Moral for ships whould be a nice addtion, places more value on ships you want to keep alive and working. Culture flipping would be easier and could provok excuses for war   .

Actually Marc the post had more than just carriers. Although I agree that moral/influence modules on ships seems odd the idea of "components that will improve fleet combat" sounds good to me.
The modules that are to be added could be a command center module that would increase the luck and/or the attack/defense of all ships in it's fleet. Another module could increase the logistics of the fleet by a small amount. There are a ton of possibilities and having a command ship would be an interesting and good addition IMO. I'd even suggest having a command ship hull type. I dont even think it'd be that hard to implement.

I would like the planetary defense improvement to actualy do some thing i know it improves the planets ablity to resist invasion but i would like something more substanual like:
now that ships are shown in orbit above a planet i'd like something like the planetary defense giving a chance of enemy ships being shot down or damaged as they try to enter orbit or invade, to keep it fair the chance should only be small but it would be much more realistic.

different sty star base for each race

That is what I am talking about. There are different styles for ships, why not starbases?

Don't know if this has been mentioned, but what about defensive tactics? So a defending planet can choose a way to fight back.
Examples:
Scorched Earth: If you know your going to lose, and you don't want the enemy to get some high level improvements you use this. It would destroy most planetary improvements (80-100%), and damage some tiles (5-20%). Also, prevents enemy from stealing techs during the victory.
Mine Fields: Destroys 10-20% of improvements and turns one tile yellow.

You get the picture. Ofcourse to keep it balanced there would be fewer defensive tactics and they would be less effective than invasion tactics.

Hi!
A bit late for the DA, but maybe it could be made.

Please make research spending independent of the production spending. Since those are two different kinds of "products" that come from different kinds od buildings, that would make sense.

BR, Iztok

*twitch*

Please take all carrier suggestions to the carrier thread, so they may be officially ignored.

By cubing I take it you mean make the game 3d? While this is an interesting idea, and one I'd love to see, it would require the standard:

Hell of a lot of AI work
Hell of a lot of interface work.

As it stands, the game played 3d would be somewhat confusing at best, and a logistical nightmare at worst. It would, however, be rather fun if implemented fully, perhaps something for gc3?

Dead horse topics

Note the title "read before posting"?

Maybe you shoulda tried that.

Me too, but i don't think it's going to happen   

How about "cubing" the map

One result would be a playing area that will feel much smaller - currently tiny is 5x5 (25) and gigantic is 16x16 (256)(doing this from memory, so please bear with me if the numbers are off). So the cube root of 256 about 6, so that a (current) gigantic galaxy in 3D would have the feel of a tiny galaxy in 2D.

By cubing I take it you mean make the game 3d? While this is an interesting idea, and one I'd love to see, it would require the standard: Hell of a lot of AI work Hell of a lot of interface work.

To this I would add:

A lot more memory if you are looking for galaxies with the feel of the larger galaxies available now.

Although it would be neat to play and have to think/plan/attack/defend in 3D.