Can someone give me a good reason not to kill all natives in colonies?

[Zarco]

Didnt one of the dev diaries explain that natives add to trade in a colony?

 

[4TyStigma]

unless you want them to all feel entitled to everything after losing the wars, blocking your damned highways, kill them all.

Yeah damn soon they all want free Health-care, Free Pension and Free ObamaPhones we better kill them all of before they all feel entitled. :rofl:

 

[Prussia]

Some 20 years back, I read a book by Terry Pratchett called Only you can save mankind. Its premise was that computer game world was an alternate reality. What if the actions you do in an EU4 game shape the history of Earth in an alternate time-space continuum? How would a massacre of thousands of innocent people weigh upon your immortal soul? What if this action condemns you to an eternity in hell after you die? And all of that just because you wanted to speed up colonization of some province in a EU4 game.

Then I'm definitely going to "Hell". All these populations exterminated in EU series...
Good god, pluck me.

 

[Inkshootr]

As far as I know, the only in-game drawback to doing so is that you'll miss out on the event that allows you to spend a few ducats to increase the base tax of the colony by trading with them.

Of course, there's also the whole role-playing aspect...

 

[Dutchling]

I think I'll just do revenge killings. Keeping it fair~

 

[Enewald]

Then I'm definitely going to "Hell". All these populations exterminated in EU series...
Good god, pluck me.

I feel even worse. I once remember playing this Victoria 1 game as Russia, I made every Polish POP into soldiers, sent them all to die to the frontline. Within the next few decades, whole of Poland was depopulated and non Poles remained in Russian held Poland.
And this way many years before Polandball stuff etc.

Then I had this Eu2-V1 campaign where I did the same as Finland with Russians being my target that time... ah the glory of 1 billion Finnish PoPs 'assimilating' so many minorities...

 

[ikki]

Yeah damn soon the all want free Health-care, Free Pension and Free ObamaPhones we better kill them all of before they all feel entitled. :rofl:

Thank goodness im setting up a capitalist system then that will tolerate no income transfers, and if they start whining.. well.. I've dealt with rebellions before.
Oh and never ever get rid of slavery. Its such a good system of taking care of both poverty (cannot find work? off to the plantation!) and uppity peasants (rebelling? off to the plantation!).

 

[4TyStigma]

Thank goodness im setting up a capitalist system then that will tolerate no income transfers, and if they start whining.. well.. I've dealt with rebellions before.
Oh and never ever get rid of slavery. Its such a good system of taking care of both poverty (cannot find work? off to the plantation!) and uppity peasants (rebelling? off to the plantation!).

Sorry to say i, but this somehow make me feel fine with slavery, besides slavery is fine with the Bible and Jesus, so I better go begin enslave my poor neighbors, you see people in enslavement are guaranteed work, food and a place to sleep at night, that is probably better than being on benefits in US or UK this days :rofl:

 

[Nilmerf]

A bird in hand is worth two in the bush. Any benefit you get from keeping the natives around is dwarfed by the sheer annoyance of uprisings that set your colonies back. Wiping them out is smooth sailing. Kill them. Kill them all.

 

[Illanair]

You let them live because of a higher base tax - and the fact that provoked attacks on the natives will cost you military points. I have a feeling it will be worth the harassment from the local natives in the long run. Manpower recovers - monarch points do not.

 

[Verenti]

unless you want them to all feel entitled to everything after losing the wars, blocking your damned highways, kill them all.

Oh, Canada.

 

[4TyStigma]

You let them live because of a higher base tax - and the fact that provoked attacks on the natives will cost you military points. I have a feeling it will be worth the harassment from the local natives in the long run. Manpower recovers - monarch points do not.

Is it confirmed that keeping the native population alive will give a higher base tax?

 

[Five_X]

Oh, Canada.

Our home and native laaaaaand!

 

[SovietPower]

"A large native presence increase the amount of trade a colony produces, offsetting costs.."

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...r-diary-18-Part-II-Colonisation-Clarification

 

[leafs43]

In EU3 is just cleared out aggressive natives.

Non aggressive natives, just not worth the trouble of clearing them out most times.

 

[Fawr]

You let them live because of a higher base tax - and the fact that provoked attacks on the natives will cost you military points. I have a feeling it will be worth the harassment from the local natives in the long run. Manpower recovers - monarch points do not.

If they attack you it doesn't cost monarch points (but they can't be eliminated this way). It only costs monarch points when you attack them (which is the only way to eliminate them). But in EU3 to wipe out all the natives you will need to attack them quite a few times...

I'm thinking that if you leave your colonist in an area until the colony forms then it may make sense to leave an army there too to protect it from the natives.

 

[Lparsons7641]

unless you want them to all feel entitled to everything after losing the wars, blocking your damned highways, kill them all.

Good luck with that one tough guy.

 

[Lparsons7641]

Yeah damn soon they all want free Health-care, Free Pension and Free ObamaPhones we better kill them all of before they all feel entitled. :rofl:

Or to not dump your sewage on their land. You know, entitlements.

 

[unmerged(612669)]

Didnt one of the dev diaries explain that natives add to trade in a colony?

So what? In my experience if you don't kill them they attack your colony and kill themselves in the process, no matter how patient you are.

There really seems no point to sparing natives; they kill themselves attacking whatever force you leave in your colonization process.

If they attack you it doesn't cost monarch points (but they can't be eliminated this way). It only costs monarch points when you attack them (which is the only way to eliminate them). But in EU3 to wipe out all the natives you will need to attack them quite a few times...

I'm thinking that if you leave your colonist in an area until the colony forms then it may make sense to leave an army there too to protect it from the natives.

Not that I don't believe you but what you mind telling me where that information came from? I have always had natives cause their own extinction when I tried to play as a tolerant colonizing power. There are bonuses to not killing them that makes me want the option to exist; but my understanding is they force your hand like in EU3. I am glad to be wrong however if I am.

 

[Agrippa43]

This is why you should not attack or instigate the Natives:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJv86RpLsVQ