I would love a new look at Trade, its the same old system we have had for a while, spam a bunch of ships, send them out, wait forever till they get there, forget you already sent one to that planet so find another ones, etc etc.

It would be cool to perhaps integrate your module and starbase systems. Maybe having a trade starbase where every module created a trade route overtime (maybe I could pick the race/races I want to trade with), and your module limit was based on trade route licenses.

I like this a lot.  Less micromanagement and more broad strokes.

I also like that you're making influence mean more but what about giving players the ability to use influence to direct which way their borders grow?  That way instead of just pressing the end turn button you can actively capture important tiles like resources and target specific factions without going to war.  Also what about combining influence with trade so that instead of just dedicating part of a planet to influence structures you would use trade routes and wealth buildings.  then you could use those mechanics to wage trade/economic wars instead of it being some vague culture war thing

Edit: I got another idea:  What about instead of influence flipping planets or colonies it flips individual citizens (including those on starbases) based on their bonuses and happiness?  That way the drengin have a hard time flipping torian planets, yor citizens are (almost) always loyal, and the festron cant culture flip anything.

AI already knows how to extend its range.

I like this, as I currently see ship range as free civilisation points. To make this bite, could you please have a think about the mass / cost of the probe module, as currently adding a probe module to colony / constructor is pretty cheap. It may be in a good spot currrently, but that may change with range debuffs.

I think we may have to go back to allowing constructors to setup space stations in an opposing Civ's ZOC.

We I guess this means if you happen to start in a area that has only 'dead' planets - you're hosed. 

Well yes I agree about the diplomacy suggestion.  I've been crying out for a more robust diplomacy system with a greater range of treaties ever since Next was announced.

If we are talking diplomacy, one thing that I have always hated.

I hate that your diplomacy strength actually impacts the main deal.

That might seem crazy so let me clarify. To me, good negotiators know the real value of a deal, which is based on their needs and wants. They don't let their emotions influence things too much. So if Deal X is good right now, it should still be a good deal if you love me, or still a good deal if you hate me. Deal-making should be influenced by how badly you need something, not how you feel about me at the time.

Now to me high diplomacy should get you "extra bonuses" that the enemy isn't aware of. This is the side deals, the under the table stuff, the bribing of the assistants, etc etc. From the opponents perspectives, they got a perfectly fair and reasonable deal....its just that you happened to get a little extra in the form of some extra yields or something. The opponent doesn't "lose" these yields, you just get them.

Likewise, a hostile opponent may not want to deal, might shut me for example, but its silly for them to make outrageously unbalanced deals that I am not going to agree to. That's just a waste of time and energy. Either have them not deal with me (which is fine), have them go to everyone else first, but if they are dealing with me have them be fair deals I actually would consider.

Might make sense to combine several starbase types so you dont have to spam them everywhere.  Instead of having dedicate influence starbases you could have military and economy starbases generate influence in different ways.  For example military bases could generate influence the way comms bases do now (power projection) while economy starbases would boost the influence generated by planets in their radius.

One hopes you are correct, but I could see it happening.