shroud woods). Now we have over 30 in just the crusader area alone?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What I am concerned of, is the fact that there are so many settlements so close together. I have no doubt some will be erased by OE and repositioned in light of the larger geography.
For all the distance, it seems cramped for the long run.
We might even see an expansion of the settlement hex range. But idk. I'm crazy.
Who wouldn't be, with your past? ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Warstein
The idea is, to my knowledge, River Kingdoms first then west a bit then south and/or east more than a bit, and then a big expansiony thing to include the rent to the north somehow.
Obviously i am the most responsible authority to ask for such things.
summon: Lee Hammock I