I took a breather from ES2 for a week or so and played that other Stella 4X game, (not sure if I should mention it's name so will be referred to has Stella).  Shame you might say, yet it provided a perspective where one could address some of ES2 short comings, and strengths

First off I came away totally convinced that ES2 fleet combat feels much better as a game mechanic and direction.  Large fleet battles might look pretty as a firework display but they lose their intimacy and immersion.  It's great to have large fleets in RTS games but in empire management games it just falls flat.  Ships merge into a mass and it's hard to follow the battle as it unfolds.  

What this other game has though is a very immersive campaign map.  You can zoom in to see all your assets on the map in real time.  See your fleets at the space port, construct space stations in deep space.  This brings a lot to the table as far as immersion goes.  In some ways I felt that both of these games would make a great marriage.  In Stella I also felt very invested in character management, you follow your characters as they live and die in your service.  This provides a level of connection to the game world.  It also provides a sense of scale to the vastness of space, and time.  Every upgrade is shown on the campaign map, if you upgrade a station module you can zoom in to see it in real time.  4X space games have to pull the player into their game worlds otherwise the campaign map is just a mess of lines and dots to navigate.  ES2 is in danger of not releasing its full potential in this area.  It has great looking interface and map elements, yet without that immersive element it could fall flat.  We as fans spend a great deal of time managing the campaign map and most of that time is spent looking at a sterile map zoomed out.  We need to be able to zoom in and see our creations.  A new ship or planet construction ought to be seen up close.  Assets need to be animated and clearly shown.  This level of detail is important for players like me, who might take days to play a game.  Both games have excellent narrative and quest lines.  Both games play out fairly well.  

Another point that needs to be made is how limiting developers, or publishers seem to be in releasing  games prematurely.  That is to say unfinished by my standards.  ES2 is in EA so I will see how far it goes.  Stella was certainly released unfinished.  These games need to cater for high end PC users with options for best graphic settings.  Detailed model and art assets might add a few gig to the game size but as a fan I want to see more of a finished product at launch.  Take more time and produce the best game possible.  Put the detail into it and I will support the DLC add-on's later.  Every 4X space game in the last few years has failed to deliver the promise of a full and rich product at release.  In my view games like this ought to be around 10 plus gigs in size.  Graphic details and sound tracks to match.  No sharing of art work or assets that look unfinished or incomplete.  Yes employ more staff, we fans don't mind paying for quality.  I will pay for a fully fleshed out state of the art game.  

ES2 has so much potential.  I want to see this game shine.  

It needs more visual elements to its campaign map, being able to zoom into a planet or asteroid field to see its orbiting platforms etc.

It needs asteroid fields to play a greater role in the game, Nebula, plasma types, were battles can be fought in.

It needs frontier outposts /space stations for deep space colonisation. (You don't need planets to always be the centre of a colony.

It needs to stop force truce and influence from breaking the game at around turn 180 as it did in my last play.

It needs to have espionage as in EL.

It needs more ship types, custom faction ship designs, hero ship classes.

I do not want to see these things left for DLC addons.  These ought to be in the launch version, complete and ready for refinement.  DLC's are for adding new components not core essentials.