Still, it would be nice to have more balanced choices at the beginning, because it seems like the long-term benefits of good aren't especially greater than those of evil, (at least to me, though I've yet to see the fundamentalists show up). It would be nice if the event about a life-force draining research machine or whatever gave a big research bonus but population penalty for evil, a smaller research bonus and no penalty for neutral, and a morale bonus for good, for example.

I with Citizen Pmutzu on this one there should be some long term effect like a addition moral bonus or loyality bonus which could reflect itself in increased income or military support. The whole catch more flies with honey than vinagor idea. Perhap it should effect cultural dominace. In that that planet stays loyal when confronted with a culturally superior faction.

I think events should continue to lead you toward evil, while choosing alignment as good should simply have more benefits then choosing evil.
I'd also make it impossible to choose good if you're too far down the path of evil (and vise versa).
And last, have moral choices continue throughout the game, but after choosing an alignment you are forced to choose the one that fit your alignment.
This way good and evil will balance each other in an interesting way.

i disagree. i think that the way it works now is best. in real life, it is close to Onikazi's CD analogy. more importantly though, if there were more benefits to choosing good choices, there would be no incentive to go evil. it comes down to taking advantage now, and paying later (evil), or paying up front, getting the advantage later (good). If more good benefits were implemented, it would be crippling yourself to go evil, which i don't think is the point.

if there were more benefits to going good, then there would need to be more benefits to being evil to balance, but i kinda like it becoming a choice of being future focused or present focused. it makes neutrality a form of Zen. it also means the same game can be vastly different due only to ethical choices. don't beleive me? start a game, save on the first turn, then play through as good, and see how it goes, then reload the save and play evil. alone, those choices change the game drastically.

the thing is I should be able to be :Good, Neutral or Evil . and they all have benefits and drawbacks that differ. so that i could change my style of play as i see fit. Right now the only Viable option is the evil option . so if thats what you want . why even have the othe r2 alignments . because nobody will play them. All you need is a good military and then you can pretty much be fine when the good non player races come a calling .
What fun is that. if every game ends up the same way.
with my system at least you would have a choice.