Yeah, that is pretty much it. Here is a picture for reference:
Edit: The picture is just to show that there is an extra opinion modifier for purging the species of an empire.
Last edited:
Purge Penalties
- Thread starter Cagliostro
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Edit: The picture is just to show that there is an extra opinion modifier for purging the species of an empire.
Actually this one is a bad example, as its not only xenophiliac species, but also you purged their own popultions. They are fully justified to hate you.
That was just about having a different opinion malus for purging the species of an empire. Madzai said that he missed that.
Question is what are the gameplay impications of purging. What is it for if the penalties are so severe. Are you supposed to only purge a few pops? Why would you do that? Is their presence such a problem, mechanics-wise? Does purging translate into more resources or a strategic advantage? Or is only for roleplaying?
Not my people, just some other species. They attacked me, so I purged them. Don't want to get purged? Don't throw bombs at my planets and ships. This is not unreasonable request.
That relies on premise that all lives are equally valuable, and this is premise not all Stellaris races share, and some openly reject.
Completely nonsensical. Conquering entire multi-system empires generates less negative opinion than purging single planet. How being aggressive against your own subjects is proof of imperialistic ambitions, if actual imperialistic behaviour is not widely regarded as proof of imperialistic ambitions?
In 1.4.1 it's mostly for Xenophobic Empires who have no other way to expand. Otherwise you simply better to enslave POPs and wait them to convert to your ethos. If you can't can't convert you better make vassals, if your own ethos don't work well with multi-species Empire. So, actual application of purges (and not purge a couple of xenophobic primitives) require a lot of pre-requirements.
Getting rid of potential rebels and cementing your conquest is pretty usefull.
We already know there will be several different ways to deal with populations in the upcoming patch, so there will be a way to remove aliens without the whole galaxy ganging up on you.
Malus for purging should be severe IMO (full bombardment use should also have big malus BTW). The reason is simple - purging is not mandatory (at last for now, in incomming DLC it can be essential). Xenophobes already have much more variety of conquest tools than xenophiles. They can enslave (unless other ethos prohibit). They can purge. Thay can insta-conquer primitives. They have better territorial grabing. They are handicaped in multicultural policy and diplomacy, both can be easily menaged unless other etics wont screw the possibility (resetlemen or normal, non-genocidal diplomacy). Purging is a strategic decision and not disadvantege. And should not be easy. Xenophiles lack many of those tools and - lets be honest - you can get exact results with non-xenophiliac non-xenophobic diplomacy if you know what are you doing. If you want "releplaying" omnicidal maniacs, than you shouldnt have any reason to whine about diplomalus of purging. Thats exacly you wanted.
However, with incoming internal policy changes, it might be better to reduce the impact a bit.
However, with incoming internal policy changes, it might be better to reduce the impact a bit.
You forget that mass-enslaving for setups without source for ethic convergence is a road to nowhere. Planets full of slaves is a critical hit for science.
Mass purging also require that you have someone to settle on empty planets. So either play as super-adaptive or go for robots (i never play with them, so i cannot remember how xenophobia works with them). Even genetic manipulation doesn't work well for Xenophobes. So in short, to make decent use of purging (that outweigh penalties) isn't a simple task.
Collectivists usually have at least some source of convergence so they better convert POPs instead of purging them. For them, purging usually is a very costly shortcut for mundane activities - like "breeding" an alien POP with proper set of ethics and purging everyone else instead of keeping them as slaves.
Your previous post could be interpeted that way. I certainly did.
Yeah, especialy that fragment:
I though I made that clear that purging should be well though decision, not a mindless tool for cleaning planets from indesirables.
You're absolutely right, in my games i modded the game so only individualists and xenophiles hate purging as the rest shouldn't care. Its game breaking for a xenophobic race as they can't do a tactic which is specifically made for them, does it make sense for slaving races or militarists to care about you slaughtering some bug-eyed race that's entirely different from themselves?
We don't care about other species on this planet generally hence why so many are livestock or going extinct so why would we care about races in space that would be EVEN LESS similar to ourselves?
I like propagating my species throughout the galaxy so I often purge xenos/primitives and substitute them with my primary species. Also as a collectivist warmonger it's easier to just kill everyone on that fanatically individualist planet and replace them with a pop or 5 of your ethics.
