zakalwe Wrote:Spot on, I think.
Personally I find the whole 5 vs. 1 plan to be pretty distasteful and underhanded, so if anything, I hope it fails horribly and Spulla subsequently gobble up some more land from their incompetent neighbors to consolidate their lead. Unfortunately, I fear those 8 praetorians might prove a bit much for them to handle, on top of everything else.
To me, it's not the whole 5v1 plan. If the 5 of them want to declare war on Sullla then fine, do that.
What I am not sure I care for is the fact that, at least according to my reading, there are civs that have an active NAP with spullla that are saying, well I can't attack till T110 or whenever my NAP runs out, but I can give you troops so you can attack on T100.
I actually had a nice conversation with krill about this, in regards to settings for rpb3, that I kind of wish we could just "ban" NAPs. I am coming more and more to the "shadyforce" school, where you don't sign NAPs, but instead show through your actions that you want to be peaceful.
But it just seems that, at least in this community how it is playing out, that refusal to sign a NAP gets interpreted as "I don't really want to be your friend"