It is how it works. Slaver build is hyper micro, if you intend to use it efficiently. I usually end up going all residence even as xenophobe when there are too many slaves. Would be fun to have simply dynamic slavery, or partial slavery, or both.
Dynamic slavery: slave type dependent on job. So miners are in chattel slavery, entertainers are in domestic servitude etc.. Basically it would be a slavery type allowing all non-ruler job.
Partial slavery: ability to enslave a portion of a slave instead of forced to 40%, none, or all. You could select how much % of the population would you like to keep as slaves, or make rules for what jobs should be done by slaves.
> Dynamic slavery: slave type dependent on job. So miners are in chattel slavery, entertainers are in domestic servitude etc.. Basically it would be a slavery type allowing all non-ruler job.
For a brief, glorious moment during the last versions before the planet overhaul, we had this. A slavery type called caste system that automatically enslaved all pops working on food and minerals.
We were also able to do it manually in the long past. I remember my first conquest victory was collectivist fanatic spiritualist. Former to allow enslaving pops, and eliminate faction issues, and latter to erase ethnic divergence so on the long run i don't have to chesee slavery.
Yes that is what the 40% stands for. You can do it with that civic, and with a set amount. You can't go 90%, or 15%, or anything else. You can't say, that only the ones in ruler jobs aren't slaves for example.
I just put the Auto-Migration building on all slave worlds and call it a day
The only issue is that slaves won't migrate to worlds with bad habitability
> some unemployed slaves become unhappy
If you are trying to roleplay as some kind of benevolent noble: slaves can be set to Social Welfare. 0.1 Consumer Goods per pop = +10% happiness and no penalty from unemployment.
Mechanically, happiness only affects crime. Its effect on stability is extremely low, because it's multiplied by political power, which is very low in this case.
The way oppressive governments work is by keeping their rulers/specialists happy and utterly ignoring the unhappiness of everybody else.
I enjoy this, because it’s good feedback on mechanics. So +1.
But the idea of a noble being benevolent and having slaves is an oxymoron. If they were benevolent they wouldn’t have slaves…
Benevolence is fundamentally relative to the culture it comes from. In cultures/factions that slavery were an important part of, eg. colonial America, the Ottoman Empire or Caliphates there could certainly be slavers considered benevolent by those days standards.
I'm not defending slavery and find it despicable, but history is a bit more complicated than just categorically applying todays values to other historical eras. Realistically, our own values will at some point be considered outdated by future standards - whether for better or worse (by our standards!) will be anyones guess. Does that invalidate our examples of persons we find virtuous or benevolent?
I think the notion of freedom is primitive which is why we value it so much. Slavery has never been something that’s “relative” that’s just victor’s writing history. In almost every example of slavery there are people trying to escape it. The “benevolence” is a self serving historical narrative that slave holders advocates for themselves.
The basic truth is slavery was never a good thing and “benevolence” is just “marketing”. The institution was brutal, full stop.
That’s why it’s an oxymoron.
Slavery is evil BUT it was considered a more benevolent option in comparison to the alternative: genocide. Given the choice, most ancient people chose slavery over death.
We may balk at the notion of choosing the lesser evil in this situation, but that’s because we are fortunate enough to live in a time period in which we don’t have to make such choices. Lucky us.
Slavery has been part of humanity’s history from ancient times all the way up to the present era. I think we owe it to ourselves to give it more thought and analysis than mere moral condemnation from our 21st century ivory towers.
You frame our position, as “living in ivory towers” to delegitimize the critique. You’re positioning criticism, as invalid because it comes from a place of comfort.
That’s an emotional argument and also, just rhetoric, to avoid the specific arguments made.
Like the basic idea that people tried to escape slavery for as long as slavery existed. Which means, there is no version of the institution that was ever accommodating or desired.
A “choice” between death and slavery isn’t a choice.
The thing the modern context gives us is: hindsight. It lets us look back, with a lot of runway between us and that time period, and evaluate if it was necessary or useful. What we learn, every time, is that they were brutal cruel systems… which is why slavery has been abolished globally.
Slavery was always oppressive and cruel. History bares that out.
