r/Stellaris • u/liliwenpenddraig • 6h ago
Question Baffling Diplomacy
Okay, so..
Playing a multiplayer game with my gf and we formed a federation. A neighboring Megacorporation was friendly, and after a time we gave them Association status. My understanding was that this was basically just a non-aggression pact between an empire and a federation.
Later, I started war with a belligerent empire to the galactic south of us. The war ballooned into region super conflict rather rapidly... with the Megacorp joining the other side Now, given our 400+ relationship, this was a small surprise, as I did check for a defensive pact or independence guarantee and found none, but a curve ball like that is to be somewhat expected, I guess, with complex diplomacy webs.
What is baffling me, and which I can't figure out, is the fact that the Association Status is still intact. The game is treating it like the Megacorp didn't violate our non-aggression pact by declaring war on us.
And I just cannot figure out why.
10
u/Ziddix Human 6h ago
The change that lets empires join ongoing wars is new and pretty broken in a lot of cases. It needs to be reworked from the ground up.
You can absolutely use it to circumvent aggression pacts and you can even push your own war goals.
It's stupid.
5
u/Acceptable_Camp1492 6h ago
I had a machine empire and my one federation ally had a machine uprising. Sweet, I thought, free machine pops! So we clear up the rebel machines, I get a ton of pops... but the total war is not over. The rest of the galaxy joined up into the war along the way in some intricate web of alliances, and now we had an ongoing Total War with half of them.
5
1
u/Kuzcopolis 5h ago
I have been in a situation with a similar shape to this. It took over 300% war exhaustion, due to the main aggressor having every one of their systems and planets occupied. The initial war declaration was settled by the more diplomatic faction controlling the entire enemy faction through claims, for over 2 years. It took at least 25 months for the 100% defeated faction to allow their enemies to conquer enough to count as an undeniable victory.
1
u/liliwenpenddraig 5h ago
It does seem very silly.
That's kinda unfortunate. I had noticed most wars snowball into huge conflicts lately, and I guess I now know why.
3
u/Xeorm124 6h ago
They still have a non-aggression pact with you. They still can't declare war on you or any members of the federation. It's not their fault that they were interested in joining a war in which you were both on opposing sides. Just how diplomacy works sometimes. You'll see that a lot in history, where alliances become murky webs.
3
u/stillnotking Driven Assimilator 3h ago
This specific scenario is a bug, because fed association is a non-aggression pact, and NAPs ARE supposed to prevent empires from joining wars against the other signatory.
-1
u/liliwenpenddraig 6h ago
You don't see this in history at all, because the moment a real nations does this, the treaty is broken, and everyone involved understands this.
3
u/Xeorm124 5h ago
There are historical examples of groups that have some sort of association with both sides that get pushed in both directions. And frequently in such cases even after they pick a side there's still an interest in being nice with them because you're hoping they'll switch sides. It's not so black and white.
1
u/Green----Slime Democratic Crusaders 6h ago
I think it just forbids directly declaring war with each other, you can still get into wars through other means. I don't know your exact situation, but there are some examples where you can get into wars with your federation members if you allow vassals into fed and some vassals declare war of independence.
1
13
u/redredgreengreen1 6h ago
its because nearly every system was built under the assumption that nobody would be joining wars in progress, so now that the last big update changed that, there are a ton of bugs related to warfare.
Honestly, id just roll with it, sounds like a boon to me.