Good vs. evil civs?

[LDiCesare]

Galciv good/evil choices amounted to:
Good = (moral choice with which you may or may not agree) + long term benefit (relations) at a short term cost
Evil = (moral choice with which you may or may not agree) + short term benefit at a long term cost (heaps of gold/production but bad relations and the possibility of losing most of your planets in a random event).

This is a very poor model if you compare to the rich choices offered in Civ IV:
Religion abstracts moral choices and drives relations between nations.
Favorite civics doe the same.
Civics also are tied to events: Slavery is great, but as the evil option in Galciv which can backfire, you can get slave revolts.

So I'd say the overall model in civ is superior to that of galciv. The moral choices available in civ change with era (free religion, emancipation...) and have an effect on relations with others (favorite civics) and on the game overall.

Moreover, some random events (quests) have a higher effect if you have certain civics, or are tied to religions. Having more of these, or events like 'Preacher XXX asks you to convert to Theocracy for a benefit' could be interesting, but I think it'd be better to use the 20+ civics as a basis for moral choices than to add a poorer manichean (good/evil = 2 choices + one in between that was hardly ever worth taking in galciv anyway) model over the game.

[Heraclitus]

^^^

What he said.

And may I add that I thoroughly resent the silly goverment system Stardock uses in GalCiv. I mean civ2 had a better goverment system! This is especialy true since the vote, and the "senate" in Galciv could play such an interesting role that it would leave civics in the dust.

[Nohbody8]

Originally posted by LDiCesare This is a very poor model if you compare to the rich choices offered in Civ IV:
Religion abstracts moral choices and drives relations between nations.
Favorite civics doe the same.
Civics also are tied to events: Slavery is great, but as the evil option in Galciv which can backfire, you can get slave revolts.

Never said good vs. evil should replace all of this.

[LDiCesare]

And I'm not saying you can't have more events. I just say that good/evil is manichean and simplistic. The civics system offers 5 * 5 choices, which is way richer. You can use it somehow. For instance, you could use good/bad events and choices to unlock a new civic rather than have it unlocked by a tech. And if you no longer have the moral option, you can no longer keep that civic.
I think the good/evil thing is quite poor in all games. A game like Pendragon (pen & paper rpg) provided your character with many traits instead of 1 or 2 alignment axis (good/evil, law/chaos), and some were considered good or evil, depending on the character's religion. For instance, pagans and christians didn't have the same view of good concerning lust.

[Addled Platypus]

I attack with every different civ I play

guess I like to monger