Evil, Neutral, or Good?

The distilled wisdom is neutral is best, most powerful. The neutrality learning centers and pq bonus r fantastic, with other extras on top, neutral is the way to go.

I would say evil is second best, with the excellent offensive weapons in a game that rewards 1st strike (may change in 1.2). Also u benefit early game by making all them evil moral choices.

Good is the worst. Its hard to be good and GC 2 lets u know this in no uncertain terms. The galaxy is stacked against u, planetary penaltys for choosing the good way, defensive bonuses in combat which rewards attack. Yep, in GC 2 no good deed goes unpenalised. Good sucks big time, no wonder those Altarians r so pissed with the galaxy and the torians r smoking something strange and the Iconians regret going good so much they just sit there and wait for someone to put them out of there misery (takes all the fun out of it for us drengins).

yes, overall neutral is #1 and evil #2.

Good is I suppose it's own reward and a dandy way, for those that say the game is too easy, to make it harder on themselves.

Good is good for diplomacy... Both Good and Neutral races like good races.

Though the neutrals have a bonus in that as well, since three extra trade routes can make you more popular.

I'm not the sort of person who tries to play for the absolute optimum though, but to try out different scenarios. If my race is good, I'll play good, even if it is not technically the best strategy.

I like being Good! It's not always the easiest, but diplomacy is smooth, especially if you have a large Good Alliance. I'm waiting for the devs to finish reading their von Clausewitz so that defence will make more sense in 1.2, which ought to make playing Good a good deal better.

Mind you, the size of galaxy you prefer to play would probably affect which faction to choose. I don't like to play anything bigger than Large, and with fairly limited planets, so there's usually not much chance for a sprawling Evil Empire to take hold, and alliances can be the key to survival.

Personally, I favor Neutral. Tech bonuses can help you pick and choose what advantages you want from both sides (working on better diplomacy, for instance, or focusng on weaponry). I always choose Neutral for any desicions.

i choose evil for three reasons:
1. the free starbase modules
2. the bonus 'trade tax'
3. the bonus weapon techs

the only thing neutral has going for it is the extra research bonus, and good is just lame, i don't even research defensive techs

Have to agree with Netural then Evil then Good.

But i suppose Good becomes important at the tougher levels when it's critical that you need the AI to like you?

Evil is better in the short run , but in the long run the power of NLC is going to finish you.

Neutral also gets a huge boost thanks to the free upgrade tiles. An often overlooked effect of this is you don't just get the tiles free without terraforming, but because your planet class improves after this, your population growth rates also jump like crazy!

Combine it with the planet quality bonus and/or population growth bonuses and you will have a crazy tax base.

the only thing neutral has going for it is the extra research bonus

Which means u end up with better weapons then evil, even with yr fancy bonus weapons techs. I love the PQ bonus even more then the neutral learning centres, u also do not after bother with soil emhancement, habitat and terraforming techs as u get those for free. The morale bonus is excellent for making $, so neutral just laughs at the evil trade tax and free starbase modules. Plus 3 extra trade routes r good as well.

Crazael, nice try, but yr 3 points r shot down in flames.

I don't care which is best. I roleplay (not to the extreme) and I like to sometimes be the goody-two-shoes. Evil is fun too. I love to take those early evil bonuses.

However IMHO, Neutral is easiest to play.

I'm a neutral myself. The PQ bonus is just too good for me to pass up, as is the trade route increase. I love it so much that I haven't even tried for another, though I tend to lean towards evil-neutral.

Futurama quote time,

Zap: "What makes a man turn neutral? Lust for gold? Women? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?"

Zap: "Time to continue the epic struggle between good and neutral."

Neutral is too good in my own opinion and i find myself going that route the majority of the time... good / evil are choices i MIGHT make depending on the situation... if im small compared to the other civs and have some big good neighbours i will probably go Good but if i get off to a good early start i do enjoy "roleplaying" an evil empire.. can make the early conquest/expansion easier and all the techs the neutrals are grabbing are soon mine anyways when i invade.

Personally i feel neutral civs should get a significant influence penalty ... strong cultures tend to have definite feelings and morals ect and i think it would balance the alignments a little more. Neutral civs should have a weakness because right now they are the ONLY choice good in every situation ; with no real choice to make between the 3.

I always play good, mostly because I dislike playing evil and neutral is just too bland.

The fancy defenses, empathy center and empathic defense constructs are nice too. I usually load up on the special defenses on my ships and rarely take any damage at all in combat.

