Why must "good" always be penalized?

from GalCiv2 Forums
Just once I would like to see a random event something like this:

A refuge ship full of aliens has requested permission to settle on your world. Unfortunately they are all infected with a wasting disease. If we allow them to stay, we must research a cure, and fast!

Good: We cannot deny them refuge in thier time of need.. +50 million tax payers, +5% Research
Nuetral: We can help them locate another planet for refuge. - 50 BC
Evil: Let them be slaves! Who cares if the disease spreads! +5% Production, -500 million taxpayers


Obviously not every scenario should reward being "good"... but why must every scenario reward being evil? It seems that being evil should be a choice based on your nieghbors, your desire for certain techs, maybe your personal desire, and that there should be good and bad aspects no matter which you choose...

Is there some game balance issue I am unaware of? I'm all about game balance... and right now I see no reason to be anything but evil and hope you get lots and lots of "random" events to take advantage of.... not balanced from my admitedly limited point of view....
13,943 views 19 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Ugh, I just realized this has probably been discussed 1000 times.
Im having a hard time learning my way around the... unusual... structure of this forum, please be patient with me

But hey if you wanna discuss it again Im all ears hehehe
Reply #2 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
If I may venture a philosophical opinion:

People do evil things because those things are in their best interests. To simulate realistic moral decisions the evil choices should have better outcomes than the good ones.

In order to provide game balance there are two possible solutions:

1) make the bonuses for playing good better than those for evil, especially in terms of superior morale and diplomatic ability.

2) Give higher metaverse points to good plyers (reward in the hereafter).

I do not know if the moral choices are balanced in this way or not.
Fences - Organize your desktop icons today!
Reply #3 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Well, you could theorize that the xeno ethics "Good" alignement gives you better bonuses than the "Evil" side. Which isn't totally true...

On the other hand, I've seemed to notice that when you select "evil" choices, your approval gets a hit. Maybe it's just me -I need to check this out more.
Reply #4 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I'd be thinking that some events are inherantly bad, like a food shortage or a plague. The only way to profit from bad events is to take the evil path, extort, seek personal gain, etc. But events that are neutral, like capturing pirates or finding a derelict ship, can have advantages both good, neutral and evil, depending on how much of your soul you plan to give up.
Reply #5 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Why do you get more rewards for being evil? Because being evil is harder. Good civilizations tend to ally each other and keep from warring with each other, and tend to pic on evil civs. Neutral civs seem to like good civs better. Evil civs tend to get ganged up on and often war with each other (although they sometimes have good relations with each other.)

So basically, the more evil you are, the more bonuses you get, the more enemies you get.
Reply #6 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Why do you get more rewards for being evil? Because being evil is harder. Good civilizations tend to ally each other and keep from warring with each other, and tend to pic on evil civs. Neutral civs seem to like good civs better. Evil civs tend to get ganged up on and often war with each other (although they sometimes have good relations with each other.)


Is that an opinion or is it verified?
If its fact then that would go far towards explaining it, although Im not sure it really balances it that much... who needs allies when nearly all your planets are better than everyone elses?


Reply #7 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I'm just curious, but do the Drengin ever ally with somebody? I'm pretty sure Good Civs ally often with others of their ethical alignment, but I don't know about the Drengin, or some other baddies.
About allies... there's a reason why there's an alliance option. It's there cause it's there. Well, I think being allied with others allows you greater flexibility when negotiating with them for techs or money, etc.
Reply #8 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
its true that if your evil your more likely to be ganged up on (if theres the same number of good,neutral and evil) and on higher difficulties, going against a few cpus at the same time is hard.

so evil dont have it as easy as many ppl assume...
Reply #9 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Did you guys ever play Dungeons&Dragons or any roleplaying game or even watched Star Wars? Good is always penalized vs evil. Evil is always the faster and more lucrative approach, since it allows you to gain more power very quickly, because your main interest is yourself and your own personal gain, no matter who gets hurt in the way. Being good is harder, as it requires you to compromise, show compassion and sacrifice personal gains for others, and therefore a single good character is always quite weaker than a single evil character of the same rank. But good usually comes as a group of people that fight for a cause rather than a quick buck. Evil tend to stick together, too, but only until one of them shows signs of weakness.
Reply #10 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Hrmmm...
IRL / Philosophicaly speaking I think Good has more advantages than Evil. Is not the Good Hero always the victor over the Evil Villain? While the villain spends his time with rituals, finding virgins to sacrifice and such to gain his impressive power, the hero comes along and shows him a holy symbol some other guy blessed for him, and the villain turns to dust. (That's just an opinion, plz dont flame it hehe)