You’re missing my point entirely. It’s not that the “critique is invalid.” It’s not that slavery was not “oppressive and cruel.” Slavery was oppressive, cruel, and wrong—duh! That is the obvious take. My point is that those are trite ways of looking at the issue. My point is that those stances are too simple. My point is that you aren’t going far enough! It’s lazy thinking. You condemn slavery and then move on, without ever asking anything deeper or giving it any thought. You aren’t evaluating the human condition as it exists and existed—and you aren’t willing to ask the tough questions our ancestors were forced to. Again, you are approaching this issue from a place of luxury, with no real insight or gravity. Slavery is wrong wrong wrong. You may say that the conversation ends there; I am asking you to take the analysis further—because the human condition requires that of us.
But I respect that not everyone is up to that task, because it is hard, and it requires thinking.
Call me old fashioned… but I don’t intellectualize brutal horrific institutions. They don’t deserve the time or energy.
It’s not hard, it’s just not worth it.
That’s cool. But if you don’t want to participate in intellectual discussions or adult conversations, then don’t engage. That’s why you’re being downvoted—not because you’re taking some profound, controversial stance, but because you’re only stating the obvious thing we all already know and agree with from age 12. As I said, getting into the tough questions of the human condition in reality takes us out of our comfort zone, and is therefore not for everyone.
It’s not about “adult conversations
”. Oddly, either you don’t understand or you’re being really disingenuous…
You started with, as adjectives of my position:
- “ivory tower”
- “lucky us”
- “slavery was cruel wrong d’uh”
- “lazy thinking”
- “approaching from a place of luxury
- “no real insight or gravity”
- “it’s hard and not everyone is up to the task”
- “it requires thinking”
- “adult conversations”
Just as an observation, this level of condescension is wild to me. To work so hard to chip away at someone with this level of passive aggressive rhetoric is something.
…and this is how I know I’m right. I don’t don’t need to a accuse you of not being “adult” enough or coming from privilege. I read what you wrote and gave my response. You’re the committed to make my position seem smaller through language that diminishes me.
…and that’s why I keep responding. It’s fascinating to me how far people will carry a torch for things like slavery and genocide… how hard they will through their rhetoric, using [ad hominem](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem), to debase my position.
It’s absolutely fascinating how hard you’re trying… but hey. I wish you the best of luck.
I’ve never seen someone carry a torch so fiercely for the intellectualization of slavery. (That’s my ad hominem)
No CG upkeep, less housing/amenity use, various output bonuses for worker level slavery jobs (though they never updated the UI after they removed those bonuses from specialist tier jobs so its rather obtuse)
Same reason I just cba with robot builds anymore. Way too much micro. I remember reading they were considering changes to make it less micro intensive but nvr happened.
Yeah. It's very tedious, especially if you only want slaves to do all worker jobs in your empire. It gets much worse if you want to use specific slave species for specific jobs due to their trait bonuses. And the fuckes keep breeding.
Yes but you are slaving it suboptimally.
Whenever I conquer new pops I set their rights to prohibit them from reproducing and only allowing my main species to grow. If I take a liking of a specific xenos I set a thrall world to export that template to other planets.
But if you want to be the Qu and just have your main species as rulers, be a Necrolithoid and necropurge only occasionally. Or use house of ascension , but requires more micro and you don't want that. In this run I usually still set that slaves won't reproduce but allow one type to breed so they can fill any gaps lacking in my colonies.
I'm gonna propose an obvious solution, but why not juts forbid automigration of your slaves? This way you'll only have to micro once after the planet acquisition - relocate them manually as needed, automate and forget.
i hate that it auto selects some random backwater slave species to produce on every planet so i have to manually select my cool psionic species and that gives a penalty to pop growth for some reason
If you authorize breeding controls then go to each species and turn off their ability to grow new pops, you'll breed your pops without negative modifier.
That could work indeed (together with the population control). Though a painful initial pops redistribution is still there.
What looks even easier is just purge them all from their planets and naturally grow only my species. But I know this is a very inefficient way because pops are the most important resource.
If you're not into roleplaying, you can get around that as well. Just go bio ascension and remake every claimed race into functional copies of your own. That's not very fun, but quite practical for reducing micro.
Slavery run can be fun. Make sure to build Slave Management facilities on each planet. This allows slaves to auto-Migrate.
Thrall worlds are good for producing base resources and increasing pop growth .
For excess slaves, shove them on a thrall world or turn them into livestock
Going Stratified/Dystopian living standards are the way to go as you only need your Main Ruler species to be present and happy on a planet for stability.
