Lifted verbatim from the old forums.
Re: Refusing planet-payment NAP demands
Demanding planets for a NAP: Itâs common. Itâs âstandardâ. Many people think itâs stupid NOT to give into such demands if youâre looking to lose more by refusing.
Personally though, I hate it. I always have and always will. Iâve never demanded planets for a NAP as a larger family, and I have never accepted such an offer as a smaller family. My view is an unpopular one, but those Iâve talked to who agree with me understand what a difference an attitude can make on the game experience.
Letâs talk about a few common scenarios:
- Fam A surprise attacks Fam B and makes large gains. Fam A demands further planets or else they will take even more.
- Fam A surprise attacks Fam B, and back-and-forth ensues. Fam A demands initial gain to be returned.
- Fam A demands planets up front or else will attack Fam B.
These donât have to involve one family being much larger than the other but very often they do. To be clear, I donât entirely blame bigger families for doing this or smaller families for partaking in such agreements. I realize that is how the game goes.
However, I do think that people are oversimplifying what these agreements involve. To me, Iâve observed a few things in particular:
- By not giving in to these agreements, you make yourself a less desirable target for future conflicts
It seems obvious that there is more to âgainâ by just giving up the planets if youâre going to lose them (and perhaps more) anyway. However, giving in to such an agreement means that you are allowing the attacking family an easy win. Youâre allowing them to walk on you without a decent fight back. In my opinion, when smaller families do this they are cheating themselves out of a worthwhile experience of fighting against a much larger enemy. Some of my favorite rounds have been where I am on the losing end of a battle; that is where true skill shines in my opinion.
I take issue with the idea that refusing these offers is âstupidâ because to me, these offers promote a system in which aggressors are rewarded for being intimidating rather than being skillful. They get to be lazy. I would rather people talk with their fleets. I would rather lose 200 planets to attacks than give 50 up without a fight. I would rather be a pain in the ass to take down even if it means I will âloseâ more at the end.
And thatâs where I actually see this as a strategic advantage. Reputation does have something to do with this game, and if people know you to be persistent and hard to break, they will take that into consideration when attacking you and perhaps choose a different, easier person or family to hit. After all, as an aggressor youâre often looking for the most profitable target. If you know a particular player or family isnât going to let you get away with a âgrab and goâ youâre probably going to at least consider other options.
- Attacking families really hate when you donât give up
When a defending family refuses to pay planets for a NAP, for some reason the attacking family often gets ridiculously angry. I think part of it is that their precious egos are hurt, but a larger part of it is that you have simply made things more difficult for them. When a defending family doesnât give in to these demands, much more work is involved and the attacking family spends more time and effort on something that should have been easy. They end up having to actually work when they thought they wouldnât have to.
In response, some attacking families will just beat the defending family down and take the planets anyway. Thereâs nothing wrong with that at all. Thatâs part of what a defending family is taking on when they refuse a NAP after all. However, some players in attacking families completely lose their cool when this happens and threaten the defending family with things like âI will ruin your round!â or âYou are making a very stupid decision! Iâm going to make you delete!â and other intimidation tactics. Again, thatâs part of the game and thatâs fine but I donât personally condone that kind of playing style. Itâs bullying, lazy, and cowardly in my opinion.
Either way, the fact that people react so strongly against refusals clearly means that doing so is a problem for attacking families, and at least partially effective as a deterrent for long-term strategy within a single round and across multiple rounds as well.
What do you guys think?
Super work man! 
