Is this expected Defensive Pact behavior?

[Randy In A Hat]

Hi fellow Stellaris gamers,

I've run into a diplomatic situation that surprised me and I can't wrap my head around it.

I have defensive pacts with multiple empires around me, let's say A B C.

There's also empire D which declares war on empire A.
D invited my defensive-pact-ally B (!) into that war.

So D+B attack A.

However, since I also am in def-pact with A, I am now at war with D+B.

But this means that B, which was a month ago my "ally", had instantenously quietly broken Defensive Pact without 10 years of truce.
So 1 day we're in Defensive pact, another day we're at war.

This sounds like every Def Pact I have now (I got 5 of them with all neighbours) is actually a detrment not a value - it's extra attack surface against me.

Is this expected or have my mods f** something up ?

 

[Lykus Cerebros]

I would say that is expected behavior. B would most likely have no treaties with D. Of course that should cancel treaties with you if they are at war with you.

It also works like this in EU.

 

[Secuter]

I'll end up sounding like a grumpy old man who constantly mutters the same old grievances; but this is again down to the oversimplified diplomacy system which can't really understand anything beyond attack/defend. Your case is yet another example of the poor system - because it doesn't consider that you two are allies. The AI should refuse to join the aggressor because of the friendly relations, but also because it needs to understand that it risk wrecking itself with such a poor decision.

 

[The Bored Chairman]

Just because you have a pact with a certain empire, doesn't mean the other empire is obligated to respect it.

Of course, this makes them a backstabbing traitor, so feel free to crack their planets and make some space omelettes.

 

[Randy In A Hat]

Just because you have a pact with a certain empire, doesn't mean the other empire is obligated to respect it.

Wait what? Game mechanics make it so that you physically cannot attack an ally you have a defensive pact with.
If A and B are in defensive pact today, the earlierst A can attack B is in 10 years. (normally as I understand it)

This is enforced by the game, there is no way around it... unless, as I point out in my original post, there is a long chain of events that somehow circumvents it.... which seems to go against the very definition of a defensive pact... and the rule which DOES protect you suddenly stops protecting you.

It makes no sense. *sigh*

 

[Randy In A Hat]

I'll end up sounding like a grumpy old man who constantly mutters the same old grievances; but this is again down to the oversimplified diplomacy system which can't really understand anything beyond attack/defend. Your case is yet another example of the poor system - because it doesn't consider that you two are allies. The AI should refuse to join the aggressor because of the friendly relations, but also because it needs to understand that it risk wrecking itself with such a poor decision.

TBH at this point it seems like a trivial game mechanic flaw/bug... when I want to declar war on an ally, I can't. But when I join a war against an ally, I can - for whatever reason

Anyhow, yeah. Sounds like poor design choice or omission (but how is that not being abused in multiplayer?!)

 

[Androbey]

This is one reason to Not enter into any Military Packs with neighbors.

Example: you closed your borders with a neighbor, then you enter a non-aggression pack with that empire, they then abrogate that treaty and start exploring your space, do to the neutrality timer.

Any time someone abrogates a treaty, the relations should revert to the status quo ante.
i.e., If you were at war, the the war resumes, if you had closed borders, the borders remain closed and the only way to cross them is with a DoW.

TBH, Unless A, B & C were in a "federation", that is a defined entity, all three were independent, not interdependent.

 

[DrNukeLear]

It sounds like expected behaviour.
Prior to the declaration of war, invitations to join the attacker can be sent. Any nation without a non-aggression pact or defensive pact with the intended defender can be invited (I don’t think it checks the pacts with the defenders allies through defensive pacts).

When an attacker then declares war, the defenders defensive pacts should trigger. Any non aggression pact is broken by the aggressor when he declares war against an ally the other party has a defensive pact with.

I think that there should be more information about treaties at risk when declaring war. For example a row of struck out pact icons alongside/under each empire representing the loss of pacts with that potential opponent.

 

[MasterOfGrey]

(I don’t think it checks the pacts with the defenders allies through defensive pacts)

This is the problem, Stellaris diplomacy is intentionally rigid, so it can guarantee a behaviour based on these things. Consequently it should check for that.

 

[Moeshevik]

NAPs are enough, never went to DPs unless there's an advanced purifier bordering in early games
being dragged to the defender side between waring allies is expected, even not D but B declares upon A directly and you'll be at war with B

DP is just a lower version of relaion than federation, you can't even identify him a 100% ally because he's not somehow promised to join your offensive wars, you'll call him like a normal neighbour without the DP, signers promise to join defensive wars when attacked, and that's all of the terms.

Stellaris blocks possible wars between federation members already, in HOI4 you can order 66 againt faction members though undesigned to do so
and order 66 actually happens the moment you quit faction.

only allies of the HREmperor in EU4 are exceptions at this situation in all PDX map-painting series, which you can't declare upon HRE princes when being at war along with or againt the Emperor.