Perhaps the leadership of the various clans in FFA can post their definitions and views on the various serverwide-accepted pacts currently maintained in the game?

When I mean "serverwide-accepted", I mean the following listed in terms of greatest importance to least:

FDP
LDP
uNAP
NAP
DNH
CF

Are these widely accepted?

What pact is considered 'breakable' if any?

I'm sure some may rank uNAP above FDP as some see a FDP as breakable.

What if your FDP requests your assistance against your UNAP?

Some may see NAP and DNH and CF or any 2 of the 3 as the same thing.

A DNH can be something agreed upon by two parties, or be self-imposed by one party agaisnt another.


Lots of questions! Clarification anyone?

I ain't got no steenkin' packs.


First, you gotta be careful (and choosy) about whom you pact and at what level.

Back in the day, ESD didn't pact very much; pacts reduce grab targets/retal acres. But when I/we did, we usually went with FDP's, and we only carried 2 or 3 of those.

An FDP is just that, IMO. If you're called on, you war. Note I didn't say that you immediately jump in.

If things got testy between us and another clan, we might issue a DNH till things cooled off.

I always liked the KISS principal when it came to pacts. Keep It Simple Stupid.

Back in the day, we didn't need a pact with, say, MIA (although before the end of Mehul's FFA ESD and MIA DID pact) to not hit them or to not hit them often. You knew they were gonna retal you, so you looked for softer targets.

Now I know what you're thinking. "Yeah, Dragon, but we're really not discussing tree huggers and who they love on."

Nor am I. If you pact up too much, you inevitably end up in dilemmas like uNAP vs. FDP and such.

ANY pact is "breakable". If I make Teh UB3R 4LLY pacy with Clan X and they run off doing stupid or fluffish things, then they don't deserve a pact. Unless of course, I'm into stupid and fluffish things myself.

We make pacts basically for two reasons, and IMO, only one of those reasons is a good one.

Those being:

1. Protecting our netters from being grabbed. Gotta tell you. This is weaksauce. Let those mothers learn how to retal because in the end, good retallers will do good things for the clan's NW. And good retallers make for better killers.

It would mean far more to me as a Clan Leader and a player to be listed as Will Retal on every other clan's site then have to beg them not to grab me. Asking for those kinds of pacts is a show of weakness.

2. Mutual Security between us and our friends. The nature of the game as it is dictates that a clan could be a one man band like ESD or have 500 countries like AoDT or LaE or whoever. We all know people gravitate to success and their belief that there is safety in numbers.

That being the reality, smaller clans might FDP each other to even the playing field. Or try to.

All that to say that in Dragonland, there's really only one pact and that's an FDP. All else is determined by war, trial, respect or just plain common sense. And of course, the (temporary) DNH

alliances used to use

FOP full offensive pact, not very common and usually not owned up to
FAP full alliance pact, theoretically fop and fdp, but sometimes used as another higher level version of fdp to give an excuse for screwing an fdp
FDP+, similar to FAP without the offensive connotations

everything unap and above is usually considered unbreakable but of course it depends with who you are pacting

its bad for to war any defensive pacts or unaps but warring naps is fine

just by preference get into the war through an ally request rather than grabbing them or doing something like refusing to pay reps

never heard of CF as a pact, id consider the cease fire to be a temporary thing you do while at war on christmas day for example, or while discussing ending the war, but when on CF you should set the other tag to DNH

i believe its common to mark some groups as will retal or can retal so that your guys dont lose land to them

and also to mark groups you want to grab but will cause you risk of war or suiciding as dont farm or overgrab, sometimes no more than a doubletap, in alliance terms thats a max of 2 hits by any one country in your tag on that tag, or a max of 2 hits on any one country in that tag per 24 hours, also sometimes a more restrictive version is max of 2 hits per tag per 24 hours, could be called do not farm

im not really up on how ffa considers multiple grabs but in my mind if its obvious the same player grabs your tag multiple times per 24 hours then it qualifies for escalating retals

gets a bit murky depending on obvious strings, consecutive numbers, alliances, same strat, same name, time of play, one man tags and what not

I agree with Dragon.

yeah temp dnh is a common tool to prevent your farming turning into war/suicides

usually used as 72 hour temp dnh's to give feelings a chance to cool down

and of course everything is breakable, its just not supposed to be broken, so you have to consider the reputational damage of doing something underhanded

on the flip side i remember times where someone would try to have unap or above with some/all of their planned target for the next resets allys to make it so they cant get any help

if someone pacts you with the intent of screwing your friends it will make you consider whether you want to be pacted with them in the future

i know in 1a it was common to sign multi reset pacts too

Pretty much depends on who it is offering the pact. and who it is signing the pact

"1. Protecting our netters from being grabbed. Gotta tell you. This is weaksauce."

Well, you have to consider the saturation-factor as well.
Since you only can take so many retals per day, you need to make sure your clan isn't simply over-whelmed by the sheer amount needed.

Pacts are good.... for me to poop on!!!

That depends on how you look at being grabbed. Granted, in the case of being farmed by one Clan, I';d almost see your point. But for that, you just dec on them.

Take a walk with me, BP. Into the scary. twisted place known as Dragon's Brain.

The logic behind what I said is this. I'm really not retalling a wall of grabs. I'm retalling individuals. And if I make them pay for grabbing me, that's prolly one guy that doesn't grab me again, or grabs me less.

Now multiply that by every individual that grabbed me. It's not just faceless countries I'm retalling. It's real people that think it sucks when they lose more land than they gained for hitting someone.

It's like poker in a way. I'm not playing the country, I'm playing the person behind the country.

You recall MPE in 1a?
What I described happened there several sets.

A couple of tags took turns hitting the top countries, then the other tags would nail the retallers. Within a week or two, the retal capacity was gone, and the original hitters could farm at leisure meaning they got a couple of brutal retals early on in order to ensure a steady landflow later in the set.

Of course, they did offer pacts, but not until the damage was irrevocable, and first after they've gotten back the acres lost to retals with a rather steep interest.

I remember MPE in 1a. I was a founding member and original co-leader. :)

And in terms of 1a, your argument is flawless. But not here.