Im sorry... what?
fanatical purgers would just see you doing their work for them knowing that you're also inferior and will be getting killed too, they wouldn't see you as competition... because it isnt a competition they want all other life dead they aren't going to care how its done.
As people have stated historically there have been purges in OUR history and no they aren't always treated harshly, europeans expanding into america is a systematic purge of the natives (i don't seem to see everyone still not do diplomacy with the USA) the Romans slaughtered many different peoples and destroyed their cultures etc (annihilated carthage and salted the land) but they are remembered as one of the more civilized of their time.
Also to suggest that because people are questioning the BALANCE of this mechanic somehow means they think its okay in real life...?
Human history aside... (given everyone in this thread seems to generalize rather than give concrete evidence of how genocide affects diplomacy at different eras of civilization. Culture, time period, global circumstances/realpolitik -- there are simply too many factors at play for simple handwaving.)
From a game mechanic perspective, the penalties for purging SHOULD be severe. Ethic divergence is one of the key problems this game introduces, which creates long term unhappiness maluses that propagate (as there is a chance when a new POP is created, it uses the diverged POP's ethics, and unhappy POPs could migrate to another planet and spread their ethos). Even when running an planet with -60% ethic divergence in my games, it often takes 30-50 years to bring any significant number of diverged POPs back to the official ethics. That's decades of unhappiness malus (for your own people) or, in the case of conquered foes, decades of faction unrest and potential for rebellion. To make things worse, those unhappy, unproductive POPs gives you reduces resources for your troubles while also penalizing your tech.
Purging can solve this entire problem immediately, and is an extremely powerful 'shortcut' tool to deal with what is otherwise a long-term headache that forces empires to slow their expansion. It's why despite the hefty diplomatic penalty, many veteran players still find it effective to play fanatic purifiers via purge-assisted fast expansion.
Stellaris is a game where the devs spent a lot of time emulating the headaches of administrating a far-flung empire that inevitably (tries to) grow in diversity. If you're going to take the shortcut by hitting the PURGE button every time something unsavory pops up, then you should take the consequences for it.
From a game mechanic perspective, the penalties for purging SHOULD be severe. Ethic divergence is one of the key problems this game introduces, which creates long term unhappiness maluses that propagate (as there is a chance when a new POP is created, it uses the diverged POP's ethics, and unhappy POPs could migrate to another planet and spread their ethos). Even when running an planet with -60% ethic divergence in my games, it often takes 30-50 years to bring any significant number of diverged POPs back to the official ethics. That's decades of unhappiness malus (for your own people) or, in the case of conquered foes, decades of faction unrest and potential for rebellion. To make things worse, those unhappy, unproductive POPs gives you reduces resources for your troubles while also penalizing your tech.
Purging can solve this entire problem immediately, and is an extremely powerful 'shortcut' tool to deal with what is otherwise a long-term headache that forces empires to slow their expansion. It's why despite the hefty diplomatic penalty, many veteran players still find it effective to play fanatic purifiers via purge-assisted fast expansion.
Stellaris is a game where the devs spent a lot of time emulating the headaches of administrating a far-flung empire that inevitably (tries to) grow in diversity. If you're going to take the shortcut by hitting the PURGE button every time something unsavory pops up, then you should take the consequences for it.
Last edited:
Purging opinions should be based on various circumstances, class of the species is one of them. The other factors would be:
- race (so humans wouldn't bother ruthless extermination of bugfolk or whatever these critters are called)
- type of purging (simple expulsion isn't as brutal as slaughtering, not to mention eating (what about making resources from purged POPs?) )
- ethos
- power projection (how strong we are, how far from them etc.)
purging isn't immediate and no one claimed there shouldn't be consequences it's a 'feature' that is totally unworkable... which is obviously why it is getting a massive overhaul in the next update and most likely affect relations with other races a lot different than it does now.
I think you'll find right now in the game it is better to just pick individualist and deal with absorbing races that way than purging them so no it isn't an easy way of solving the problem of expansion it's actually the least efficient.
Before proposing any major changes (and I recognize some of the criticism people made in this thread, though at the same time unlike when judging the issue in real life game balance also needs to be considered) wouldn't it be best to first wait to see how the changes to the purge mechanic work out in the next update?