Stability

[plantago]

How is stability determined?

Like lorewise I get how conquering a planet and enslaving its people means low stability - but game mechanics-wise, what is it? I'm pretty sure that differences between the ruling ethic and the pops' ethics play into it, and I know that so do amenities. Stationing armies also seems to increase it. But how much do each of these factors matter? Most of the other mechanics in Stellaris there are tooltips that tell me the math - but for stability I can't find one. Thanks ahead of time for any help, I'm trying to get these planets out of "martial law."

PS: Same question for crime.

[Elitewrecker PT]

Stability is influenced mostly by happiness, amenities and housing.
Happiness itself is affected by living standards and amenities, among other less variable things. With the average happiness being affected by the weight of the different tiers of the pops - i.e. a ruler pop's happiness has a bigger effect on the planetary happiness than worker happiness.

[Xaphnir]

Originally posted by Elitewrecker PT:

Happiness itself is affected by living standards and amenities, among other less variable things.

Faction approval is highly influential on happiness, too.

[HappySack]

Political power is also a big factor because unhappy pops with less of it will not decrease stability as much.

[plantago]

It seems like, given this, it's never beneficial to have enslaved pops? It seems like the unhappiness drags everything down so much that you never get to benefit from the production bonus.

[Mazey]

Originally posted by secretdinner:

It seems like, given this, it's never beneficial to have enslaved pops? It seems like the unhappiness drags everything down so much that you never get to benefit from the production bonus.

No, because enslaved pops have such little political power that their unhappiness has very little effect.

[HappySack]

Originally posted by secretdinner:

It seems like, given this, it's never beneficial to have enslaved pops? It seems like the unhappiness drags everything down so much that you never get to benefit from the production bonus.

As mentioned by my previous post: political power is what determines if a pop's unhappiness with affect stability or not and slaves have some of the lowest amounts of political power in the game that can be further lowered with a Slave Processor building.

[plantago]

So why are every single one of my conquered worlds unstable? Many after 50-80 years of being part of my empire. All of them have plenty of housing, zero unemployment, two strongholds apiece - under 30 stability except when I have martial law on them. This didn't happen when I was playing egalitarian, and I don't see what's causing it. I assumed it was the high % of slave pops, but if what y'all are saying about the political power is accurate, then I don't know what it is.

Edit: honestly, it seems like the game just nerfs the whole concept of slavery - which I think is actually kind of a cool thing to do - punish the player for being evil lol.

Edit2: Ok I'm checking and some of them have low amenities. What's weird is I've built the same amount of entertainment as I did on conquered worlds in previous playthroughs, so I guess now my question is what's causing this?

[HappySack]

Did you move any non-slave pops to these worlds? are you letting entire worlds of slaves do whatever they want without sufficient supervision (and beatings)?

[Elitewrecker PT]

Originally posted by secretdinner:

So why are every single one of my conquered worlds unstable? Many after 50-80 years of being part of my empire. All of them have positive amenities, plenty of housing, zero unemployment, two strongholds apiece - under 30 stability except when I have martial law on them. This didn't happen when I was playing egalitarian, and I don't see what's causing it. I assumed it was the high % of slave pops, but if what y'all are saying about the political power is accurate, then I don't know what it is.

Edit: honestly, it seems like the game just nerfs the whole concept of slavery - which I think is actually kind of a cool thing to do - punish the player for being evil lol.

Check the tooltip for stability and the tooltip for approval and check individual pop happiness starting with the higher pop tiers.

[plantago]

Originally posted by Elitewrecker PT:

Originally posted by secretdinner:

So why are every single one of my conquered worlds unstable? Many after 50-80 years of being part of my empire. All of them have positive amenities, plenty of housing, zero unemployment, two strongholds apiece - under 30 stability except when I have martial law on them. This didn't happen when I was playing egalitarian, and I don't see what's causing it. I assumed it was the high % of slave pops, but if what y'all are saying about the political power is accurate, then I don't know what it is.