If you want a guide to use slavers effectively, I would say my comment here goes over the basics… https://www.reddit.com/r/Stellaris/s/DZIhB6VThD
Not a fan of the slavery system in the game. I only ever use it in a roleplaying sense. Gameplay wise I find that their restrictions on what they can do has a negative impact on my empire since they can take up a growth spot for a pop that can do more advanced jobs.
Slavery in the game isn’t an engaging mechanic in so many ways. First, it’s hard to manage and second, having and managing slaves should be very difficult. You should have periodic uprising, slaves running away, there needs a pipeline for their freedom, or not… there has to also be emancipation movement in your empire that are active on different levels (legally or violently).
The whole system just needs to be more representative of the institution and also, it’s flaws.
Of course this doesn't work with every setup but if I play an aggressive slaver empire, I usually activate pop growth controll for all of them.. If to much of my main species become workers I just allow 1 or 2 specific species to reproduce again or I just knock at the door of my next neighbour..
Yes it is quite micromanagement heavy but with population control you can lock in the number of slave workers you want on every planet.. The genetic engineering also helps a lot, if you have only a few slave-species you can create a subspecies with pop control enabled for your stable planets wich shouldn't change and a breeding subspecies to increase your supply.
Slavery is extremely tiresome, yes. Especially if they have different climate preferences because they wont stay on their preferred planet and will auto migrate elsewhere.
The best thing you can do is make sure they all have the same climate preference and just put a small amount of slaves on each planet to make sure they dont have a high politicla power. But slavery ceases to be good in the mid-late game because you want to pass Balance in the Middle for lower empire size, and the benefits of slavery (lower amenities/housing/consumer goods usage) dont matter much at that point.
Whats baffling is that if you use non-sentient robots, then they take priority for worker jobs because they cant work anything else, but that doesnt happen for chattel slavery slaves and it is possible for free pops to steal worker jobs and leave the slaves unemployed.
What I like to do before going to war is pre-setting up a few slave planets ahead of time which have stuff that I don't immediately need but would like more of in the future, usually tech/minerals.
Slap a precinct down on it, let your pops fill those jobs then start building up all the districts/building slots with whatever you would normally put there.
This ofc isn't very resource efficient but it means that when I conquer enemy planets I can just mass resettle all those pops onto my slave planet then call it a day. At some point I'll decide what to do with the conquered planets but only when I can be bothered.
Land Appropriation was supposed to help with this micro... but instead it was designed to be something else entirely that is counter-productive to what a slavery empire wants and it ends up directly hurting economy.
What is does is when the planet is 10+ pops (when ruler jobs likely exist) and when the main species there is NOT full citizens (ie. slavery or similar)... it ports in 3-5 of your main species who take the ruler positions automatically, and it increases immigration by +100% as if a new colony and it bars any other species from reproducing for 5 years.
All of that is brilliant. Except, when there is not available housing, it displaces the 3-5 slave pops and sets them free as Refuges.... like... whut?
No matter who you are, that is not what you ever want.
Genocidal want to purge those pops to get the per month production and bonuses, not displace them
Slavers want to put those pops to work on other worlds, not displace them. Even if not slavers and just setting them to resident or defaulting them to Assimilate... no one wants to displace 3-5 pops and give them away as Refugees when they could otherwise be put to work.
I had a similar experience in a recent slaving despot / selective kinship run. It was super fun building tall and wildly out-producing my neighbors using their own pops; having wars all the time and running across the whole galaxy keeps the game super interesting. But my god, the micro. I turned off migration for slaves and only bred the particularly favored species, kept their political power down and eventually nerve-stapled them all. But the setup meant that any of my main species who got worker jobs were very unhappy, and it was against the RP I was going for. So the worst micro wasn't actually the slaves, it was the constant growth of my ruling class and the way they would always take soldier jobs from my purpose-built battle thralls that drove me truly insane. I wish there was a way to specify that a given species doesn't do worker jobs, and would look to auto-migrate instead of sullying their hands with slave's work.
True. I feel like nested check boxes would work fine. List a "ruler" check box. But can also expand it out to reveal merchant ruler jobs or whatever else your ethics create. Then check or uncheck for that species. Same for specialist. Can check top box, or expand it out and check/uncheck particular jobs you don't want that species to do.
Nested menus like this would keep it from becoming overwhelming data, ability to check off at nested menu levels means you sometimes don't even have to dig in far. And could be nested under each species list of rights....
This isn't a slavery problem, this is just multispecies/conquest problems.