I usually play on Gigantic maps.
I chose according to who my nearest neighbour is.
If I am next to the Dregin, then evil all the way. To keep them off my back in the early game.
If I am next to the Altarans, then it is good/neutral for the same reason.

Must say, evil is more fun.

I choose evil, just because I like the quotes. Remember, People are a renewable resource!

Neutral is certainly the most rewarding alignment, since you can skip a whole research branch, grab three extra trade routes, AND you get the best research buildings in the game.

Evil is also fun, though; those psionic weapons do pack a major whallop, considering their location on the tech tree, and the money saved on starbase upgrades and trade route cash are not bad either. Everyone does tend to declare war on you, though, despite your never having provoked them.

I've never actually played as a good race, so I can't really pass judgement there.

Going Neutral may not require you to research Terraforming, but it is a good idea to anyway. Then you can get the Aphrodesiac trade good. And even with the NLC, I always research at least as far as Discovery Sphere to get the Omega Research Facility. If you're going to focus on research, may as well do it right.
And you also need to research up the missle defense tree if you want the Super Computers, which give another 20% to research.

You may have guessed, I always go for Neutral and heavy research. I guess I just love those Doomrays too much.

First I thought neutral is a bit overpowered as well, but have another look at evil. Except the weapons (they aren't that good IMHO) you can build the Artificial Slave Center, which gives your manufacturing capital a real boost and you can build the Mind Control Center, which doubles your economy.
First I thought, the 100% economy boost would only apply to the planet it's built upon, but it applies to your whole economy (checked tonight), so maybe it is a bug, maybe it is intended, however it is an enormous bonus.
I also like the free starbase moduls as well as the free invasion tactics, so while neutral gives you the best research buildings early and terraforms your planets to their best at once, the evil bonus comes late, but then it comes mighty.

The only thing I'm missing are some special buildings/bonuses for the good alignment. It is by far the lousiest choice and while I like to be the "good guy", I sometimes get angry because there is nothing useful about this alignment (don't tell me about diplomatics as I'm playing with tech trading disabled). I would love to see some balancing, but as I think neutral and evil are nearly equal, maybe Stardock should leave them as they are and "pimp" the good alignment with some more specials.

So very often it is the good aligned races that try to take over the galaxy.
They are often the main aggresors in the game.

Yes I agree. There need to be some balance for the good. They appear too week and usely get jacked up. But isn't that the way life works? A little too philolsophical of a question right before a long weekend.

Peace out.
Curt

I just got done playing with a good alignment and since i was on the other side of the galaxy i set up a bunch of influence starbases and stole like 7 or 8 planets

Going Neutral may not require you to research Terraforming, but it is a good idea to anyway. Then you can get the Aphrodesiac trade good.

I always let the AI build the aphrodesiac then conquer the planet its on. Keeps the AI occupied well u do something else. An AI always trys to get it early game.

Good does have a few nice bonuses.

Arnorian battle armor adds to all ships' hit points. Dynamic shielding, telepathic point defense and subspace rebounder enhance the defense strength of all warships, without having to install the modules. The defense modules themselves are fairly powerful, but too expensive to really use. Empathic Tactical Defense adds more defensive strength to all warships.

Hall of empathy .... I don't know if it actually works, but there's nothing wrong with getting extra planets for no work.

It makes relations friendlier with good/neutral races, so you can generally feel free to go conquest happy without much interference from them. Playing as good Terrans, with their diplomatic abilities, the good/neutral races generally leave you alone without provocation, unless you become significantly less powerful.

As for evil, it does have extremely nice bonuses. On the high difficulty levels, you'll need every one of them. Play Drengin on "tough" sometime to see why. And keep an eye on your border with the Altarians.......

aphrodesiac is actually one of the good trade goods/ galactic achievements that the AI build. Another one is xanium hull plating. They also like to build diplomactic translators....

It's funny, in GC1 good races got all the best stuff.

In GC1 by making good choices you tended to be a bit compromised early game but setup for a powerful late game when it all starts paying off. It apparently doesn't play out like that in GC2. The good guys need a helping hand with either some new tech/ability or beefing up the current ones.

And I agree with the suggestion of an influence penalty to offset neutral a bit.

Maybe they are planning to release the equivalent of the Paladin in the expansion because that was the main benefit to playing Good in GCI. It was a Good-only ship that could take out a Dreadnought without dying (your own Dreadnoughts couldn't, because the computer always had better stats) and healed ships in the same sector. It was better cost/power than Dreadnoughts, Rangers, Phoenixes, and almost better than Avatars. Not having it made the late game tough.