In game I am still looking for a reason to be good. If nearly all my planets are superior to the good guys planets, I win.
If he has allies, they are likely good, and thier planets arent as good as mine either. I can then ally with another evil race, and our combined extra cool planets mean no more good alliance in short order.

So, there must be some other reason to be good other than the "advantage" of being able to ally with other races with weak planets... unless I am missing something, which is probable since its toooooo early in the morning for me to be trying to use my brain, lol.
Reply #11 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
as the good races i always pick evil choices and i can still choose good for no cost at all when i research xeno ethics which seems contradictionary.
Reply #12 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Well, good and evil are both viable options, actually. Good has just easier time acquiring friends and creating united fronts. I sometimes like playing good for the sake of being good, while feeling virtuous, and pretending to save the galaxy from those evil races, as the wind blows my cape around my shoulders
Reply #13 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
After playing with 9 races and going hard core good, I now understand that those bonuses that sound weak weak weak are actualy strong strong strong bonuses. Its not really something you can see well until you have a bustling galaxy with lots of races however. In a game with just 2-4 races, the bonuses dont help much at all.

So my latest analyis... if you play with lots of races, good gives you incredible advantage. If you play with few, good is nearly useless.
Reply #14 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Good gives you enormous diplomacy bonuses as other people have stated.

Also the Evil races of the game tend to be more fickle. Your friends one turn, your enemies a few turns later.

Reply #15 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
you guys suck, i just finished playing YOR on gigantic galaxy, and i made alliance victory, i was allied with drengin, insectoids, humans, korx and drath (payed them alot ); on all random events, i allways made evil choice so i was evil to the core
Reply #16 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
In most of my games my civ is always in the final spectrum of evilness (Lord Vader is a n00b near me ) and I have no problems making these foolish other civs beame my allies trough military might and some glass beads every now and then.

As sometimes you'll gain huge bonuses by choosing the evil way (48% production bonus in a 20+planet for example) I think that being good is not nearly as profitable as being evil in the current iteration of the game. Even being neutral is a bit better.
Reply #17 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I'm not big on the good thing either...it's soooo much harder than evil as all the events I've seen so far amount to this:

GOOD CHOICE-get absolutely fricking nothing
NEUTRAL CHOICE-get one miniscule step above fricking nothing
EVIL CHOICE-get a bonus so beneficial you'd be nuts not to take it

I swear that in Galciv 1 you got something for good decisions (and BTW are there any new events or all they all retreads from the original...figure if there's any gripes about this game this would be mine if true...)...and I think it'd be so much better if someone came up with an "events mod"-say, "here's an event, you get your GOOD/NEUTRAL/EVIL choices with NO PENALTY/BONUS LISTED until after you choose! Make it a bit random somehow, mabye factor it also against your alignment before the decision vs the choice you took, etc., etc.

Whadda you think?
Reply #18 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
See, but therien lies the rub. Oh sure you get great planets, but in a bustling galaxy full of races, you also have to fend off 3 or 4 races full time. If you are good, you do not. You get to pick and choose who you fight and when.

So, if you play with 3 races, evil pwns. If you play with 9.... it can be a bad thing.

Ive noticed ta trend with the AI that reinforces my thinking here... the evil races tend to die first in the larger galaxies with more races.... and in the smaller games the good tends to get creamed.
Reply #19 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
True, you can ally pretty easily even when you're evil. And if all you enjoy is getting better at other expenses, then by all means, be my guess. But like I said, when I feel like playing a nice master-diplomat, I enjoy the goody-two-shoes approach.

I prefer something like:
Diplomatic and/or research victory with a nice quiet gameplay - Good
A huge, back-stabbing, branching trading empire - Neutral
War-mongering or hostile take-overs through sheer influence, squashing minors and intimidating everybody - Evil