Yet another thread on ethics.

Here I will put some ideas from various threads about ethics on this forum, as well, as a couple of my original ideas.

First of all I must say, I really like the idea of ethical dilemmas in this game. Still, I think they could use some tweaking. Some of them really have "the only right" option or are overpowered.

Someone requested in another thread for a switch to disable ethics when you start the game. I think it is a pretty good idea, but a slider going from "none" to "common" would be better. Personally I would just go for common.

I also think we should keep getting ethical dilemmas after choosing alignment with Xeno Ethics, but either force the player to choose the option of his alignment (so that good keep getting disadvantages, and evil advantages), or allow players to choose, but penalise choices not congruent with their alignment. Penalty could be paying money to cover everything up and convince your people you made the right choice, or perhabs a decrease in morale. It should also be severe enough to discourage not roleplaying your alignment. To compensate for continious disadvantages a good player maybe should get lucky with random events more often, than evil player (If you are good, the universe is on your side kind of thing).

I dont like it, that players have the option of not roleplaying their desired alignment and then choosing to pay 10 bc per turn to buy different alignment. IMO the payment for changing alignment should scale with the size (population, number of planets, income, expenses, whatever) of your empire. After all it is more expensive to brainwash more people. It should also scale depending on how far from your choice are you already. It should also be prohibitely expensive if not imposible to suddenly go from "leaning towards evil" to good or vice versa, and maybe even lower your morale for a few turns.

I also think, that neutral choices shoul bring you a bit closer to neutral alignment regardless of where you are on the scale.

I think some moral dilemmas, like "Du'Rakh" and "Flesh Nectar" should only appear once per game at most. After all, how many times can you research a cure for the same disease?

I really like the idea someone proposed, that moral dillemas should have long-term effects as well as short-term, and that those long-term are largely random, and only have a small chance of happening. Unfortunately that would complicate the game too much, so it won't be implemented. I like the idea, tough. Examples:

1) "Bug Wars": If you choose to bring them peace, that planet gets a chance of having a population boost, or soldiering bonus or both. If you choose to leave them alone, there is a chance, they will attack you, lowering population or even creatning a minor civilization.

2) "Du'Rakh", "Flesh Nectar", "Blood Nectar", etc. should give you a per turn revenue rather than just a pile of cash. These should also be somehow scaled in effect (but not ethical weight) on your current population. First two should also kill a percentage of your people rather than a set ammount. For example if you have 100B people in your empire, over several turns 2B will die, giving you 2k BC or something like that. Maybe even you get -% to fertility, and constant income based on your population or economy boost, just not something entirely overpowering.

3) "Underwater Domes" If you choose to exterminate them, there is a chance of their buildings collapsing due to wrong maintenace. If you choose to leave them as they are, they might join you giving you a population bosst, soldiering bonus, or even sell you their technology, so you can get research bonus anyway, but pay for it in BC.

AI should get ethical dilemmas too, and simply choose based on their alignment. That way after you conquer evil race's planet you can still have the bonus, or maybe face the effects of their decision. If they enslaved a stone age race, you could free them. If there are still those gigantic beeings on an aquatic world (they havent been exterminated by previous race) you still have to decide, what to do with them. With sufficient espionage you should also learn of other race's ethical choices.

In "Bird Eggs" ethical dilemma neutral option should be something like "Ban hunting those birds, but also create special ferms, where they are bred for eggs". This would cost some, but also give you a soldiering bonus.

In "High Tech Hijack" good option should be changed for "politely ask them for info", and neutral to "capture the ship, and investigate, but dont disassemble it, and after you are done, let them go, and pay them up for the trouble".

"Mining in a park" should give you a per turn money, and maybe production bonus rather than a quick cash injection.

Maybe ethical dilemmas on planets should be generated when the universe is created rather than when you colonise a planet. Also, a barren world probably shouldnt have any life on it. So no Bug Wars for example.

Going to war out of the blue should also influence your alignment. Now a good race can attack another good race without ethical consequences.

Oh, and keep up the (mostly) good work of comming up with more of these dilemmas and their (often funny) descriptions.

One more thing, but IMO quite important. When colonization triggers an ethical dilemma you should be able to get some info about the planet. I dont like to guess, which planet was it. I woldnt care for a production bonus on a economic / research colony of for precursor life on a PQ3 planet. At least a mini map with planet location, and some basic info, like PQ should be made availible when you get to make a choice.