Edit: honestly, it seems like the game just nerfs the whole concept of slavery - which I think is actually kind of a cool thing to do - punish the player for being evil lol.

Check the tooltip for stability and the tooltip for approval and check individual pop happiness starting with the higher pop tiers.

Ah. There's the info I was looking for.

[ScreamCon]

You can get stability from high approval. If happiness somehow got to 100% your crime would also be 0 per pop and approval rating would be 100% if those pop had full political influence.

100% approval = 30% higher world stability from the base 50%. The penalties from low approval are worse than benefits of high approval. So don't let approval get too low otherwise your worlds get really inefficient on resource production.

As others have said political power can be complicated. As you could have a slave with 0% happiness in a world with 9 other pops with 100%. If all had 100% political this would result in world having 90% approval total. But because there is often bonuses or modifiers that reduce political power of a slave with 0% the impact would be smaller.

For example lets say the slave has a -75% political modifier. This means the pop would only get .25 as much say so the world approval would probably be closer to 95%- 97.5%. This is similar to the rich getting extra votes over their peasants for example in feudalistic systems of rule despite unhappy pops. Also note many government forms give modifiers like 700-900% political power to rulers.

Governments with slavery the politically repressed are like a powder keg ready to go off explode. IF STABILITY gets low enough the revolts are much worse with slaves present. Bad events without slaves happen at 25% a market that uses dollar as method of slaving. While actual slavery in the sense of it, empires with, bad events start at 40% world stability.

As playing with slaver don't worry too much about this unless your world is getting bombed devastated or your amenities are negative.

Ruler political power is the main reason bringing a pop of your own species to a revolting world can solve the stability issue. Since stability is based on the worlds approval rating to degree.

[Bored Peon]

Originally posted by ScreamCon:

Ruler political power is the main reason bringing a pop of your own species to a revolting world can solve the stability issue. Since stability is based on the worlds approval rating to degree.

That and permission to be soldiers and enforcers. If you take over a world and none of the races on it can fill the soldier or enforcer jobs it is going to revolt. Declaring martial law will do nothing because you have no soldiers.

[plantago]

Originally posted by Bored Peon:

Originally posted by ScreamCon:

Ruler political power is the main reason bringing a pop of your own species to a revolting world can solve the stability issue. Since stability is based on the worlds approval rating to degree.

That and permission to be soldiers and enforcers. If you take over a world and none of the races on it can fill the soldier or enforcer jobs it is going to revolt. Declaring martial law will do nothing because you have no soldiers.

Thanks. I'm realizing I have a lot of worlds like this. So you basically need to use resettle if you're playing as a slaver empire, it seems like? Force your own pops off of their happy worlds and onto the conquered ones? I never used resettle when I was playing egalitarian, so it didn't occur to me to try this. But also, it looks like my species HAS migrated into the ruler (and to some degree specialist) classes on worlds with high %habitability (tropical, continental, ocean) for them. It's the other ones (tundra, arid, etc.) where those slots are empty. Will they still provide the approval bump if they're on a world where they... like... can't breathe or whatever?

[Bored Peon]

Originally posted by secretdinner:

Originally posted by Bored Peon:

That and permission to be soldiers and enforcers. If you take over a world and none of the races on it can fill the soldier or enforcer jobs it is going to revolt. Declaring martial law will do nothing because you have no soldiers.

Thanks. I'm realizing I have a lot of worlds like this. So you basically need to use resettle if you're playing as a slaver empire, it seems like? Force your own pops off of their happy worlds and onto the conquered ones? I never used resettle when I was playing egalitarian, so it didn't occur to me to try this. But also, it looks like my species HAS migrated into the ruler (and to some degree specialist) classes on worlds with high %habitability (tropical, continental, ocean) for them. It's the other ones (tundra, arid, etc.) where those slots are empty. Will they still provide the approval bump if they're on a world where they... like... can't breathe or whatever?

Well the big thing you need is stuff that pushes your government type. Things that increase government shifts increase the chance those people change to your faction.