Alliance system not functional?

For general talk about Supreme Ruler 2010

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

markuk
Warrant Officer
Posts: 37
Joined: May 13 2005

Alliance system not functional?

Post by markuk »

I am playing the German campaign as East Germany; I allied with South Germany and had an alliance and a mutual defence agreement with West Germany.

South Germany (SG) declared war on West Germany (WG) and nothing relating to my alliance with SG happened, however I got an email saying I should declare war on SG due to my mutual defence agreement with WG. In this case, there was no time limit and no apparent loss of treaty integrity by not doing so.

I thought this was due to the fact SG started the war, however Poland then declared war on me and neither SG nor WG declared war on Poland, I was under the impression that allies automatically declare war on your attacker(s).

Is this a bug or do I not understand the alliance system correctly?
Tobstar10
Corporal
Posts: 3
Joined: May 29 2005

Post by Tobstar10 »

I think its a bug or how you wanna call it. Same happend to me with playing West Germany. I had all Treatys with East and South germany available. Poland declared war on East Germany. Nothing happend to me or south Germany. I evern never got an email were i could choose to declare war on Poland.
red
General
Posts: 1092
Joined: Feb 14 2004
Location: New York

Post by red »

Perhaps their belli increased towards you for having an alliance with South Germany. Check their war justfication before and after in the new diplomacy panel.
markuk
Warrant Officer
Posts: 37
Joined: May 13 2005

Post by markuk »

There has been no change, good relations.

The alliance simply does not seem to trigger. It could be only this map, has anyone else experinced these problems on different maps?
SamuraiGG
Warrant Officer
Posts: 25
Joined: May 17 2005

Post by SamuraiGG »

markuk wrote:There has been no change, good relations.

The alliance simply does not seem to trigger. It could be only this map, has anyone else experinced these problems on different maps?
Yeah same thing happened in my game. I not only had a non aggression pact with Jersey, which they violated to declare war on me, but Virginia, my ally, did nothing to help me.
User avatar
George Geczy
General
Posts: 2649
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Location: BattleGoat Studios
Contact:

Post by George Geczy »

First thing to note is that an Alliance does NOT automatically commit your ally to declare war to help you out. As far as the AI goes, an Alliance makes this even much much more likely, but it is by no means an assured thing. And it is not meant to be part of the 'alliance' package of treaties - things like line of sight, transit, and such are included in an alliance, but mutual defense is not.

Now, there is a separate treaty for Mutual Defense - this can be signed at the same time as an alliance, signed separately, or even just on its own (ie Mutual defense without any alliance). In the latter form it is interesting because it does not show up to other players - you can always find out who Player A's allies are, but you don't know who they signed an Mutual Defense agreement with.

BUT, even mutual defense is not a guarantee that the treaty will be honoured - also, it does not have a specific timeline. If any player (human or AI) does not honour a mutual defense treaty, then some of their diplomatic and integrity ratings will decline over time, though there is no sudden drastic decline. Maybe we should make this penalty more severe, but currently it is not a 'big hit' if the player (human or AI) drags its feet in honouring Mutual Defense.

But back to the original point - an Alliance in no way commits a region to declare war in response to aggression on their ally. Instead, alliances are intended to show the friendship and non-aggression (as well as co-operation on transit and spotting etc) between the involved regions. They also have the benefit that if Player C attacks your ally, you will gain an immediate causus belli increase against Player C in case you did decide to join the war; you would not gain the same amount of belli/justification if you were just a neutral bystander (though, depending upon circumstances of the regional relationships, you may still gain a lot either way).

-- George.
SamuraiGG
Warrant Officer
Posts: 25
Joined: May 17 2005

Post by SamuraiGG »

How often does the AI dishonor non aggression treaties? Is there a certain Casus Belli level, that, when reached, the AI disregards the treaty and declares war anyway?

I was feeling stupid my last game when my non aggression partner Jersey declared war on me while I was tied up in my war with Illinois. :oops:
Zickefoose
Warrant Officer
Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 13 2004
Location: Millersburg, Ohio

Post by Zickefoose »

I have " never " had help when a country declared war on me. I think the Belli really hurts our chances of that, since I have not seen the AI declare war without a high belli, therefore few wars and ones that the AI will think is ok.
aegisx
Colonel
Posts: 465
Joined: Mar 22 2005

Post by aegisx »

If a country does not honor their side of an alliance/mutual defense, your belli rating towards them should rise (giving you cause for war).
myros
Lieutenant
Posts: 71
Joined: May 21 2005

Post by myros »

I think it does rise a little ... IMO it should rise a bit more and also their standing with the WM should drop a bit more. In the 4 or 5 games Ive played since the new update none of my allies have helped in a war yet. I would like to see that tweeked a little, allies dont seem to mean to much yet. I agree that they shouldnt just automaticly be forced into my wars but there's not much point in having a treaty if they never honor them ;p

M
Borodin
Lieutenant
Posts: 99
Joined: May 19 2005

Post by Borodin »

Formal alliance seems a bit vague, then, George. It sounds like it repeats what other arrangements already do between your region and another, without adding a significant, new core element. My understanding was that of many others, here: that a formal alliance meant something different from everything else, listed.
aegisx
Colonel
Posts: 465
Joined: Mar 22 2005

Post by aegisx »

South Africa declares war on Nambia, Nambia allies with Madagasgar, Madagasgar does not declare war on South Africa. Alliance should mean that there is a very good chance of being on their side during a war.
Lokos
Sergeant
Posts: 10
Joined: May 25 2005

Post by Lokos »

North Caucaus declared war on Kirov after I did, honoring its alliance with me.

Lokos
TheRockFrog
Lieutenant
Posts: 65
Joined: May 06 2005
Location: Seattle, WA

Post by TheRockFrog »

The problem with all this diplomacy stuff is everyone has their own idea on how much the Belli should go up, how often your allies should help you out, etc...

I personally have an alliance with someone so that they wont declare war on me when I go to war with others...I don't care if they join my war or not..I just want them to stay away from me and the alliance gives me that assurance.

Reading all these posts every day....there is no way everyone will be totally happy one way or the other...on one map someone might help you in a war while on another map, a country might not help...its not cut and dry and you know someone will say "on this map, my alliance partner went to war with me but his Southern neighbor then declared war on him and i didn't want the S. neighbor in the war so please change this or that, blah, blah, blah.

The scenarios are set up differently and play differently...there will ALWAYS be someone posting to please change this or that...it gets old.
Decimatus
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 734
Joined: May 18 2005
Location: The Empire

Post by Decimatus »

I think we need an option to make an Alliance with someone, against a common enemy.

Like, spain and italy team up with the express interest of taking down france. Such an alliance would be harder to get signed, but would keep the AI more acountable.

Better than the alliance where the AI helps you if it feels like it.
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”