Two suggestions for the Class Design window.
1. For each component type, could we have the possibility to order the components in different ways, e.g., from older to younger ones, or according to their capability?
The alphabetic order we have now can be confusing sometimes. E.g., for MFCs: I developed FC103-R20, FC103-R5, etc., up to FC164-R20 that are now listed before than FC17-R1, but they have much longer ranges than the last one, so I would like this last one be the first in the list.
Other examples are for missile launchers or for shields.
2. I don't remember which is the most capable between Advanced Damage Control vs. Improved Damage Control, and go to check them in the Research tab. Would it be possible to add the capability of the components in their description box (as already done for geo and grav sensors)?
Other modules could be terraforming one and orbital mining: the capability appears in the class description, when the module is added to the class.

Intuitively, I think players expect a decoy to "look like" the ship it's decoying from, i.e., to have the same signature. I can see why the actual mechanic is different, as its more flexible and less micromanage-y than requiring exact size matching (plus avoid issues with ship sizes that aren't nice, round numbers), but the fact that an infinite swarm of size-5 decoys is arguably optimal (same performance and cost as any other option, maximum flexibility) seems to eliminate what could/should be a gameplay decision point.

I don't agree smaller decoys are always optimal. For when your facing negligable missile threats smaller sized decoys mean ships with standard settings will always launch some decoys even against tricklefire from AMMs that your PD or Shields can shrug off which adds cost (or alot micro if you want to turn it off situationally).

For larger decoys it's much easier to have a sensible cut-off setting so that for negligable threats with fewer incoming MSP then 0 decoys will be launched, while still ensuring all decoys will be launched against that deadly alpha strike.

Can player races resurvey a system if they suspect a dormant jump point?

I assumed you had to wait until you could have a sensor detect another race's ship transit through the suspected dormant jump point.

Yes, it was added a while ago, although you were always able to manually resurvey a specific location, IIRC.

Do you mean literally resurveying jump points

This one.

Can player races resurvey a system if they suspect a dormant jump point?

I assumed you had to wait until you could have a sensor detect another race's ship transit through the suspected dormant jump point.

I dont really think "for the sake of" can apply when it comes to a role playing game though. If you get me? Like why is the Story character check box there? Its to build stories around Officers, I personally get great enjoyment out of seeing the histories and it adds so much to the RP side, but even gameplay wise when you start out you have loads of officers with nowhere to go. so over time they die or retire and before you know it around early/mid game you are left with nobody in any senior positions. Yes you can promote but the lack of history messes with the RP. Maybe its my playstyle I play at 20% tech with no starting ships because i enjoy the slow burn and other players might build loads of ships with the starting points and give them a good head start. I dont like that though I want to crawl out of the starting system.

Senior officers dying off vaguely sounds like a problem from older versions of the game?.. Now you're able to create extensive naval hierarchies on day 1 and always have as many high-ranked officers as you desire, as the game will auto-promote to fill any vacancy. I understand your desire to have many officers before you have a large navy though, and that's why I like the miscellaneous command component solution, as it allows that option without encumbering any beginner player with a plethora of seemingly relevant officer positions that actually do nothing. Either that, or a game setting for additional positions would work just fine.

Ground forces are a bit more difficult in that regard, you either need small baseline formations, smaller amount of formations below each higher level HQ or a damned lot of GFCCs if you want to get your hierarchies close to top rank, but like large and detailed naval rosters, it also takes time. Ultimately I think there's plenty of RP possibilities in the game already, and while I'd love to see a few extra steps in my Grand Admiral's brilliant career as he rose through the ranks since enlisting as a chief cook on the SS Rustbucket, if I had to choose, I'd prefer getting more officer positions through functional modules that benefit the gameplay as well.