Why choose anything but the best option

Planetside options

from GalCiv2 Forums
When landing on some planets you are offered a choice of how to do a situation. Though these are split into Good, Neutral and Evil, they end up as BAD FOR YOU, MEH FOR YOU, and GOOD FOR YOU, of which the evil choice is always the good for you choice.

Why would you choose anything but evil (besides roleplaying, but this isn't a roleplaying game) with negative consequences when, as I understand it, you actually choose your alignment rather than it being determined by your choices.
19,204 views 42 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Because the benefits of being good are really good

Being bad has its benefits too of course.. as does being neutral. But in the end, it boils down to what benefits you want. Personally I like the good benefits, so I make good and neutral choices only... unless the drawback is too severe (rare)
Reply #2 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
The UP sometimes put harsh restrictions on evil races.
All good races hate evil races.
All evil races distrust other evil race.
Good races help other good races out.

Being good just for good sake because choosing evil is always hard to resist. I always try to do the right thing but Im always tempted to choose the evil thing, especially with the PQ bonuses.

Sometimes, I swear if we didnt have laws, we all go shooting people we dont like and stealing things we want.
Sins of a Solar Empire: Rebellion
Reply #3 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I think what Quitch is saying is that you can get the benefits of being good simply by choosing your alignment as good when you research xeno ethics.
After this, whats stopping you from picking all the evil choices and reaping the benefits of them?
I assume your alignment will stay good even if you pick the evil choices (after having researched xeno ethics)

Or do you no longer get these moral choices after its been researched?
Reply #4 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I almost never choose evil.

Usually, good gets the worst bonus/penalty, but I once, I landed on a planet, got one of these choices and chose neutral. On the next planet I colonized, I got the same (kind of) dialogue, so I think "alright, just make the same decision." Then I read it and thought, "Well, I can have -38% planet quality with neutral, or -7% with good. Gee, I guess I should start donating to charity."
Reply #5 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Or do you no longer get these moral choices after its been researched?


I don't think you get a choice after that - they should be auto picked.

Something to add to the previously list:
Sometimes, an event would cause planets of evil races to rebel to another race.
Reply #6 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
So far, with the way AI handles tactical movement, evil has the best combat advantages. Brad has stated that the AI will improve with escorting transports ect., but right now it's pretty easy to beat back a race with a weaker military but better designed ships.

Even though in my current game as the Yor I had 3 races just decide that I was too evil too live. Yum
Reply #7 from Stardock Forums Top
I think what Quitch is saying is that you can get the benefits of being good simply by choosing your alignment as good when you research xeno ethics.
After this, whats stopping you from picking all the evil choices and reaping the benefits of them?

Because it will cost you much more money to go the good side with xeno ethics when being evil.
And as long as you are evil (ie before flipping to good alignement with xeno ethics), you will get all the negative diplomacy aspect of being evil.
But I don't know if the choice are still presented to you hafter finding xeno ethics.
Reply #8 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
After the ethical alignment, no events ever.
I used to always play evil, and evil is useless unless you have a supreme economy to support those insanely expensive evil weapons, which aren't good for very long on large+ maps.
Everybody likes good races except evil races, many people won't attack. Nice good defences which just got made cheaper with last nights patch. They surrender to you more, and you get a Wonder that makes them pretty certain to surrender to you. Plus, the trade money thing is good, as they're are more good races in the game to get money from, and your 5 best planets cost no upkeep.

Neutral is my favourite, the auto-upgrade tile is excellent. Their weapons and defences will soon be put in, making them better. Neutral has the most races in the game, so the trade wonder is better. More trade routes is always good, as neutraility learning centres will be, and a morale bonus.

Evil get expensive and mediocre weapons, free invasions, free starbase upgrades, and a wonder that means that planets rebel more often. These are to make up for the fact you have very bad trade, and just help the economy. If you can afford psionic weapons, you don't need the help.

Evil gets owned (7 races versus the drengin! woot!)
Reply #9 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Mediocre weapons? You've got to be kidding me. Have you ever used the abomination to game balance called the psionic beam?
Reply #10 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Mediocre weapons? You've got to be kidding me. Have you ever used the abomination to game balance called the psionic beam?


They are way expensive thou and the animation sucks! Altough they do make psionic weapons seem worthless
Reply #11 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Expensive if you have a crappy economy, maybe.

