Having half the galaxy as strong allies is pretty powerful. You obviously favor a strong military and research, it makes sense you like evil and neutral. I like diplomacy.

having played a few games as neutral lately, i just dont know how i should live without neutrality leaning centers when not being neutral ...

what are your strategies when going good? having good allies is fine but everyone loves me anyway when i have those extra techs from my neutrality learning centers and my extra money from taxes the morale boost allows me to have

anyone else being always evil in planetary events to get the best bonus and then paying the 10 BC per month if you dont want to chose evil alignment?

There is a lot of overlap in terms of strategies for each of the alignments. In terms of specifics again it really depends greatly on the game situation. If the majority of the AIs lean towards one particular alignment and I'm going for a diplo win then I choose that alignment. If I just want to sit back and let them pound on each other till one surrenders then I go good so that I can increase the chances of them surrendering to me. My custom race set up doesn't need the bonuses for morale or economy that neutral give. However if I've managed to set myself up as the middle man in terms of galactic trade then I definitely go neutral just for the extra trade routes. Evil I mostly go for if I want some decent weapons for war earlier in the tech tree. It's nice to have weapons doing 10 points of damage while the rest of the universe is stuck with damage 3 weapons.

Funny you should mention the Neutrality Learning Center cause that wasn't always there. So we had been getting along just fine without it prior to what B2?

Also in the latest version of 1.1 they've really changed the bonuses from the ethical events. There are still a couple that just give too sweet an evil bonus to pass up (can anyone say +46% research? )but for the most part it's not as big of a deal to stay good.

The AI does tend towards certain alignments. Hopefully in the future part of the *randomize* intelligence will also randomize their ethics as well.

No arguement there MV... I'm all for options that allow the user to customize the game how they like to play. I mostly meant that it would be nice to have the races be a bit more of an unknown something the devs have already started to do with both the randomize features and the blind exploration option. Having played enough games I basically know on turn 1 what everyone's alignment is going to be. Would just like a little of that mystery back

I have usually played Neutral for the reasons listed above (morale, tech) -- I think the bonuses are possibly the best of the three.

But from a design standpoint, I think neutral should be the "worst" of the three. It's the easiest to choose, and is in some respects the "default" choice. If you are evil sometimes and good sometimes, you end up as neutral.

As such I think "good" and "evil" should be technically stronger than "neutral". Being "good" is hard -- you have to take a lot of sucky planet discoveries, and be on good behavior with your allies. Being "bad" is also hard -- even though you get the benefits of the planets, you have worse relations.

As it stands, I agree with the earlier comment that it's too easy to be neutral. I think it would make more sense if the payoff came for hard choices. Maybe give the contentment bonus to Good. Neutral civs are just good at researching and trade. Good civs are actually happy, etc.

Yes, yes, yes, and yes to all. Moral conceptualization extends far beyond what we could ever hope to cover in a forum thread. Thousands of years have been spent trying to come to grips with this notoriously slippery subject. The best that GC2 could ever hope to attain is some distilled, synthetic representation of this concept. But I digress into esoteric philosphy. Back to the subject:

Quite some time ago, I reconciled the fact that I have neither the time nor inclination to attain GalCiv high-ranking bragging rights. I just to play a game that makes me really think about the choices I make and care about whether they'll move me in the right direction, that is, toward a win. So sometimes I get to test myself and my skill by trying other's strategies or even think of new ways on my own.

Whether X alignment should have more Y widgets, while Z race should always be W alignment appears more a matter of personal taste and I don't see where that is easily reconciled within a solid game design. These choices are all very nuanced and contain endless shades of gray, uh...kinda like life except with a "do-over" button. That's why I like these games. They're not about the "twitch" factor (my youthful reflexes are long gone) or fragging online avatars, but about asking questions like these and learning how they play out in a fantasy realm.

So, test yourself. Step out of your Neutrality Centers and Temples of Righteousness and see how it feels squish all who oppose your "correct" way of life... or vice versa.