Political treaties

Since Wars and politics are player grafted onto this game - no ingame allowances to help run, organise or recognise them - I think we should perhaps discuss and hammer out what the different "peace/war levels" we as a guild will recognise and what they mean.

From other games I have played I have the short list below:

Peace : No conflict between the guilds
Non-Agression Pact : we won't enter into war with them.
(Mainly of concern once we have alliances)
Mutual Defense Pact : If one party is attacked the other will attack thier attackers
(In other words we won't be drawn into any wars they initiate)
Alliance : We work together in wars as agressors or defenders.
Neutral : No restrictions but no special agression either
Hostile : Not really declared to the target, but attacks against this guild are encouraged.
(Limited, covert war)
War : A state of open, declared conflict.

In this list I differentiate between wars and attacks, since in everything but "Peace" an individual knight is allowed to attack whom he wishes. NAP, MDP & Ally would also probably have to have some allowances for Rich List targets.

This list is not meant to be exclusive or all inclusive, but rather a starting point for establishing our guild's treaty policies.

Well techniquily, wouldn't we be nuetral with everyone, unless we are at war or peace( or any of the other ones...)? I think we should have War (Duh) Hostile, MDP, Peace and Maaaaaybbeeeee alliance, not so sure though.... And a NAP is kinda pointless, cause wouldn't it be just like Peace? (unless tis one sided, like we wont attack you, but you can attack us...)

Yepp, Neutral is the default status, but it's there for upgrading or downgrading relations with another guild.
NAP is for alliance situations, it means we won't go to war with a guild if our allies do. (It's best to make sure our allies know about this sort of treaty.) If our ally makes a fuss about it we can break the NAP, but I would give the other guild ample warning. . .
Alliances will come into play as we get involved with wars with other alliances, what happens when we piss off a guild that has half our strength but is allied with 5 other guilds the same size? I am currently looking at alliances from a defensive POV, but they can also be used effectively as an offensive tool also.

This should be moved to the allies section i think since it seems to focus on our involvement with other guilds. Anyway this post can be deleted if ur moving it Thraven!!

I was trying to keep allies clear for it's intended purpose - for guilds approaching us about alliances. That and putting something like this there might make folk think it's "official"

Scenario:
Guild one has NAP with guild 2 And Alliance wqith guild 3.
3 attacks 2 and 1 does not attack, because o0f NAP.

Now say guild 1 had peace with 2 and an alliance with 3,
than when three attacks two, it would result in 1 not attacking, correct?

Soooo Whats the difference?

As I said peace is usually simply the state of affairs after a war ie. 2 week peace. Also peace is a total halt to hostile actions, while NAP is just the guild's playing nice. With an NAP the guild won't go to war with the other guild but knights can still attack on thier own initative.
Peace is temporary.

Guild one has NAP with guild 2 And Alliance wqith guild 3. You're still free to hit you loot list members of guild 2 (but not guild 3)

Now say guild 1 had peace with 2 and an alliance with 3. You cannot attack any knights of either guild, no matter how much loot they're carrying. However when the peace treaty expires it's open season on guild 2 knights again.

I suppose it could be "simplified" by either making knights abide by the guild level restrictions or else adding "immunity clauses" to the different levels. NAP(M) and NAP(T) I'm just running through ideas here and writing them down as they occur to me.

Again, this is simply my take on political affairs. I like to have different levels of iteration simply because it allows more room to bargain. I am also more used to a military/economic enviroment where there are economic or military differences between the various levels. I guess the big thing here is that the stakes are rather small, we aren't really fighting for anything, no territorial concessions or cash "reparations" and guilds really can't materially help each other in this game beyond joint attacks and knowledge sharing. Well let's have a few wars and I'll see what's what, maybe we only need 3 states : enemies - allies - others.

long post poor spelling - stream of consciousness

Well personally I think it vary's depending on the situation.. I mean there are no set and defined pacts.. we discuss and implement what both guilds are comfortable with rather than going head first into anything..

I've been in top guilds on many servers and honestly there are no defined pacts.. Each and every pact made between guilds seem to be unique in their own way, depending on the situ..

"It cannot be too clearly stated that international law is no protection except to the strong, and that the only laws which great powers recognise as binding are those of power and expediency" - S.L.Murray
I couldn't find Clausewitz' quote on international law (basically that it was impotent), guess I'm gonna have to dust off my copy of "Vom Krieg". Basically treaties aetc only have as much power as we give them, so what they say is only for our ease in deciding what treaty we want. Each treaty could be drawn up ad hoc, but that would make it rather hard to keep track of the particulars of each once you get more than a few treaties going.
BAH! you guys figure out what you want to do with treaties, I'm just gonna attack who I want until told otherwise!