Forget it, just forgot to check an option. Everything's allright with anomalies. *embarrassed*

Actually anomalies are far too abundant for my taste - they reappear rather quickly which gives them a quite "inflationary" character in my opinion. If it was up to me, I'd have a bunch of anomalies at the beginning of the game when they are really important to keep an fledgeling empire alive, but see diminishing numbers the older the game gets - at a certain point when civilizations have consolidated there's no sense in having dozens of anomalies popping up. In fact, they should just vanish for good in later games.

Well, the way that I see it is as such:

OLD SYSTEM:
Anomolies are gobbled up and then when the first recessions hit there are no more around and this slows down the game for several months. Then the civilizations work through it and become powerful again.

NEW SYSTEM:
Anomalies are gobbled up in the early game. the recession starts and then anomalies have reappeared by then, so it doesn't hit nearly as hard. When the recession is over the anomalies are still around and have a much smaller impact, but the 1000BC boons can make it so that economy is a much smaller issue than it should be.

***************************************
REVISED OLD/NEW SYSTEM that is sorta in the middle of the current situation:
Make it so that the anomalies are abundant or whatever setting is set, have them reappear throughout the recessions, but after 1.5 - 2.0 years there is no longer any need for anomalies, with the rate of reappearing becoming lower and lower. In a 1/(x^2) pattern, with maximum rate being a low x and minimum rate being 0 or x = infinity. something like that would probably work well.

With ABUNDANT setting having a reappearance modifier of x = 1, RARE modifier of x = 4 or 5, can't remember how many kinds of settings there are.

After a certain period of time x = x + 1, and a diminishing time (t) modifier as well.

The t modifier would start out at a different value based upon system size.

*****EXAMPLE*****
Okay, in this example will use a system of MEDIUM size, Abundant anomalies.

For this example I am going to suppose that the t value at the start of 8.
also, for this example, I will say that the t value is equal to the number of months before the next step increment in anomaly reappearance modifier value.
START --
X = 1
T = 8
8 months later Total time elapsed = 8 months
X = 2
T = 4
4 months later Total time elapsed = 12 months
X = 3
T = 2
2 months later Total time elapsed = 14 months
X = 4
T = 1
1 month later Total time elapsed = 15 months
X = 5
T = 1/2
2 weeks later Total time elapsed = 15 months 2 weeks
X = 6
T = 1/4
1 week later Total time elapsed = 15 months 3 weeks
X = 7
T = T
***************
At this point each week X = X + 1 and T doesn't change. 9 iterations from Abundant Anomaly settings the rate of reappearance should be small enough to be obselete, at this time the total time elapsed would be 16 months 1 weeks, or nearly 1.5 years. At the point of 1.5 years the X modifier is equal to 14, at 2 years X = 38. By the 2 year mark the reappearance value with the equation { 1/(X^2) } would be 1/(38^2) or 1/1444, which has the approximate value of 6.925 E -4. This is a very small value and would be equavalent to a reappearance value of 0.

*************************END EXAMPLE*************************

Okay, I tihnk that what i put is a useful example of how things could be modified. it is not possible to modify the current code for use in 2.0 probably, perhaps if this idea is picked up by many than it will become viable in a later revision of the code.

GalenEvil

Haha, nah Trym. I am an Electrical Engineering student, currently a sophomore. I am math-minded though, and that is the best programming example i could think of.

It would be nice if we could have a Dev comment on the feasibility of modifying current code to use this, or if they are thinking along this direction anyways for a future update.

Always willing to give my amateurish point of view on things

GalenEvil

Amateurish... took me a while just to figure out the basics of your example and still not sure if I even... oh well who cares, as long as anomalies get nerfed in future patches according to your suggestions.

I'm sorry....I'd really like to see more of an explanation as to why this needs to be nerfed? You say there are too many of them and they need to be nerfed. Then someone draws up his opinion of how they should be respawned and suddenly that is the correct amount.

Why is the current amount too much? Who is benefiting by the too much? The AI or the player? If you consider it money supply and all the players have access to it, the competitive difference can't be considerable.

I'm not trying to be combative about stuff...but I just feel like the dev's have a lot on their table right now and as users I think we need to help prioritize their work. I would rather they spend 5 minutes on ai then 5 minutes on anomalies. What a lot of people seem to feel is that the game needs a more aggressive, combative, intuitive AI. I'd rather they devote their limited resources to that then these kind of modifications.

If the flagship was armed, then you'd be able to use it to blast away the other race's colony ships and miners to gain a competitive advantage in the colony rush, which seems a little cheesy.

Part of the problem is that the AIs rarely, if ever, build additional survey vessels. Once they lose their flagship, they simply lose out on all anomalies after that. If a player can eliminate several flagships (or arrange for others to do it for them), most of the later anomalies will go to the player. The AIs relative disinterest in speed upgrades only compounds this problem.

Nobody has ever stated nerfing anomalies should be a priority - actually the discussion started because I made a mistake in identifying a bug that wasn't one in the first place.

GalenEvil and I just happened to agree on the fact that unlike before, anomalies nowadays tend to be spammed on the map throughout the game (and I always set them to occasional) when, according to our opinion, it would suffice if there were plenty of anomalies in early game to help players survive until everyone's economy got going, and let them fade out in later game. I personally am irritated in late games by the abundance of anomalies which nobody seems to care about anymore as their importance becomes increasingly obsolete. That's why I seconded GalenEvil's suggestion about how things could be adapted because it was just what I had in mind (without all the complex computing )

One thing to mind for you fellas, this is but a PERSONAL opinion, you have every right to disagree and discuss things. Let's see if this issue gets adressed by the devs.