Are Fanatic Individualists/Xenophobes affected by Xenoslavery ?

[Futharkk]

I mean happiness-wise. Do the two slavery tolerance modifier cancel each other out ?

 

[iniudan]

You can enslave xenos without any problem, at least until ethic diverge, which is basically impossible to prevent with this ethos combo.

 

[Futharkk]

Well, I guess I can use the "conformist" trait.

 

[iniudan]

Well at least one of the nice thing about that combo, is that you have plenty of happiness building, so can be easy enough to keep control of the population even if they start to diverge, just a bit power hungry, due to hyper-entertainment maintenance been 6 powers.

 

[Endless Rain]

Slavery tolerance modifiers are additive, so free Fanatic Individualist and Xenophobe pops dislike slavery as much as pops with no ethics affecting slavery tolerance. Fanatic Individualist and Xenophobe slaves, on the other hand, will hate you more than if they had any other combination of ethics. It will be incredibly difficult to get their happiness above 0%, let alone make them have a positive opinion of you. I once saw an AI empire with this ethos combination expand and become a major power after they were forced to ban atrocities, but then collapse under constant slave revolts once it was able to change its policies back to xenos only slavery again.

Slavery's only benefit in Stellaris is that enslaved pops mine slightly more minerals, and it is also incredibly evil, so I would highly recommend against enslaving your pops no matter what your empire's ethics are. As it stands now, using slavery in Stellaris basically damages your own empire in order to oppress your pops. The fact that so many Stellaris players use slavery anyway... disturbs me.

You can enslave xenos without any problem, at least until ethic diverge, which is basically impossible to prevent with this ethos combo.

This is probably the one ethos combination where you want ethics divergence. High ED will make your pops will drift away from Xenophobe, which is normally the most difficult ethos to keep happy. If you're lucky, you can get them to have collectivist and xenophile ethics, which are the two ethics that are easiest to keep happy, so long as you don't enslave anyone. This is probably the easiest ethos to create a stable empire with, as ethics divergence actively benefits you, and you get two buildings giving a total of +25% happiness on top of that.

 

[Seryss]

Slavery's only benefit in Stellaris is that enslaved pops mine slightly more minerals, and it is also incredibly evil, so I would highly recommend against enslaving your pops no matter what your empire's ethics are. As it stands now, using slavery in Stellaris basically damages your own empire in order to oppress your pops. The fact that so many Stellaris players use slavery anyway... disturbs me.

There's a little more to it than that. Slavery effectively means you can ignore that pops ethics/happiness. If i conquer 5 planets, and cleanse 2 of the bad ones those pops HATE me, and as long as i continue purging, etc. (which i will) if i leave those pops free it's a nightmare. If i cap a planet, and enslave them, set up the tiles, i never have to bother with that planet again (unless the sector ai is acting wonky) No influence lost on intregation campaigns, no down time on mineral/energy production, no additional factions to suppress, so my war machine (which gets bigger, and stronger with each world enslaved) can move right on along to the next empire.

Slavery in stellaris is every bit as much about control as it is mineral and food output (which with slave processing, and stimulant diet is a little more than a "slight" bonus). As a slaver species your own pops will be dedicated toward science, and energy (enslaved pops with power hub 2, are still decent at energy production, not optimal, but good enough, especially with thrifty trait) and you tailor your traits toward that end. You also need less farms to keep them from starving freeing up a tile. Slavery makes decadent 100% free, as your capital building will always produce food/minerals, which is helpful.

Slavery is just a little more hands free i suppose; you're free to do whatever you want as far as policies are concerned.

 

[iniudan]

There's a little more to it than that. Slavery effectively means you can ignore that pops ethics/happiness. If i conquer 5 planets, and cleanse 2 of the bad ones those pops HATE me, and as long as i continue purging, etc. (which i will) if i leave those pops free it's a nightmare. If i cap a planet, and enslave them, set up the tiles, i never have to bother with that planet again (unless the sector ai is acting wonky) No influence lost on intregation campaigns, no down time on mineral/energy production, no additional factions to suppress, so my war machine (which gets bigger, and stronger with each world enslaved) can move right on along to the next empire.

Slavery in stellaris is every bit as much about control as it is mineral and food output (which with slave processing, and stimulant diet is a little more than a "slight" bonus). As a slaver species your own pops will be dedicated toward science, and energy (enslaved pops with power hub 2, are still decent at energy production, not optimal, but good enough, especially with thrifty trait) and you tailor your traits toward that end. You also need less farms to keep them from starving freeing up a tile. Slavery makes decadent 100% free, as your capital building will always produce food/minerals, which is helpful.

Slavery is just a little more hands free i suppose; you're free to do whatever you want as far as policies are concerned.

Actually I wouldn't say slavery makes decadent free, as they are the only population that don't like slavery been ban. Basically if you want to create a mess in a decadent empire, just take stop atrocity and humiliate as wargoal, their empire will basically crumble to rebellion, then you are free pick up the pieces.