I just started playing this weekend, and have found myself in over my head a few times. (And I don't care what the Dwarf Fortress players say, your UI is much better. ) I just had some suggestions that should be easy, but make life easier for new players.
1. Resource abundance multiplier. In my first game, I spent a lot of time blocked waiting for various things (shipyard retooling, critical research, designing new components, etc. ) The result is that I was completely screwed when Earth started running out of key minerals and I didn't have the infrastructure in place to set up an alternative source. A resource abundance multiplier (as in, a constant multiplier to minerals every time they're generated or discovered - not a multiplier to how fast you dig them, just how much is on a given body) in the game creation settings would let you play a slower-paced game without so much expansion pressure while you're trying to learn your way around, and gain enough experience to see problems before they land in your lap. It would also be handier for multiplayer games if you have multiple players in the same system (like your NATO vs. Soviet Union campaign) or if you just wanted to play a game with less difficult to manage inter-system sprawl. (In general, I'd prefer it if the Sol system was emphasized more. If I discover minerals on Titan, I know what that means, and it's cool. If I find minerals on "Lalande 1842-A VII Moon 6," it's not nearly as interesting. )
2. Component summaries in the research menu. I don't know how many of the rest of you have done this, but when designing several mutually-interdependent systems (A weapons control / missile / missile launcher set for use on your first military vessel, for instance) I sure would have found it nice to be able to reference what the stats are in the first component while working on the second component without having to wait for the scientists to finish researching the first component first. I now know to copy everything into notepad when doing this, but I don't imagine it would be that difficult to have the system's stat's available in the research project's description in the research window.
3. Qualitative descriptors in component design. When building a new system, I have no idea how its capabilities correspond to what might be considered "normal. " Is what *I* think is actually a long ranged, but weak missile really laughably short-ranged with a heck of a punch? I realize this could be tough to do given the steady increase of capabilities and the fact that your warhead research could far outstrip your engine tech. Maybe it could be based on the relative size or cost devoted to each stat? (Like, if more than x% of a missile's MSP is devoted to engine power, note that it's fast, very fast, etc. ?)
4. Distance measurements are sometimes confusing / ambiguous. Almost everything is in thousands or millions of kilometers, which is okay, except sometimes I run into notes in the GUI telling me that a distance is (k) or "in k. " Is that in Kilometers? Or thousands of Kilometers? This could just use a bit of cleanup to make sure proper units are always given. (I seem to remember running into this most often in the missile design window. ) Alternatively, consider using miles, or light-seconds, or something like that to reduce ambiguity between "km" and "k km. " (Personally, I like km for the more authentic feel. )
5. Sanity checks in ship design. It would be nice if there were warnings as well as errors when designing ships. "Missiles have longer range than fire control!" "Beams have no fire control at all!" "Hey stupid, you forgot the engines!" That sort of thing. You'd still be able to commit the design
6. Locking a ship design should also lock the class name and type. I can't tell you how many times I forgot to hit the "new" button, and accidentally renamed my "Sparrow class Light Personnel Transport" the "Juggernaught class Battlecruiser" or something similar. (Also, the "unlock" button doesn't seem to work?)