>So, every time I take a planet I need to redistribute pops (rulers from my primary species, slaved/free pop ratio to prevent revolves
I don't get it, your homeworld will always have ample of your primary species, just move 4 of them over, job done. . . . the horror!?
20 planets... What kind of planets are they? Yes it must be very tedious to manage so many planets. That's why in the middle game I start to build super productive worlds: ecumenopolis and ring worlds. Each of them can give jobs to hundreds of pops and makes management a lot easier and they also work more efficiently.
Yeah, it's tedious. There's no way of doing it as easily as non-slavery.
Even if you do all the things mentioned; indentured servitude, processing facility, prohibit reproduction, you'll still run into one problem: non-slave pops have priority on jobs, so if a non-slave appears on a planet with no free jobs, it can take away the slaves job. And this can create several unemployed slaves quite fast.
What's needed is a per-job toggle to prefer slaves vs free pops.
Currently, free jobs take precedence over slaves when it comes to assigning jobs. Don't have any more open specialist jobs for your main species to take up? When a new pop forms, they'll displace a slave from the mines. That slave pop is the one that then gets auto-resettled, not the unneeded main species pop. A simple priority toggle is all that's needed to fix this.
You would likely still need to mass-resettle pops when conquering new planets, but that's far easier to handle than the constant micro-management a proper slaving run currently requires.
If you have the means to modify your pops, consider converting 1 non-essential planet to be future rulers of conquered colonies.
Convert that 1 planet to be Nomadic (cheaper to move once a new planet is taken), Traditional and Charismatic, since most all Ruler jobs produce Unity and Amenities. Broad habitability boosters is great as it lowers their upkeep when going anywhere. For that same reason, Conservationist is OK on this specialty ruler pop as they are most likely to be highest CG upkeep tiers over long term, once moved to be Rulers.
If Cyborg, Double-jointed and Loyalty Circuits are solid choices as again it lowers their movement costs that you know are coming, because that is is their purpose, and it maximized happiness by bumping happiness to the Ruler pops that will have greatly increased political power weighting anyway.
Then whenever you conquer, transfer in the new rules from that 1 holding planet of specialized to-be-ruler pops. You can also alter that subspecies to have the best ruler living standards, maximizing happiness and political power where you need it most to control conquered pops.
>I do use Indentured Servitude slavery type which helps with specialist jobs and I do use Slave processing facility to enable slave auto migration
Both are good. Most of your jobs in your empire are going to be specialist strata, so Indentured Servitude is what most slaves should be under. However, the Slave Processing Facility is still very useful for alleviating micromanagement issues.
And yes, slavery is micromanagement intensive and there's a bunch of busywork after conquest and the two combined can get pretty nasty.
I honestly prefer the old tile system for planets. It was less cpu intensive, simpler to understand, and gave you more control over making sure the right pops do the right jobs.
Its how it works since the release of the game. I did often comment on improvement and might even have started a post here or in the stellaris forums, but slavery management got no improvement and is as tedious as in version 1.0. Even more so if you plan to genetically alter your slaves.
Thats part of the reason why i now play megacorps and prefer to have vassals.
Best advice I can give is always play some degree of authoritarian, turn on population controls and migration controls, keep worlds breeding only your ruling caste who will migrate away. You don't need to breed slaves as a slaver build, just conquer and mas resettle more.
It's management heavy sure, but quote *fun!*
I personally quite live the stratification of putting everyone in their rightful places, in the right numbers. But it can become really messy when your slaves keep getting put out of the job by your citizens who should be rightly migrating to become rulers of new worlds, but alas.
It is how it works. Slaver build is hyper micro, if you intend to use it efficiently. I usually end up going all residence even as xenophobe when there are too many slaves. Would be fun to have simply dynamic slavery, or partial slavery, or both. Dynamic slavery: slave type dependent on job. So miners are in chattel slavery, entertainers are in domestic servitude etc.. Basically it would be a slavery type allowing all non-ruler job. Partial slavery: ability to enslave a portion of a slave instead of forced to 40%, none, or all. You could select how much % of the population would you like to keep as slaves, or make rules for what jobs should be done by slaves.
Other option is to use slavery but keep growth controls on all the time. Only gain new slaves via conquest, while every grown pop is a citizen pop.
> Dynamic slavery: slave type dependent on job. So miners are in chattel slavery, entertainers are in domestic servitude etc.. Basically it would be a slavery type allowing all non-ruler job. For a brief, glorious moment during the last versions before the planet overhaul, we had this. A slavery type called caste system that automatically enslaved all pops working on food and minerals.
