RBP2 Lurker Discussion Thread - No Players!

[Beamup]

A NAP says simple : We don't attack you and You don't attack us.
The MDP only broadens the definition of us.

Arbitrarily broadens, by one side of the agreement, without approval from the other side. This change is essentially equivalent to me signing a contract with a lawn care company to care for my front yard at an agreed price, and then I declare that all of my yard is now considered "front" and therefore they must care for all of it at that same price. Just how far do you think I'd get with that?

The terms of an existing agreement can be modified ONLY by the mutual agreement of the parties. In my mind, there can be absolutely no possible question about it - this IS breaking all existing NAPs. Which they can do, but they should be prepared for the fallout.

Again had they kept it secret then yes any blame would be on them but so everyone knows what an attack on one of those 2 triggers.
To attack now one of the 2 MDP-partners and whining about that the other declared war and so broke the NAP is idiotic.
Everyone is now warned and should act accordingly.

Let me restructure this argument a bit. Suppose that you and I have an agreed NAP until turn 250. On turn 200, I inform you that I will attack unless you give me three of your cities. You refuse and I attack. I expect that you would rightly consider me to have broken the NAP. But the argument you're making here would apply to that case equally well - I warned you, you knew what not giving me those cities would trigger, so whining that I declared war and so broke the NAP is idiotic. You were warned and should act accordingly.