Rewards for good vs. evil - balanced?

from Stardock Forums
I've seen several posts on the forum about evil computers being more powerful than good computers, and after my (admittedly small) first few games, it seems like all of the moral choices benefit evil. Good always seems to get punished for doing the right thing. Is there a game balance reason why evil is rewarded? It seems to me like every enemy race can be set to whatever alignment you want, so being good or bad doesn't seem to make much difference when dealing with other races.

Sometimes, doing the right thing can ALSO be the rewarding thing. It would be nice to see this reflected in the game at least sometimes. Right now, every time you see a moral decision, it is a free paycheck for evil players and bad news for good players.

Anyone have anything to comment on this that might either enlighten me or give higher-ups some ideas?
--jmt

~SDC~
328 views 6 replies
Reply #1 from Stardock Forums Top
I 100% agree...but I happen to like it that way. Being good means choosing self sacrifice over short term benefit. It ain't called the straight and narrow for nothing.

Being evil gets you planet quality, research, and production boosts. Being good gets you...the self satisfaction of being good. The knowledge that you conquered the universe without sacrificing your moral code for a quick gain. Being good is its own reward.

I have noticed (although not enough game's played yet to be sure) that good computer players are more reliable friends and less likely to stab you in the back. Also they seem more likely to become friends with each other and less prone to attacking each other.

So you actually get quite the standard fantasy / Sci- Fi environment of the forces of good uniting against overwhelming forces of evil who might have won except they started turning on each other.
Reply #2 from Stardock Forums Top
Being good gets you the help of other good races when you need them.
Being good is a longterm investment.
Being good gives you some nice 'good only' techs.

~SDC~
Sins of a Solar Empire II
Reply #3 from Stardock Forums Top
for conquest victory, evil is by far the best path. alliance and culture victories are much easier for "good" civs. tech victory could go either way.

it all really depends on your style of play: if you're an "aggressive expansionary" type player, you're gonna benefit from the "evil" choices. if you're a "chill n' build" type, "good" will work much better.

cheers

h
Reply #4 from Stardock Forums Top
I believe that some of the more annoying random events only happen to Bad civs as well (the Fundamentalists event is one of these).
Reply #5 from Stardock Forums Top
My problem is I'm more ethical than moral. I've never made the evil choice, but I have no problems choosing the neutral position if it only affects volunteers. I also don't screw over my colonists on a planet class 15 or below with serious morale or planet-quality penalties if I can avoid it.

That attitude bit me hard in my current game. Almost every choice that came up was on a class 15 with one of those two penalties, so at the end of the expansion period, my morality was all of 55. Very long story made short, the Arceans demanded protection money, I told them to shove it, so they attacked, then formed an alliance with the Altarians, who had an aliance with the Torians. The Altarians and Torians kept coming to me asking for peace, since they're my neighbors so they're getting the brunt of the war and the Arceans are a nice safe distance off, but if I accept, they had to declare war again the next turn, because the Arceans don't get the fact that they're not the irresistable force that the math says they are. Finally, the Arceans give in, and peace is given a chance. For a year or two, when they come knocking again, and the same war starts up again. This time, someone's going to the mat, I just started kicking out avatars and haven't seen my opponents use anything better than dreadnoughts, which they were using at the end of the last war, and they're also not upgrading their starbases as fanatically as I am.

Anyway, what made me want to describe the situation is this: The only civ in the game I'm at 'close' relations to is the one civ I'm not interested in allying with, the Drengin. I'm supposed to be good, darn it! :)
Reply #6 from Stardock Forums Top
I admit I haven't had the game long enough to playtest it very much (but boy, am I anxious to get home from work today!), but so far I'm really enjoying the good vs. evil aspect.

I've read numerous complaints about evil being overpowered, but I'm not sure about that. Try being consistently good. Other good civs will really, really behave like they "should", i.e., they won't suddenly declare war for no reason, they'll send you supplies when you're fighting evil, they'll make it easier to trade, etc.

Quite frankly, I'm thinking being "good" is a tremendous advantage if you're trying anything other than straight-out conquest. The diplomatic AI is just blowing me away in this game. It's that good.