The MPP: useless?

[Bad Ax]

I've read several posts in this forum advocating use of the Mutual Protection Pact in foreign policy as a way to protect your civilization from attack. I'm personally not inclined to agree.

The MPP gets activated when another power attacks your units on your territory, as I understand it. Even if I'm wrong about the latter condition, the former is definitely true. MPP's don't require your ally to enter the fray unless you are attacked physically. Just because somebody declares war on you doesn't mean that your ally will help. This can lead to some unexpected results.

A real example:

I was playing Russians on an archipelago map. I partially colonized a rather large unclaimed island some 50 years previous, but then got bogged down in some domestic concerns. By the time my attention returned to the island, the English and French had also built small cities. I have an MPP with the French. The English decide to explore the island (although they have my territory map) with a complement of 3 Knights, marching them within striking distance of one of my weaker cities. I demand they leave, and the Brits declare war. The French sit on their assess because the Brits do not physically attack. The next turn, the Brits negotiate an alliance against me with the French, and the French declare war on me.

The lesson from this experience is that the MPP does not really offer any assurance that you'll receive assistance from the other country, and indeed does not even guarantee that they won't attack you. Furthermore, MPPs can be quite costly, unless the other signee is a country too weak to be of any assistance during a war.

I tend to think the alliance tool is much more useful in the case of an attack. It requires more direct effort from you, but it ensures that the other signee will declare war on your enemy. As an added bonus, I think it makes your enemy have a worse attitude towards your ally, thus decreasing the likelihood of friendly diplomacy between those two countries. As an added bonus, it does not have the critical flaw of the MPP.

Remember that the MPP is *mutual*, which means that it works both ways. If you've signed an MPP with another civilization (say, France) and they get physically attacked (by England), then you *must* go to war with England, no matter what your foreign policy objectives. You don't have the choice whether or not to honor your MPP. This means that you can get drawn into a war that's quite damaging to your civ (consider the effects of war weariness) and your objectives. It's the classic WWI effect.

The MPP's only advantage, then, derives from the improvement of the other signee's attitude towards you. However, you can usually get just as much mileage out of an ROP agreement, without the attendant cost of getting embroiled in foreign wars.

That's my take on the MPP. I'm curious to see what the rest of you think.

[Matthevv]

I keep out of MPPs, because it will mean ineviatably getting dragged into a war against a Civ that I don't want to war against. I try to keep my head down and take advantage of the fact that they are all fighting each other. It might be worth it if I were sharing a continent with another friendly Civ, but so far my experience is that it is impossible to keep friendly with a Civ in this position.

[solo]

I think they are useful as long as you don't have more than one. MPPs with the most powerful AI, or the one I fear an attack from the most, have worked well for me so far. When I've tried to "cover" myself with extra MPP's, I've been dragged into wars I didn't want to get into.

[eMarkM]

I only use them for very specific purposes. I've made the mistake of making them just to have "buddies" who like me and that's not a sufficient reason. Here's some examples from some of my games:

Protection: Share continent w/ Americans and Zulus. Zulus are all powerful on my continent and it would be very difficult to survive an attack from them. I MPP w/ America so that at least we'd both be fighting them if they invade. And I don't mind if they invade America and I get dragged in. I'll have to get into war w/ them eventually to weaken them enough to win, so when it happens I might as well have someone fighting on my side.

Strategic: I'm most powerful and want to launch a SS in peace. China & France are only world powers left and they have MPP w/ each other. I can't afford to fight them both at same time, so I pay France to MPP w/ them. I'm more worried about Chinese so this way if they are aggressors, France will be forced to war against them. I don't worry so much about China declaring on France and dragging me in, since they already have MPP. I end up launching SS w/ no war starting.

Resources: England is a very close 2nd to me in power and a threat to my winning. But they have no oil. Their neighbors, the Iroquois, have tons of oil, but they are weakest civ. If England declares war on Iroq, they'll gain space & oil and may take over as #1 civ. I MPP w/ Iroquois as deterrent to England. They invade Iroq anyway, I send in the tanks and reduce England to rubble and assure myself the #1 position in the game.

Diplomatic: If you're going for a diplo win you'd want to MPP and protect all the weakest civs. If you defend them in war, they're sure to go with you in any UN vote. You basically need MPPs to get votes for diplo win.

I will now do, maybe, 1 or 2 MPPs a game with very specific criteria in mind, like above. Otherwise, I tend to be pretty isolationist and refrain from them. You say you had MPP w/ France. What was the specific strategic purpose of it? If it was just to "be friends", yeah, those get you into situations you won't like. I've made that mistake, too. Always consider what will happen if your partner is attacked. In the "resource" case above I didn't mind at all that it triggered a war w/ England. I wanted it in that case. Of course, I took a calculated risk it would be England that attacked and not someone else, but I won't make the pact unless I'm comfortable going to war for the other civ.

As for them not giving you aid, yeah that's happened to me, too. But it works the other way. You can give token "protection" in a war, too. Just sink a few ships, defend your territory from invaders and just fight a "phony" war yourself. That has its uses.

I agree alliances are more useful, but they're usually a lot more expensive. Civs usually want an arm and a leg to join you in an explicit war. MPP has its uses, just consider the possible combinations before making one and make sure they fit into your overall strategy.

e

[Pyrodrew]

It sounded like BadAx used MPP for the 'Strategic Reason' eMarkM listed... except eMarkM didn't have the Chinese pay the French for a military alliance against him... BadAx did have the English pay the French for a military alliance against him.

I tend to stay out of MPPs also, but here's a current situation for why I'm considering to use it soon...

Regent, Industrial Age, I (Americans) recently was forced to eat the Zulus & China while mass-embargoing & fighting the 'furious' Aztecs (4th) severely weakening their Superpower position. The 'polite' Indians (3rd) & 'annoyed' Babylonians (2nd) are tech leaders with me & on my continent. Both the Indians & Babylonians have a larger military. 'Annoyed' Persia is moderately strong, but dangerously stuck behind me. All other Civs on the continent are pathetic. Civs not on the continent are not only weaker, but too far away (recall naval units are VERY slow). Babylonians & Indians each have extensive trading networks with other Civs. They are also trading partners & refuse a military alliance against the other. I share a larger border with the Babylonians... but they each share far more borders with each other. So, if I set up a MPP with India & declare war on Babylon they will do far more damage to each other than Babylon will do to me (Tactical MPP use). The risk is India gaining more terrority from this than me, yet, if I do nothing they could set up a military alliance against me since I'm tech & score leader. Another alternative I've been considering is the Peaceful 'Strategic MPP'...

BadAx Result: I sign MPP with India only to have the Babylonians (aggressiveness 4) pay India to do a Military Alliance against me... devasting me.

eMarkM Result: I sign MPP with India & Babylon lets me reach the Modern Age & build the SS in peace.

Domino Result: I sign MPP with India... Babylon signs a MPP with the Aztecs... other MPPs are the signed... the Aztecs then declare war on me... blood bath.


If I set up a MPP with both, Babylon (Aggressiveness4) will likely drag me into wars I don't want to be in, but perhaps that is better than a Domino Result or BadAx Result. For now I'm considering devouring 1/2 of Persia, without a MPP.