I've been experiencing several hard drive fragmentation issues which may have influenced/corrupted my game. Please if anything seems unusual or can not be reproduced please let know. My internet acces is thru work so reloading can involve several hurdles...
Dear Iztok,
Thank you very much for your indepth and informative response. I appreciate the very useful links you have included, which I read along with the wiki

I keep a journal of my game satistics so I can compare previous games. As I mentioned above in my quote, I am uncertain about certain discrepancies (between prior games) which I have observed. Many of my games are having questionable performance issues which I am trying to identify. For example, this current game I was playing is now known to be corrupt. I have had to reload my game and start from scratch because I was using my windows key to switch between the game and my usb drive where I record my wordpad statistics. This has made my game unstable for reasons I can not explain, for example, my world targeted for colonization was swapped with the AI's resulting in me colonizing the AI's world across the galaxy while it colonized mine

Also the base moral for Iconians is +20 not +40 etc...
Are you sure you're crunching the numbers in the right way?
No I can not verify my results until I have eliminated or otherwise identified all my issues, after which point I am reduced to stastical analysis with a sample size of "9" civs. This means I must "create" 21 different custom civs and begin 30 different games simultaneously inorder to acheive a sample size for Z=30. Then I can record my individual data sets and calculate the mean result for each statistic I investigate. After that, results which are derived within 4 standard deviations are considered to be the "norm" although I must also account for sample biasis, alpha and beta errors.
I'm sorry but "crunching the numbers" is not for posting rows and rows of data used for crunching, but for posting MODELS behind the numbers. Models, that other players can use to better understand game mechanics and improve their playing style.
Yes I whole heartedly agree, however, the relevent data used in pattern recognition are necessarily included for peer review to allow others to check the results as well as point out any other patterns which the author may have "missed".
And BTW AAR stands for After Action Report, not for the "two-page analysis of turn 1" report.
I agree that my AAR is more indepth than many others, however, the level and scope of detail doesn't necessarily subtract from its usefulness. Especially in focusing attention on certain areas which are ordinarily ignored.
For example:
Can you confirm the military production is added to social without using focus? I can't.
This has been in existence in every DA game I've started so far. I can not account for its source, however, I have observed this additional free bonus production. Not to complain at all, but I find your comments much more useful when you say "I could/couldn't reproduce that ..." rather than the general this is not what you should be doing ... we all have our own individual reasons as to what and why we play. I find the game mechanics much more interesting to research