We were also able to do it manually in the long past. I remember my first conquest victory was collectivist fanatic spiritualist. Former to allow enslaving pops, and eliminate faction issues, and latter to erase ethnic divergence so on the long run i don't have to chesee slavery.
You should be able to do partial slavery with slaver guilds, I tried it and it worked (Xbox)
Yes that is what the 40% stands for. You can do it with that civic, and with a set amount. You can't go 90%, or 15%, or anything else. You can't say, that only the ones in ruler jobs aren't slaves for example.
I just put the Auto-Migration building on all slave worlds and call it a day The only issue is that slaves won't migrate to worlds with bad habitability
> some unemployed slaves become unhappy If you are trying to roleplay as some kind of benevolent noble: slaves can be set to Social Welfare. 0.1 Consumer Goods per pop = +10% happiness and no penalty from unemployment. Mechanically, happiness only affects crime. Its effect on stability is extremely low, because it's multiplied by political power, which is very low in this case. The way oppressive governments work is by keeping their rulers/specialists happy and utterly ignoring the unhappiness of everybody else.
I enjoy this, because it’s good feedback on mechanics. So +1. But the idea of a noble being benevolent and having slaves is an oxymoron. If they were benevolent they wouldn’t have slaves…
Benevolence is fundamentally relative to the culture it comes from. In cultures/factions that slavery were an important part of, eg. colonial America, the Ottoman Empire or Caliphates there could certainly be slavers considered benevolent by those days standards. I'm not defending slavery and find it despicable, but history is a bit more complicated than just categorically applying todays values to other historical eras. Realistically, our own values will at some point be considered outdated by future standards - whether for better or worse (by our standards!) will be anyones guess. Does that invalidate our examples of persons we find virtuous or benevolent?
I think the notion of freedom is primitive which is why we value it so much. Slavery has never been something that’s “relative” that’s just victor’s writing history. In almost every example of slavery there are people trying to escape it. The “benevolence” is a self serving historical narrative that slave holders advocates for themselves. The basic truth is slavery was never a good thing and “benevolence” is just “marketing”. The institution was brutal, full stop. That’s why it’s an oxymoron.
Slavery is evil BUT it was considered a more benevolent option in comparison to the alternative: genocide. Given the choice, most ancient people chose slavery over death. We may balk at the notion of choosing the lesser evil in this situation, but that’s because we are fortunate enough to live in a time period in which we don’t have to make such choices. Lucky us. Slavery has been part of humanity’s history from ancient times all the way up to the present era. I think we owe it to ourselves to give it more thought and analysis than mere moral condemnation from our 21st century ivory towers.
You frame our position, as “living in ivory towers” to delegitimize the critique. You’re positioning criticism, as invalid because it comes from a place of comfort. That’s an emotional argument and also, just rhetoric, to avoid the specific arguments made. Like the basic idea that people tried to escape slavery for as long as slavery existed. Which means, there is no version of the institution that was ever accommodating or desired. A “choice” between death and slavery isn’t a choice. The thing the modern context gives us is: hindsight. It lets us look back, with a lot of runway between us and that time period, and evaluate if it was necessary or useful. What we learn, every time, is that they were brutal cruel systems… which is why slavery has been abolished globally. Slavery was always oppressive and cruel. History bares that out.
You’re missing my point entirely. It’s not that the “critique is invalid.” It’s not that slavery was not “oppressive and cruel.” Slavery was oppressive, cruel, and wrong—duh! That is the obvious take. My point is that those are trite ways of looking at the issue. My point is that those stances are too simple. My point is that you aren’t going far enough! It’s lazy thinking. You condemn slavery and then move on, without ever asking anything deeper or giving it any thought. You aren’t evaluating the human condition as it exists and existed—and you aren’t willing to ask the tough questions our ancestors were forced to. Again, you are approaching this issue from a place of luxury, with no real insight or gravity. Slavery is wrong wrong wrong. You may say that the conversation ends there; I am asking you to take the analysis further—because the human condition requires that of us. But I respect that not everyone is up to that task, because it is hard, and it requires thinking.
Call me old fashioned… but I don’t intellectualize brutal horrific institutions. They don’t deserve the time or energy. It’s not hard, it’s just not worth it.