I've taken the second strongest military (Arceans) down to the weakest in one blitz with fast large hulled psionic beam carrying ships. They do so much damage that the enemy rarey gets to counter attack. I'm still getting about 200+ BC surplus per turn with my funding to max. Build a few dedicated manufacturing planets and I can push out a good military out quickly to reinforce just in case.
Reply #12 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Doom Rays are cheaper and far better. I'd rather spend my time doing the required research and then having ships that are nice and cheap, yet still doing huge damage. I can get tiny fighters with an attack of 26 and a price less than 200 bc with proper weapons, Psionic just arent worth it.
Reply #13 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
You get Psionic quicker (and Nanoripper even quicker). They're just options until you research Doom Rays. I don't see what's wrong in using some Nanoripper/Psionic on a flag ship until then.
Reply #14 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Nuetrality is the best in my opinion. Even with many of it's bonuses non-enabled, still kicks ass.
The instant terraforming effect increases all your worlds' PQ, which means they will be happier and have faster population growth, thus more taxes, plus there's a morale bonus, and extra trade routes, which your economy and relationships with the AIs.

But has anyone ever played without selecting alignment? I had an amazing game like that. I continued to get colonization events which really helped power my cultural domination machine.
Reply #15 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
It's ridicilously slow to research any of the late-game weapons. You could easily win the game with a tech victory rather than getting a doom ray. Nanorippers are really easy to get, as are psionic weapons. You get them early, plus they're powerful. You get doomrays only if:
a) You have set the tech speed to superduperfast.
b) You want to prolong the game intentionally.

You don't get them in a normal game. They're a weapon that's used when you wish to show the rest of the galaxy that you're far ahead of them. Normally the game ends before you're halfway through the weapons tech tree, even on the largest mapsize.
Reply #16 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I agree. It is much easier to get a tech victory than to research the high-end weapons, much less equip them on your navy. I think this is a legitimate game-balance issue.
Reply #17 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Nanorippers yes, they're justified at that early stage. But since my infrastructure and playstyle relies on having a ffew outstanding ships, and a lot of good ones, it works well. In a game I had ages ago, I was getting beaten quite badly, and designed a "Nano Defiant" class cruiser (no prizes being given on what weapons) and they allowed me to capture a couple of high pq planets, which I converted to research. Got to doom ray in a year after that (from early phasors), so about 6 years into game. Granted, I was sacrificing a lot of things to get that tech level advantage, but six years is a fairly normal game for me. (Huge galaxy). Couldn't win militarily, so I wimped out and did the cultural thing, too tired of destroying people.
Psionics really aren't worth the general cost required, the Drengin only lost because their fleets were very high damage psionic armed, and ruined their economy.
Reply #18 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Every game that i played so far anything but neutral gets destroyed und then i sit there getting bored due to being neutral myself
Reply #19 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
"I hate these filthy Neutrals, Kif. With enemies you know where they stand but with Neutrals, who knows? It sickens me. "

"What makes a man turn neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?"
Reply #20 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Good quote. One of my fav episodes, by far.

Incidentally, another reason why you might choose an option that isn't best for you: although this is a strategy game it _does_ have roleplaying elements. It is interesting and fun to start a game as a custom race (or a modified version of one of the core races) with a particular theme and play the game following through that theme. Such a theme might well include playing as "good" or making decisions that your imagined race would likely choose.

I realize some people don't play this way, but for those who do the good-neutral-evil choices can be a little more interesting and significant.
Reply #21 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Agreed. Neutral is outstanding, with Good being a far second. In almost every instance the BC saved switching to Good from deeply evil is more than the weekly cost of having made the switch. So go evil, then swap out.

Personally, I think that every single planet should inspire an event. A real chance to build your alignment, then if you're completely evil by the time you've researched Xeno Ethics, you're stuck with that alignment. Or, perhaps, ensure that Good gets no benefits on the Planet Event level, yet amazing benefits from Xeno Ethics. Meanwhile Evil gets no benefits of Xeno Ethics and all the benefits off Planet Events.
Reply #22 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I agree. It is much easier to get a tech victory than to research the high-end weapons, much less equip them on your navy. I think this is a legitimate game-balance issue.


Maybe. But getting a tech victory is incredibly boring. At least when you're getting weapon techs, you're getting new weapons. So, you're either in the middle of fighting someone, or you're going to be, which is entertaining.
Reply #23 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

It annoys me that there's no penalties for choosing the evil option, stuff like forcing pain on your people or shortening their lifespan or enslaving the natives should definitely have negative morale and loyalty implications, it only makes sense.

Also I think any race that's Leaning evil should only be allowed to choose evil or neutral, and a race that's leaning good should only be able to choose good or neutral.
Reply #24 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
There are no role-playing elements though, you're simply saying "punish me" or "reward me". There's no advisor with variant dialogue depending on your choices. It doesn't shape your society or influence your look. You're basically choosing whether you want a freebie reward.

A stratergy game should be a game of choices, not a pre-determined route. I should be saying "Hmmm, that evil option gives me +10 production, but then there's that -7 morale hit due to my actions" etc.
Reply #25 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
There have been a few changes to improve the good alignment in the latest beta of 1.1:

+ Neutral civilizations won't discount relations with good players anymore (why be good? because good and neutral civs will tend to like you more).
+ Being a good civilization gives you more bonuses with neutral and good civilizations in terms of relations