MPP's as a prelude to war

[Ricardo]

Does anybody feel that MPP's should not work the way they do ?

Look, I have no problem declaring war on France when they invade my MPP-Partner Egypt, but when Egypt starts the war ...... at least give me a chance to think it over !

On the other hand, in my latest game I was bullied by the evil Germans who were the most powerful civ in the world. I got MPP’s with all other civs on _my_ continent, declared war on Germany and invaded with a mighty warrior. When the Germans killed my invasion force, their fate was sealed. I stayed within my own borders, developed my army, and when the(ir) war was finally over, I had no problems uniting the continent under Roman flag.

I guess my partners didn’t read the fine print on the contract before signing it.

Although I enjoyed it, it felt a bit like cheating. Anyone have similar experiences ?

[Flight]

absolutely
its a system open to explotation by drawing the AIs into wars and leaving them to it.

[The Andy-Man]

I think the MPP's suck.

haveing the AI's fight your wars, though, is realistic. its just. pelpe had MPP's in RL WAY before nationalism, its just a think, i will protect you if you protet me.

but MMPs are just dumb. the minute the AI gets the tech, they all sign one with each other, meaning a democracy/republic is screwed if some one atacks him cos they WILL have an overseas MPP partner.

[Kilroy_Alpha]

You're only obligated to declare war if one of your partners is invaded, right? That's how it was with 1.16. Did they change this?

[Dida]

MPP is not just prelude to war, it is prelude to world war.

[ProfEclipse]

Originally posted by Kilroy_Alpha
You're only obligated to declare war if one of your partners is invaded, right? That's how it was with 1.16. Did they change this?

I've been sucked into a number of wars where my MPP partner declared war on another civ. First I get the message "Germany has declared war on India." Next turn, I get the message "Due to our MPP with Germany, we must declare war on India."

Now, I love a good war now and then, but war weariness under a democracy really takes the fun out of it!

[Random Passerby]

In my experiences, one of three things happens at Nationalism:

Scenario 1. A few civs form MPPs with each other. Then a few of those civs form MPPs with civs in other pacts. Soon just about everybody has MPPs with most of the world, and no one's stupid enough to launch any attacks on anyone. The world remains basically at peace for the rest of the game (boring).

Scenario 2. A few civs form MPPs with each other. Then a few of those civs form MPPs with civs in other pacts. Soon just about everybody has MPPs with most of the world... but someone's stupid enough to attack. Their attack triggers the target civ's MPPs, who all attack the original civ... even the ones that had MPPs with them, too. Then their attacks trigger the original attackers' remaining MPPs... even the ones that had MPPs with the counter-attacking civs, too. Pretty soon every single civ is at war with every single other civ (silly).

Scenario 3. A few civs form MPPs with each other. Then due to cross-pact hostility, no one on either side forms any alliances of any sort across the two (or sometimes three) pact groups. Both alliance groups are intimidated by the other and seek to draw in the remaining neutral nations to their pact. Sooner or later someone in one of the alliances will decide to snag some territory from a minor neutral player... and eventually someone from the opposing alliance group realizes that it would upset the balance of power if the aggressor civ actually managed to take over that much territory. They declare war; both sides' MPPs kick in, and there's a mad rush to buy whatever civs are left in to each side using military alliances. Pretty soon you've got a nice proper world war (fun!).

[jabroni154]

I just played a game with Scenario number 2 and it was pretty stupid. From Nationalism onwards, the whole world was continually at war. It started off reasonable enough but as soon as various MPP's would expire (or even not), somebody would switch sides and then a whole new slew of MPP's would create another war.

It was just crazy, pretty much constant war without any sort of break. If peace was declared, that player was bought off within one or two turns to declare war somewhere else or to suddenly have some new magic alliance with their former enemy. The diplomacy seemed to be pretty much a joke as alliances swapped just one or to turns afterwards. It was so amusing that I had to laugh at times at how much the AI flip-flopped.

I must say, it was highly amusing though when I nuked the Americans and half of the world (that I was at peace with) declared war for no reason (or at least that I know of).

[Velociryx]

I dunno....on the one hand, I sorta like it...gives you the chance to play the role of puppet master, cos it's generally pretty easy to get the AI's all wrapped up in MPP's and then lure them into fighting amongst themselves, while you devote your time and energy into propping up the losing side to prolong the fun....this is one of the easiest way to take firm control of the game, in fact. Keep the AI's in Communism, while you stay in Dem and undo much of their production and research advantage.

Still, once you master doing it, there's not much variation on that theme.

-=Vel=-

[Deathwalker]

Though I feel that the MPP system does lead to a world war. IU think that within the game hat will always heppen in the end. Which is terrable for Democracy because of war werieness. You can never kill a enemy fast enough for your people to be happy. So I think the game it two biased twards dictatorships.

[The Andy-Man]

the problem with civ3 (and all of em really) is every nation is important. there is no dependency nations of minor countries that are worthless. so it is enevitable wars will happen, and in Civ2 they were for noe reason (no reasource system) and in civ3 they could be for a reason, but most likly just cos i am bored once i hit the modern era with nice never-to-be-obsolete weapons.

[godinex]

Originally posted by The Andy-Man
the problem with civ3 (and all of em really) is every nation is important. there is no dependency nations of minor countries that are worthless. so it is enevitable wars will happen, and in Civ2 they were for noe reason (no reasource system) and in civ3 they could be for a reason, but most likly just cos i am bored once i hit the modern era with nice never-to-be-obsolete weapons.

Ilike your signament

[The Andy-Man]

i would be happy you like my sigmanent if i new what one was....