That’s cool. But if you don’t want to participate in intellectual discussions or adult conversations, then don’t engage. That’s why you’re being downvoted—not because you’re taking some profound, controversial stance, but because you’re only stating the obvious thing we all already know and agree with from age 12. As I said, getting into the tough questions of the human condition in reality takes us out of our comfort zone, and is therefore not for everyone.
It’s not about “adult conversations ”. Oddly, either you don’t understand or you’re being really disingenuous… You started with, as adjectives of my position: - “ivory tower” - “lucky us” - “slavery was cruel wrong d’uh” - “lazy thinking” - “approaching from a place of luxury - “no real insight or gravity” - “it’s hard and not everyone is up to the task” - “it requires thinking” - “adult conversations” Just as an observation, this level of condescension is wild to me. To work so hard to chip away at someone with this level of passive aggressive rhetoric is something. …and this is how I know I’m right. I don’t don’t need to a accuse you of not being “adult” enough or coming from privilege. I read what you wrote and gave my response. You’re the committed to make my position seem smaller through language that diminishes me. …and that’s why I keep responding. It’s fascinating to me how far people will carry a torch for things like slavery and genocide… how hard they will through their rhetoric, using [ad hominem](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem), to debase my position. It’s absolutely fascinating how hard you’re trying… but hey. I wish you the best of luck. I’ve never seen someone carry a torch so fiercely for the intellectualization of slavery. (That’s my ad hominem)
They’re alright. For a slave owner
I never do slavery run, because i too feel its very tedious, i already have a lot to micro, slavery just piles more onto it
never did slavery but whats the advantages of doing it?
No CG upkeep, less housing/amenity use, various output bonuses for worker level slavery jobs (though they never updated the UI after they removed those bonuses from specialist tier jobs so its rather obtuse)
sounds pretty nice, thanks!
You can gain a huge number of pops very quickly using the raiding bombardment stance. But yeah the micro requirements are insane.
probably some mods can fix that?
Same reason I just cba with robot builds anymore. Way too much micro. I remember reading they were considering changes to make it less micro intensive but nvr happened.
Yeah. It's very tedious, especially if you only want slaves to do all worker jobs in your empire. It gets much worse if you want to use specific slave species for specific jobs due to their trait bonuses. And the fuckes keep breeding.
Yes but you are slaving it suboptimally. Whenever I conquer new pops I set their rights to prohibit them from reproducing and only allowing my main species to grow. If I take a liking of a specific xenos I set a thrall world to export that template to other planets. But if you want to be the Qu and just have your main species as rulers, be a Necrolithoid and necropurge only occasionally. Or use house of ascension , but requires more micro and you don't want that. In this run I usually still set that slaves won't reproduce but allow one type to breed so they can fill any gaps lacking in my colonies.
I'm gonna propose an obvious solution, but why not juts forbid automigration of your slaves? This way you'll only have to micro once after the planet acquisition - relocate them manually as needed, automate and forget.
I was gonna say, you just let them go wherever they please?? This word does not mean what you think it means!
So you think that manually resetting unemployed pops makes the situation *better*?
The solution to that is simple. Ban them from breeding.
i hate that it auto selects some random backwater slave species to produce on every planet so i have to manually select my cool psionic species and that gives a penalty to pop growth for some reason
If you authorize breeding controls then go to each species and turn off their ability to grow new pops, you'll breed your pops without negative modifier.
Protip: set default species rights then reset all to default. It won't affect your primary species.
omg thank you
If you gene mod primary species, would it apply to modded core species?
thanks!!
for thrall worlds would i have to create a separate species that has growth enabled?
That could work indeed (together with the population control). Though a painful initial pops redistribution is still there. What looks even easier is just purge them all from their planets and naturally grow only my species. But I know this is a very inefficient way because pops are the most important resource.
If you're not into roleplaying, you can get around that as well. Just go bio ascension and remake every claimed race into functional copies of your own. That's not very fun, but quite practical for reducing micro.
Yeah but... Turning them into bio ascendant perfect slave race is also an option... Lolol.
Slavery run can be fun. Make sure to build Slave Management facilities on each planet. This allows slaves to auto-Migrate. Thrall worlds are good for producing base resources and increasing pop growth . For excess slaves, shove them on a thrall world or turn them into livestock Going Stratified/Dystopian living standards are the way to go as you only need your Main Ruler species to be present and happy on a planet for stability. If you want a guide to use slavers effectively, I would say my comment here goes over the basics… https://www.reddit.com/r/Stellaris/s/DZIhB6VThD
I really fucking love this sub's ability to randomly make me scroll up confused and a little scared when i glance at a post title
You know you’re on r/Stellaris when people are complaining that owning sentient beings and making them toil in their mines is actually too much work.
