Defense Pacts shouldn't end when you're attacked!

[KMadCandy]

I've been attacked before (me being non aggressor) and my DP has been dropped that second.... like eh what?

right. because at the moment you were attacked, your DP partner automatically declared war on whoever attacked you, as was his duty. but since he declared a war, any war, the DP is then automatically null and void. before it's dropped it goes into action, they join the war and are in theory defending you (whether they send any troops is another matter). but the game mechanic is that any DoW cancels it so that it isn't there for any future extensions of the war, such as monty bribing france into the fight too, in the original post.

 

[Quintillus]

Meh, I thought I'd probably messed up somewhere in there - I'll retrace it when I have time. And I know it was a rather extreme situation. But I've stuff similar to that happen in Civ3 before, so I thought I'd make a complicated example. Because complicated diplomacy is so much fun!

But in World War I and II, the whole world did dissolve into madness and chaos. There is almost no country that existed at the time of World War II that was not at war; even minor countries in latin America jumped in near the end.

Besides, world wars were my favorite part of Civ3.

The difference is you still had two distinct sides in WWII. In Civ3 you can easily have it so that the "sides" in a war are no longer distinct "sides" at all.

And good point that it can still happen in Civ4. Though it doesn't usually get quite as crazy.

 

[Soneji]

right. because at the moment you were attacked, your DP partner automatically declared war on whoever attacked you, as was his duty. but since he declared a war, any war, the DP is then automatically null and void. before it's dropped it goes into action, they join the war and are in theory defending you (whether they send any troops is another matter). but the game mechanic is that any DoW cancels it so that it isn't there for any future extensions of the war, such as monty bribing france into the fight too, in the original post.

Are you sure?

I've never had any units to help (didn't really need them anyway).. they also pop up saying that the deal (DP) no longer suits them.

You can't get another DP with them after either? (after peace ensues that is)

 

[Stylesjl]

Yes, defense pacts should carry on even during a war. With the only restriction being that they won't be activated by agressive wars

Tangled alliance webs remind me of Cybernations, where the huge interconnected webs have frequently resulted in massive conflicts of interest and involvement of unrelated parties to those who orginally started the war

 

[KMadCandy]

Are you sure?

I've never had any units to help (didn't really need them anyway).. they also pop up saying that the deal (DP) no longer suits them.

You can't get another DP with them after either? (after peace ensues that is)

i'm sure that's how the game mechanics work now, yes. am i sure that's how it should be? i don't have to answer that do i? *giggle*

the only way cathy can manually break the DP on the "same turn" that monty declares war on you is if cathy's turn comes before before monty's turn does. altho you don't see the AI actions until they're all done, they do happen in an order. so cathy can cancel your DP, and then monty declares on you. because DP was already cancelled, you had no "sworn to come help you" pal. so it's the "same turn" but it isn't, since it's turn 123 but there are steps in there, turn 123.persia, turn 123.russia, turn 123.aztec, you know? drives me bonkers, since it leads to situations like monty asking you to join him in a war vs. the evil greeks, and then he signs peace with the greeks the same turn . because he does them in that order, and because he's psycho.

as far as why they break the DP, and why they won't sign another after, you have to be at a certain level of cautious/pleased/friendly with the leader before they'll sign one. if you drop below that level, they sometimes come by and break it. seems to me they don't always break it as soon as the option is there tho, and i don't know why that is.

 

[Soneji]

Ok, I'll take your word for that then hun.

Still bloody annoying, on principle alone.

Don't need the gypo buggers anyway!

 

[Seras]

wow i looked everywhere in the code last night to try and find the defensive pact triggers but no luck

anyone know where it is?

 

[Gooblah]

Im so annoyed by this problem: Any self-respecting WWI modder should be allowed to redo the DP system! GB, France, and Russia's MPPs didnt cancel when Russia declared on Austria! Instead, it kicked in when Germany began mobilizing due to the AH-Germany-Italy MPP!

 

[sylvanllewelyn]

Alliances and defensive pacts are totally different things.

An alliance simply means joining in a fight with a friendly nation against a common enemy. When war actually happens, you can choose to join in immediately, join in later, backstab or ignore your ally's request (if your economy's in shambles then for whatever reason). An alliance is a diplomatic strategy, not a formal "agreement".

