Native Policies - Which one is the most effective?

[Subai]

So are there any new experiences with these native policies? I've read the older threads about this case but it seems people are not quite sure which one gives the most benefits.

Let's put coexistence aside and think of the most effective way in case of growth and income benefits. Which policy would you recommend? Assimilation or settler growth?

 

[Cymsdale]

The wiki seems dry on this topic. What are the exact modifiers for each policy? Do policies trigger specific events?

 

[Metallord]

I think it depends if you can field An army in your colonies or you need it to stay on the olde continent.

But the second one seems quite Nice 50% less agressiveness and 50% more assimilation effect bonus on production.

 

[zedyue]

If I'm busy, -100 native revolts
otherwise I station troops and pick one of the others but I don't know which one of those two gives me more money, because higher assimilation gives production money I think and the trade events give development sometimes but it's beyond me

 

[TheMeInTeam]

So are there any new experiences with these native policies? I've read the older threads about this case but it seems people are not quite sure which one gives the most benefits.

Let's put coexistence aside and think of the most effective way in case of growth and income benefits. Which policy would you recommend? Assimilation or settler growth?

Putting co-existence aside without looking at the tradeoffs is silly. Both of the other policies require you to either kill the natives or actively commit troops to defend colonies. Co-existence lets you dump a colony in Madagascar from across the world and garrison it with nothing whatsoever, spending 0 monarch points.

A lot comes down to your intentions with colonization. If you just want a mobile CB, co-existence is solid enough. If you're doing exploration/expansion/NI/policy stacking to try to get more territory fast, you can get 80-100 extra people per year on average with the settler growth. Early reports are that the assimilation events are too infrequent to be worth going that route, but I don't have substantial numbers there so that might not be correct.

I find paying 2 ducats/month for something with low utility to be questionable, unless it does more like provide a CB or open a new front. If you're running 1-2 colonies only then 20-40 pop per year is only going to average (roughly) 1-2 extra provinces per 25 years.

 

[Subai]

Yeah, that's the question. Assumed I have enough troops what is the better policy? Seems like there are not enough experiences with that to clearly say. Or if there are circumstances in which one is preferable.

@TheMeInTeam This Topic should be about which policy grants the more benefit out of colonisation. Not if colonisation is worth it itself. Asumme I want to get the best and biggest colonial empire and i have enough troops. Which one is better?
All I found is what you said. Maybe assimilation is to infrequent but if that is a fact nobody seems to now.

 

[zeredek]

Repression early game, then coexistence after I finish Expansion

 

[kyos7]

If you are france... trade.

if you are spain/portugal, maybe the +20 grow for america (for fast colonization) and trade for africa or pasive.

for the red, trade i guess.

 

[Subai]

If you are france... trade.

if you are spain/portugal, maybe the +20 grow for america (for fast colonization) and trade for africa or pasive.

for the red, trade i guess.

Is there a difference between africa and america? Has the amount of natives and their aggression any Impact on assimilation?

 

[Gigawot]

have you found an actual effect with the assimilation? i find it just leads to more uprisings

 

[Cymsdale]

have you found an actual effect with the assimilation? i find it just leads to more uprisings

I believe it adds a bonus to goods produced after it becomes a city. I don't know if there are any other benefits.

 

[jockedahl]

Depends on the region, for colonizing indonesia or other places with nasty tribes, the no natives uprising one is really neat.

 

[grumphie]

if i'm mainly colonising i tend to just pick trade. half the uprisings means less annoying popups and allows me to quickly grab those local troops to help sstomp a rebellion in my CN's without risking much growth. the small amount of goods produced also adds up over time to send some more trade income your way. i'll be stacking plenty of +settler growth anyways, and i'll aim to be there as one of the first so i won't have too much comeptition initially.

if i'm instead playing a nation that doesn't really rush exploration and tends to be part of the second wave of colonisers i tend to grab the additional settler growth as i'll miss either expansion or exploration and need to carve out my own piece of the new world/asia.

 

[kyos7]

assimilation give + goods produced.

In africa, all provinces have 4000 or more natives. however on america dont have more than 3000 (in just 1 province).

 

[yerm]

20 settler increase is a pretty big stacking addition early on. I'm used to seeing about 45 base settler values, often dropped due to jungle or arctic for the early regions. Going from 35 to 55 is a massive increase in colony setup speed. More/faster colonies easily trumps better colonies. The alternative choice, for me, is removed attacks, as this allows me to either/both of keep my entire army at home and keep army maintenance off. The cost of simply keeping that slider up to garrison a colony is often more than the maintenance cost of dropping an extra colony, plus the opportunity cost of diverted FL towards that land.

I would probably need to figure out the actual math on increased production from assimilation; I'm sure there's a breaking point where the % gained from that outpaces the % increased growth potential of the flat settler increase, which one would expect when comparing a % to a flat bonus, and with high enough dip tech (and stuff like Iberian national ideas) you'd grow faster with a "tall" assimilated colony over a "wide" settler increase. That said, if you are staring at a bunch of 1/1/1 areas with thousands of natives each, assimilation may work out early, whereas stuff like the Caribbean's 8-10 starting development base island chains with only like 2500 natives tops it will not.

 

[Golladan]

If I'm playing in the new world myself (where I will get direct control of the land), then Trading policy.

 

[Cragspyder]

I haven't done any math on it, but i imagine you're interested in playing optimally you use Repression in areas with few or peaceful natives (Siberia or many areas in North America) and Trade as France or in areas with aggressive or numerous natives (Africa, Indonesia, etc). If you don't ever want to waste admin on a stab hit, pick Repression and garrison your colonies with mercs as you did before Cossacks.

Co-existence may have niche usefulness for NA/SA Natives, or Sub-saharan nations because natives in colonies can actually be dangerous and draining to keep fighting early in the game. Once you tech up you can swap to the other policies.

Co-existence is the one i use in my games only because it is so darn easy to fire and forget colonies. But i dont think its optimal.

 

[Adrian Gaming]

Doing a Sweden colonizing game, and the Coexistence policy is really a damn good policy. No need to station troops in the colonies, and I am growing at an exponential rate with my three colonists. It's 1560 and I will own all of Canada and the Thirteen Colonies by 1660, guaranteed. With no native uprisings, I can really focus my attention on Europe and let my colonizing mission build up my strength passively, and I will soon be raking in the ducats from trade.

But that's just me. I imagine in Africa and the Far East it's even more useful.

 

[TenshiN]

Always repression, especially earlygame, since 20 bonus settlers is very solid, and it is always easier to get more colonies faster than have colonies slower, but with the small assimilation bonus. Maybe only use Trade policy if you colonise provinces with a big amount of natives, like Madagascar/most of other provinces in Africa.

 

[pedrito_elcabra]

Coexistance is awesome in a bunch of different situations, for example when you can't afford the troops to garrison the provinces, when you don't want to keep military maintenance down to save money, etc... especially as a weaker country in ROTW.