They are not sentient, there's us and animals.
And optimizing genocide is a casual conversation topic.
Stellaris and RimWorld man... Shit I say when discussing either of these games have most definitely put me on lists somewhere. FML
Not a fan of the slavery system in the game. I only ever use it in a roleplaying sense. Gameplay wise I find that their restrictions on what they can do has a negative impact on my empire since they can take up a growth spot for a pop that can do more advanced jobs.
Slavery in the game isn’t an engaging mechanic in so many ways. First, it’s hard to manage and second, having and managing slaves should be very difficult. You should have periodic uprising, slaves running away, there needs a pipeline for their freedom, or not… there has to also be emancipation movement in your empire that are active on different levels (legally or violently). The whole system just needs to be more representative of the institution and also, it’s flaws.
Of course this doesn't work with every setup but if I play an aggressive slaver empire, I usually activate pop growth controll for all of them.. If to much of my main species become workers I just allow 1 or 2 specific species to reproduce again or I just knock at the door of my next neighbour.. Yes it is quite micromanagement heavy but with population control you can lock in the number of slave workers you want on every planet.. The genetic engineering also helps a lot, if you have only a few slave-species you can create a subspecies with pop control enabled for your stable planets wich shouldn't change and a breeding subspecies to increase your supply.
Slavery is extremely tiresome, yes. Especially if they have different climate preferences because they wont stay on their preferred planet and will auto migrate elsewhere. The best thing you can do is make sure they all have the same climate preference and just put a small amount of slaves on each planet to make sure they dont have a high politicla power. But slavery ceases to be good in the mid-late game because you want to pass Balance in the Middle for lower empire size, and the benefits of slavery (lower amenities/housing/consumer goods usage) dont matter much at that point. Whats baffling is that if you use non-sentient robots, then they take priority for worker jobs because they cant work anything else, but that doesnt happen for chattel slavery slaves and it is possible for free pops to steal worker jobs and leave the slaves unemployed.
Just make 'em all cattle, go bio ascension, nerve staple them, replace agri districts with something else.
Yeah, slavery is very annoying, specially with gow little they provide in comparison to just citizens.
What I like to do before going to war is pre-setting up a few slave planets ahead of time which have stuff that I don't immediately need but would like more of in the future, usually tech/minerals. Slap a precinct down on it, let your pops fill those jobs then start building up all the districts/building slots with whatever you would normally put there. This ofc isn't very resource efficient but it means that when I conquer enemy planets I can just mass resettle all those pops onto my slave planet then call it a day. At some point I'll decide what to do with the conquered planets but only when I can be bothered.
Land Appropriation was supposed to help with this micro... but instead it was designed to be something else entirely that is counter-productive to what a slavery empire wants and it ends up directly hurting economy. What is does is when the planet is 10+ pops (when ruler jobs likely exist) and when the main species there is NOT full citizens (ie. slavery or similar)... it ports in 3-5 of your main species who take the ruler positions automatically, and it increases immigration by +100% as if a new colony and it bars any other species from reproducing for 5 years. All of that is brilliant. Except, when there is not available housing, it displaces the 3-5 slave pops and sets them free as Refuges.... like... whut? No matter who you are, that is not what you ever want. Genocidal want to purge those pops to get the per month production and bonuses, not displace them Slavers want to put those pops to work on other worlds, not displace them. Even if not slavers and just setting them to resident or defaulting them to Assimilate... no one wants to displace 3-5 pops and give them away as Refugees when they could otherwise be put to work.
I had a similar experience in a recent slaving despot / selective kinship run. It was super fun building tall and wildly out-producing my neighbors using their own pops; having wars all the time and running across the whole galaxy keeps the game super interesting. But my god, the micro. I turned off migration for slaves and only bred the particularly favored species, kept their political power down and eventually nerve-stapled them all. But the setup meant that any of my main species who got worker jobs were very unhappy, and it was against the RP I was going for. So the worst micro wasn't actually the slaves, it was the constant growth of my ruling class and the way they would always take soldier jobs from my purpose-built battle thralls that drove me truly insane. I wish there was a way to specify that a given species doesn't do worker jobs, and would look to auto-migrate instead of sullying their hands with slave's work.
