A few ideas

1. Smart.

2. Agree.

3. Yes, no, maybe. Like it but tiles may be asking for to much, people want Starbase population more than ever no, myself included.

1. I too do not like the way starbases were build in Gal Civ 2 and think a overhaul of this system is in order.

2. I think something like this will be implemented in the final game.

3. I dont know about starbases having population, but I would like more things to build on the map and on my planets, like orbital defense sattelites, orbital cities. And why cant we place starbases in orbit of planets? seems strange that my planets can be invaded and my military starbase just sits next to it and watches.

I like your ideas 1 and 2. I unsure and slightly against idea 3.

I swear to a god that people were threatening to burn down SD if population modules where not made a while back. Lol it was popular.

I would adore habitable artificial planets/satellites, and Dyson spheres.

It is my imagination, or is tech missing?

Where's the teleporters?

Can we make useful stars yet?

It strikes me that we've gone into the future, and lost options.

This makes me sad.

I would like to see every tech from Gal Civ 1, with more besides.

Please?

^^WHAT?

You put "This makes me sad." on a single line!?!?!

Dyson spheres or Ringworlds would definitely be cool.  They'd be major undertakings though.

I wish there was more to be found on the map, except planets and resources, like abandoned outposts, alien space ships or some space creatures. right now it is kindy boring when you go exploring.

Interesting ideas.

as for #1:

Yeah, the constructor spam short after all colonys are grabbed is a bit boring. To have them as machinery which places and installs the starbase is a good point.

as for #2:

Even the AI is ignoring resolutions, so also the players should be allowed to break them by choice. At the current, if UP resolution not to settle in each others ZOC, the AI is completely ignoring it if they have a ship allready underway. Kind of a bug I guess.

as for #3:

How about thinking one step further? Why not having constructors to build habitats in asteroids, which seems more reliable to me?

1st, the astorioids could be usefull now.

2nd, they could not be easily destroyed, but conquered.

I am against this, because it will break the game. I give rise to the following abuse:

1) Buy a constructor;
2) Move the constructor and build the star base;
3) Move the constructor back to the shipyard, and wait (or pay). But because it does not take shipyard construction points you can either use the production on the sponsor planet(s) or build extra ships - military, colonizers or even more constructors;
4) Move the constructor back to the star base and upgrade;
5) Rinse repeat until the end of the game, resulting in star bases spam.

In other words: almost free star bases, and therefor even earlier and more boosts to the planets within the zone of control of said star bases.

At the moment building a constructor is a strategic decision: do i build a constructor, colonizer, military ship or nothing at all? By making the constructor modules gratis as far as manufacturing points are concerned it becomes a strategic non-issue - simply abuse it as much as possible.

Even if you would have to pay for the constructor modules this would not stop the abuse of it, because wealth is a non-localized resource. This means a planet on one side of your empire can generate the wealth and you can build star bases on the other side without spending manufacturing points - which are a localized resource. And i know you can already simply buy constructors, but that at least takes a production turn away from the shipyard.

By the way in real life/space (in non-surface-to-space-capable vessels) the navigation and propulsion system (not counting fuel) are around 1% of the mass of the vessels. For the game this would mean you send a constructor on its way and then you want to wait turns for the 1% that is not used in the construction of a star base to return to the shipyard?

While it is true that you would build less constructors it would increase the (micro) management of the constructors you actually do make, it opens the game up to serious abuse of it, and makes the strategic depth of the game at lot shallower.

"I wish there was more to be found on the map, except planets and resources, like abandoned outposts, alien space ships or some space creatures. right now it is kindy boring when you go exploring."

I feel like the main map is pretty cluttered as is though.  When you zoom out, it's a mess of stuff. 

Yes, lots of stuff which gives some percent based bonuses and that is it. I do not find theese kinds of "artefacts" exciting and I think the tech trees could use less of this as well and have techs that really make you want to research them.

Every time I get a new building or ship component and all it does is some incremental stat improvements, I feel like wading trough a swamp of filler techs, to get to the cool stuff, which is terrifingly scarce at the moment.

Interesting ideas, here are my 2cents;

1. That would probably add way more micromanagement than anything else. Perhaps though, if the starbase is close enough to a shipyard you could directly upgrade it?

2. Sounds cool.

3. I feel that they already do this via starbase modules.

If we are limited to one constructor module on a vessel now, then it would be possible to set up this mechanic:

A module requires X points. Each time a constructor travels from a planet to a starbase it transfers X number of points. When enough points are amassed to build a module, you are alerted. In other words, constructors can either build a base or act as a construction version of a trade ship.

2). Agree - this was in GC2 and will likely appear later in GC3.

I understand why colony ships get gobbled up considering they are used to create headquarter shelter for new colonies. Yet I don't understood why constructors get gobbled up in construction. Instead of refitting modules on constructors each time as OP suggest. Galciv III can simple have (turn rounds) to complete different task. Constructing satellite can take 5 to 10 turns, upgrades 2 to 3 rounds and so on. Doubling up constructor can speed process.

As far as the other two suggestion I have no opinion though I like the idea of defying the UP directives (with consequence) if players or IA chooses. 

"I understand why colony ships get gobbled up considering they are used to create headquarter shelter for new colonies. Yet I don't understood why constructors get gobbled up in construction"

I think the idea is that the raw material of the ship is also broken down and used in the construction of the starbase.

^^Its a old mechanic without player support that needs a update to be modern.

"^^Its a old mechanic without player support that needs a update to be modern."

If SD changed their game every time someone whined on the forums, GalCiv would be unrecognizable, and horrible.

As it is Starbase construction management is a giant pain in the ass. Some indication of the fact that a starbase has a bunch of constructors there available for use would seem to be obvious. When you're up in the dozens of starbases, how on earth do you figure out where you've sent constructors or how many modules a specific starbase has without zooming and clicking and clicking and clicking. Cmon. this isn't UI design circa 1994.