good and evil

from GalCiv2 Forums
justa few points
a) there is NOTHING usefull happening for good alignments. anything that comes up with a bonus, is an evil decision. thats crap

b) it does not realy matter much how "powerfull" some evil decision is, the alignment moves to the evil side at lightspeed. On the other hand, when doing something good, that actualy always criples the civ, it like with 1 pixel per event. thats ridiculous!
8,079 views 11 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
dm04,

You have to think of this in real world terms, you do the good thing because it is RIGHT.

You do evil things because you are shell-fish, greedy and rotten.

AS in real life (not reel life) the good must wait for thier reward, while the evil path often
offers instant reward.

But, it WILL even out ... Ex: I play the Terran and make all GOOD choices while the Dreng and
Yor always make EVIL ones ...

BUT, by the time war comes, I KICK thier butts !!!!

Lt Byram
Reply #2 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I think it would be nice if a few, rare events are beneficial to the person who choses the good path for all of them. Not all decisions in life are more profitable if you follow an evil path, afterall.
Ashes of the Singularity II
Reply #3 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Well, If you dont like the black/white of evil/good...

Choose the middle - Neutral path, you get some reward and keep
your options open for your ethical alignment.

Lt Byram
Reply #4 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
The one good thing about being good is that other races tend to not go to war with you (with the exception of the evil races, of course). That can make playing Suicidal mode much easier.
Reply #5 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
AS in real life (not reel life) the good must wait for thier reward


Played good a few times now and I am still waiting...

Can't even be bothered reasearching ethics to officially become good anymore, just a waste of research, its that rubbish...

Basically good really does suck big time in GC 2...
Reply #6 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I think it would be nice if a few, rare events are beneficial to the person who choses the good path for all of them. Not all decisions in life are more profitable if you follow an evil path, afterall.


Well you could imagine that there are some decisions like that going on behind the scenes. If there was a choice where the good option had more benefit than the evil one, then _everyone_ would take the good option - evil races included. Evil just means you do what's best for you, regardless of the cost. For example, in reality you obviously have the choice at any time of executing your entire population. That'd be evil. But even the evil races don't do it, because it's stupid. So, the only choices that are actually shown to you are the ones which are a conundrum - there's a possible benefit, but it's morally dubious.

The point of these choices is that the evil options are _always_ better, but at the cost of becoming evil. Being evil is really bad for diplomacy, which is actually hugely important in the long term. If you're evil, you're on your own. Even other evil races will hate you. If you're good, then almost by default you'll end up in an alliance of good races. So I think good's actually a really good choice if you're diplomatically inclined. If you want to go to war constantly, evil's probably a better choice, not surprisingly.
Reply #7 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Sure good does have its sides. Much easier diplomacy is one of those. Being evil on the other hand will make the other races hate you. I often play neutral since some of the moral options are pretty harsh on the good aligned. I'd rather not play evil unless I really mean to blast everyone else to the kingdom come. Highly aggressive and it better work or the game is over pretty fast. A neutral faction could be a bit easier to play. Still it's a good flavour thingie that all these options exist and even are all playable. It's not even clear which is the best if any.
Reply #8 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
For example, in reality you obviously have the choice at any time of executing your entire population. That'd be evil. But even the evil races don't do it, because it's stupid.


Well, maybe there should be a specific random event where you are faced with the decision to have to wipe out your population on an entire planet for some reason.

I should note as a side bar here, that I think the diplomatic bonuses gained from being good are more than enough to compensate for the negatives for always choosing good, but you have to admit, this has turned into a good discussion.
Reply #9 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
It's not even clear which is the best if any.


Disagree, neutral is by far the best alignment, life's wonderful being neutral PQ bonus, morale bonus, neutral learning centers, extra trade routes...top...great...no drawbacks.
Reply #11 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
there should be some drewbacks for evilts... as someone said, like wiping out a complete planets population... just for the fun of the leader, at least he/she is evil.... or in a sudden attack of agression, the research progress would go some % down.

the diplomacy bonus is nowthing worth, given the proper technologies, an evil race is as good at diplomacy, heck, in one game I was pure evil and have had 2 alliances with pure good civs, which lasted longer then anything else I ever had.

I wish events could be defined that way, alas its not possible, there is no if variable in check for the alignment in events right now