Is there any gameplay reason for passive observation?

[WhiteWeasel]

Isn't that to your borders? So that a world that is inside your territory will always be 30 influence cost, as long as it is within your borders.

I got confused a bit there, so yeah, that's what I meant.

 

[balmung60]

As a side question, does the climate preference of a species change if they go through a nuclear war but survive (i.e. do the survivors get Tomb World Preference)? Or do they just somehow survive on a world that would have 0% habitability for them?

Nope to both - they do not get tomb world preference or irradiated, but they survive with 100% habitability because a species always has 100% habitability on its home world.

Well, unless something's changed since last time I saw it happen.

 

[yafeshan]

Prime directive.what other reason can it be?

 

[Asari Inquisitor]

I too find Passive Observation kind of a boring and uninteresting option, not to mention it's not very profitable in the long run. At least it can still generate some events. I had the occasional asteroid before, but the best one I had is when a scientist grew tired of passive observation and decided to become a god to the primitives. In the end, I managed to extract him, but the message did say that the primitives still had out technology. Maybe I don't remember correctly, but the event did seem to bump them up from the Bronze age all the way to the Machine Age. At that point, I was like, "screw it, the damage has been done, might as well enlighten them now". At least I got another protectorate.