A defensive pact, on the other hand, is a much more delicate tool. It's defensive, in the sense that the two sides are using each other as "if you attack me, the stakes would be higher than you'd think". It helps you defend by deterring potential attackers, which is very different from an alliance, where (presumably) if one member attacks a nation, all alliance members must do so too (which would be an OFFENSIVE pact).

Here's the key: defensive pacts, unlike alliances, must work with a formal agreement, because within the 10 turn period, the nations MUST declare war on the aggressor nation. It's the game theory situation of "burning the bridge", meaning "if you come, we must fight". If you want a triple alliance situation like WW1, just sign multiple defensive pacts, and watch the chaos.

 

[CivFan87]

Yeah sometimes I wish there was something below a permant alliance but above a defensive pact. Like a regular "alliance" that could be broken up later on in the game.

 

[KMadCandy]

If you want a triple alliance situation like WW1, just sign multiple defensive pacts, and watch the chaos.

oh but the chaos can be nasty, because you can't enforce them to act like an alliance, or even civil to each other! you sign a DP with cyrus, and a DP with bismarck. then cyrus declares on bis. you auto-declare on cyrus, and now someone who was your friend has a "-3 you declared war on us" grudge against you. i never sign multiple DPs unless the 2 people have been holding hands since like 3500 BC .

 

[Meateater]

yeah I hate that, I think it should be that if you have a DP and someone DOW on your buddy that it should act like a vassle and they DOW on you to, instead of you have to DOW on themand get all the neg points and WW. Just MOP..

 

[draethor]

This is a pretty interesting thread, I hope someone at Firaxis notices it, or considers similar scenarios.

I think the bottom line of this thread is that there are certainly limitations with the defensive pact / permanent alliance thing, though it seems necessary from a game mechanic point of view to make sure defensive pacts end when they're actually enacted. Probably there would need to be an additional alliance system in place to enable multi-nation offensive or defensive arrangements.

One could argue that the current system of diplomacy supports this, but there's no question that a coalition build up such as the cold war is impossible in the current system (though would be very interesting and fun to have in the game).

 

[Seras]

...there's always multiplayer

 

[King Flevance]

oh but the chaos can be nasty, because you can't enforce them to act like an alliance, or even civil to each other! you sign a DP with cyrus, and a DP with bismarck. then cyrus declares on bis. you auto-declare on cyrus, and now someone who was your friend has a "-3 you declared war on us" grudge against you. i never sign multiple DPs unless the 2 people have been holding hands since like 3500 BC .

Just make sure you kill Cyrus.

You can also help the AI out in common wars by going to "Why don't you attack..." Any time I am at war with an opponent and have a mutual attacker, I always suugest their next target. And it usually results in them taking that city soon.

 

[WhimpyCiv]

the only way cathy can manually break the DP on the "same turn" that monty declares war on you is if cathy's turn comes before before monty's turn does. altho you don't see the AI actions until they're all done, they do happen in an order. so cathy can cancel your DP, and then monty declares on you. because DP was already cancelled, you had no "sworn to come help you" pal.

Which brings (in a weird roundabout way) a thought to mind: is there a way to bribe nations to break a DP? Like, you want to declare war on Cyrus to get some oil he's got, but he's in a DP with Cathy and she's a lot bigger than you are. So you bribe Cathy to drop the DP, then DoW on Cy?

If there's not a way to do that ... should there be?

-- WC

 

[King Flevance]

You could bribe him/her to declare war on someone possibly, which would cancel their current DP.

 

[KMadCandy]

Which brings (in a weird roundabout way) a thought to mind: is there a way to bribe nations to break a DP? Like, you want to declare war on Cyrus to get some oil he's got, but he's in a DP with Cathy and she's a lot bigger than you are. So you bribe Cathy to drop the DP, then DoW on Cy?

you can try bribing them to stop trading, which doesn't actually cancel the pact but might hurt their relationship below the threshold, so that they'd cancel the pact. if they have +wise civics going, you can try to spy-swap that for the effect. but there's no direct way to bribe "cancel DP with the vile XYZ".