First, please read this forum thread to fully comprehend my extreme confusion:
http://forum.imperiaonline.org/int/index.php?topic=33847.0Now that you've finished, I hope this suggestion makes a little more sense.
As mentioned in the linked thread, sometimes points are awarded according to the formula: points = spent resources / 1000 (* 2 if the resources are spent on military units). And sometimes points are awarded according to the formula: points = a different number than they were just a moment ago.
Here goes my ways I've come up with to fix the problem:
1) Award
all points based on the amount of resources spent, according to whatever formula works best. That includes troops from the bonus chest, which cost zero resources, fortress repairs, peaceful province annexation, anything that increases the number of buildings, technologies, holdings, military units, non-military units, or even possibly alliance assets a player has. Additionally, when un-building something refunds resources (as of right now, only disbanding troops), use the same formula to calculate how many points should be subtracted. Note that military losses refund zero resources, and so if you lose troops, you still have all the points they're worth. The strengths of this solution are that points become easier to calculate, if you keep track of everything you buy, and a bit easier to manage, because you control every change to your points. Some strategy nuances this solution brings up are the need to keep your army safe, even more so than before, and a greatly increased value of "liquid" assets (resources) as opposed to "solid" ones (buildings, etc.), which would lead to enhanced competitiveness in the market and a dependency on farming to control more "liquid" assets. The weaknesses of this solution are that losing your army can end your competitiveness in the realm permanently, because you are competing in a higher attack range due to points that do not reflect your current strength, which leads to further defeats, etc.
2) Award
all points based on the intrinsic value of whatever is bought, according to whatever standard works best. (Personally, I'd suggest resource cost according to the current formula but always based on the price of something at level 0 university, military university, architecture, builder's guild, academy, and military academy.) When something is un-built, refund exactly the same amount of points as were awarded to build it (because the player lost the intrinsic value of whatever was un-built). Under this system, points awarded are standardized for every player, so that if player A built his university to level 40 before researching level 1 of centralization, and player B left his university at level 1 when researching the same level of centralization, then players A and B will receive exactly the same amount of points for researching the exact same technology, even though they spent a different amount of resources. This system is reminiscent of real-world market systems in that the value of something relies upon what the something is, and not how much was paid for it. For example: Muwe buys ten kilograms of a certain kind of grapes in Italy for fifty euros (architecture level 5, let's say), and Angela buys ten kilos of the same kind of grapes in California for ten euros(architecture 40). Both of them could sell the grapes at market in France for 100 euros, which is the real price of the grapes (architecture 0), even though Angela got a much better deal than Muwe. In game terms, the example goes like this: Muwe pays a total cost of 32,2 billion gold to take his espionage technology from level 0 to level 100, using a level 5 military university for every research, while Angela pays a total cost of 19.7 billion gold to perform the same research using a level 40 military university. They receive exactly the same effect from the research (because it has the same intrinsic value) even though Muwe paid nearly twice as much as Angela for it. (In fact, according to this system the research would have an intrinsic value of 35.4 billion gold, which is the cost to research it with no reductions from any source.) The strengths of this solution are that it is realistic, as I hope I have illustrated, it is mathematically simple, it would be easily integrable into the currently existing version of the game, it is standardized for every player, it allows for exact calculation of the amount of points one has (if one spends the time to dissect the system, that is), and it allows for a large degree of control over the amount of points one has (except for that pesky bonus chest, but you can disband those troops anyways). It introduces no new strategy nuances, but also does not break the game's balance; rather, it stabilizes it, if anything. The weakness of this system is that the advantage of having high-level universities, architecture levels, etc. is reduced, because under it, they only decrease the cost and time of things, and not the points gained from them.
3) I had a third option in mind, but I lost it somewhere between the first two and now I don't remember what it was. If it comes to me again I will put it up here. Just for reference, I started this post about ten seconds after I said I would in the thread you've forgotten about at the top of the post, so I hope you can forgive me for forgetting one small thing. It probably wouldn't have worked anyway.
Thanks for your patience with this one, I didn't mean to build such a wall of text. I hope you really consider it, because of the time and effort that went into this suggestion (and not just from me -- several other players contributed to this masterpiece), if for no other reason. We're really trying to help you make the game better here, because we care about its success, too. Otherwise we'd have quit ages ago.