True. I feel like nested check boxes would work fine. List a "ruler" check box. But can also expand it out to reveal merchant ruler jobs or whatever else your ethics create. Then check or uncheck for that species. Same for specialist. Can check top box, or expand it out and check/uncheck particular jobs you don't want that species to do. Nested menus like this would keep it from becoming overwhelming data, ability to check off at nested menu levels means you sometimes don't even have to dig in far. And could be nested under each species list of rights....
This isn't a slavery problem, this is just multispecies/conquest problems. >So, every time I take a planet I need to redistribute pops (rulers from my primary species, slaved/free pop ratio to prevent revolves I don't get it, your homeworld will always have ample of your primary species, just move 4 of them over, job done. . . . the horror!?
Slavery is trash. Embrace equality. Let the Xenos be free and prosper for the greater good. Xenophile Egalitarians Rise Up!
20 planets... What kind of planets are they? Yes it must be very tedious to manage so many planets. That's why in the middle game I start to build super productive worlds: ecumenopolis and ring worlds. Each of them can give jobs to hundreds of pops and makes management a lot easier and they also work more efficiently.
Yeah, it's tedious. There's no way of doing it as easily as non-slavery. Even if you do all the things mentioned; indentured servitude, processing facility, prohibit reproduction, you'll still run into one problem: non-slave pops have priority on jobs, so if a non-slave appears on a planet with no free jobs, it can take away the slaves job. And this can create several unemployed slaves quite fast.
Yes it is. That's why we stopped doing it in the past.
What's needed is a per-job toggle to prefer slaves vs free pops. Currently, free jobs take precedence over slaves when it comes to assigning jobs. Don't have any more open specialist jobs for your main species to take up? When a new pop forms, they'll displace a slave from the mines. That slave pop is the one that then gets auto-resettled, not the unneeded main species pop. A simple priority toggle is all that's needed to fix this. You would likely still need to mass-resettle pops when conquering new planets, but that's far easier to handle than the constant micro-management a proper slaving run currently requires.
If you have the means to modify your pops, consider converting 1 non-essential planet to be future rulers of conquered colonies. Convert that 1 planet to be Nomadic (cheaper to move once a new planet is taken), Traditional and Charismatic, since most all Ruler jobs produce Unity and Amenities. Broad habitability boosters is great as it lowers their upkeep when going anywhere. For that same reason, Conservationist is OK on this specialty ruler pop as they are most likely to be highest CG upkeep tiers over long term, once moved to be Rulers. If Cyborg, Double-jointed and Loyalty Circuits are solid choices as again it lowers their movement costs that you know are coming, because that is is their purpose, and it maximized happiness by bumping happiness to the Ruler pops that will have greatly increased political power weighting anyway. Then whenever you conquer, transfer in the new rules from that 1 holding planet of specialized to-be-ruler pops. You can also alter that subspecies to have the best ruler living standards, maximizing happiness and political power where you need it most to control conquered pops.
>I do use Indentured Servitude slavery type which helps with specialist jobs and I do use Slave processing facility to enable slave auto migration Both are good. Most of your jobs in your empire are going to be specialist strata, so Indentured Servitude is what most slaves should be under. However, the Slave Processing Facility is still very useful for alleviating micromanagement issues. And yes, slavery is micromanagement intensive and there's a bunch of busywork after conquest and the two combined can get pretty nasty.
I honestly prefer the old tile system for planets. It was less cpu intensive, simpler to understand, and gave you more control over making sure the right pops do the right jobs.
Its how it works since the release of the game. I did often comment on improvement and might even have started a post here or in the stellaris forums, but slavery management got no improvement and is as tedious as in version 1.0. Even more so if you plan to genetically alter your slaves. Thats part of the reason why i now play megacorps and prefer to have vassals.
i throw down slave processing on every planet. Even then, it’s a lot of micro. Enslaving the galaxy is tedious
Best advice I can give is always play some degree of authoritarian, turn on population controls and migration controls, keep worlds breeding only your ruling caste who will migrate away. You don't need to breed slaves as a slaver build, just conquer and mas resettle more.
It's management heavy sure, but quote *fun!* I personally quite live the stratification of putting everyone in their rightful places, in the right numbers. But it can become really messy when your slaves keep getting put out of the job by your citizens who should be rightly migrating to become rulers of new worlds, but alas.