Hey all, I've got an update mostly done.

A number of typos and bugs are getting fixed, as well as some balance tweaks. I'm also adding some additional features and upgrades to temples. (And added a new temple, as well.)

For gameplay, I'm moving both temple restoration and moon exploration a tech tier earlier, and adjusting the costs of developing moons and restoring temples.

In the case of exploration, this allows the choice of teching to exploration viable in the early game - opening up more interesting gameplay choices.

For restoration, this allows temples to become more prominent in the mid-game, and additionally, temples now have additional upgrades and things that can be further unlocked with a tier 4 tech.
Without getting into spoilers, every temple comes with some other benefit such as allowing a new building, specialization, reduction, etc. And typically open up some new interesting gameplay choices either from the temple benefits or the new item.
I’ve tried to make the new things potentially matter, but without really breaking the game. Besides, temples are generally rare and you can't specifically account on getting one (let alone a specific one) in any particular game. But so far, it's pretty fun when you find one and then try to figure out how best to utilize it.

I've also added a new Vodyani improvement to give some interaction with temples, since they can't normally restore them at all. In this case, they can get benefits from owned but undiscovered temples. (And I think I've justified this lore-wise.)

I've also increased the resource cost of developing a moon, and added industry cost to both development and temple exploration. (Though both still retain a minimum number of turns.)

I've seen some push-pack on the set turn aspect, but so far there's been no elaboration on what the objection is, or which way the objection leans. (It's not clear if they mean the set turns leads to building them too quickly or too slowly)

At any rate, my thought process behind the cost is three-fold:
1) Moon development is more akin to system development in theme, so fixed turns makes sense in this regard.
2) It makes some moons viable as an early colony development options, since exploration only takes a turn regardless of industry. This opens up more gameplay options and choices.
3) Introduced new industry costs so as not to make restoration and development over-powered on new colonies.

At the moment, the largest bug is (embarrassingly) that the WorldSettingDefinition table wasn't getting loaded properly, leading to moons and temples generally being rarer than they should have been.
Fixing this, however, has implications for compatibility with other mods that also use WorldSettingDefinition.

Currently testing the changes, so thoughts and comments are certainly welcome before release!

Hey Tychonoir, 

It is unfortunately impossible to replace this icon, as it is not set using a GuiElement or anything, simply in the Prefab in Unity.

Ah well. What about color? Can I change that?

Anyway, then the real question, is whether it's better to keep moons as anomalies realizing that this increases the number of overall anomalies, or if it's better to make moons not count as anomalies realizing that this might cause confusion when looking at the system view.

The color of the icon is defined in the GuiElement CategoryAnomalyQuality<Quality>.

Since CategoryAnomalyQualityMoon has its own GuiElement, you should be able to change its color!

Ok, here's the thing.

I can re-color Moon type anomalies, but eventually, moons can become completely developed. As this point, they become Positive type anomalies which has a different color.

This leads to a problem if I want to keep moons in their own color:
If the final element in the chain of moon reductions retains the Moon type, it will leave the reduction button active with no reduction in the list.

To hide the button, it needs to be Positive, and then I can't keep the color consistant.

Unless I can create a new quality type. I didn't immediatly see a way to do this; is this possible?