Starmada Admiralty is new and improved!!!!  Allows fighter/drone design and has a psuedo-vector type system.  Among many other things.  Both are good!   

New, yes. Improved? Not entirely sure on that score...

I like S:X because I can work with it. I understand it much better than S:AE, especially regarding the whole tech level issue--one of the reasons I haven't touched S:AE since I tried to design a ship with non-0 TLs. And the ship space units in S:AE is all off to me. I prefer to have ships with -0 or -00 space units as I can easily calculate the space units in my head. With 2529 or 2259 space units, its not possible to calculate space unit percentages.

The only thing I like about S:AE is the terrain, fighter/drones and some of the weapon options, all of which can be transported into S:X.

Because with the whole rounding-off space units, I am unsure whether to round off before the TL modifier or afterwards. The afterwards mode implies a second rounding-off effect, and I don't think this is what you mean.

I just bought the SAE and I really like it so far and jippie - I am again mentioned in the playtesters section.
What I like:
-greatest customization rules of all Starmada games
-The good old empire, arcturians and SSSka are back and better than ever.
-campaign system - great. I will surely use it.
-area damage - hyper great! And now we just need alternative area templates other than the standard 7 hexes. (like lines or 2,3 hexes etc.)

New movement system:
while I fully understand the necessity to introduce a new "realistic" system to please some grognards, I dont use it. The old basic movement system was one of the main reasons I played Starmada over the years. Its easy to play and offers enough options and preplanning.

What I dont like very much:
-Why did you eliminate the spinal mount? (ok I know you can simulate it ot a certain extent with designing a special "spinal" weapon, but IMO its not the same)
-why do all marines of every race have the same diceless combat effect? Wouldnt it be better to fight it out with 5,6 like in the previous editions? I always liked the suspense if I am able to capture a ship with my marines or not.
-Unfortunately there are again no planetary assault and defense installation rules - for asteroids or starbases. Hm...

But all in all I think its the best Starmada edition ever.

Maybe its just me, but I think that the spinal mount was a special equipment piece.  It feels very "normal" in SAE. In previous editions spinal mounts could not be destroyed and the heavier the ship was the more range it had. I considered it more as "integrated" part of the ship design than the modern variant of SAE, where it is just another weapon. (although a big one) But of course I can live with it.

I never felt that we have too many dice rolls. For me the amount of different rolls feeled right. Maybe you can bring up in future source books some troops variants as optional rule. I mean we have several weapon parameters like range, IMP, ROF etc.. And we have maybe hundreds of different weapon designs. But we have just a single troop type in the game which has the same attributes and no luck involved. This feels strange, because in every other game mechanics there are always many choices and also an amount of dice rolls.

So why not having different troop types in order to portray the physcial/technological abilities of the different races? I even imagine that it could be fun to custom design troopers with traits like missiles or fighters.

I think what makes space bases interesting is that they could be used in different scenarios for victory points etc. To make it different a base could have more unique traits, which no mobile unit has. Eg. jump gates, extra layers of armor, space docks or planetary shield converters, biospheres or whatever phantastic equipment one can find in SF operas.
You did a similar thing with hyper jump engines, hopsital and cargo space etc. These things are mainly for chrome and the scenario design.
To introduce real differences between space bases and ships, the bases could have special equipment ships cannot have. Or maybe a base has a to-hit-bonus? Or you can integrate some equipment cheaper? Or maybe a station has always a bonus on RNG because its a more stable platform? I think there are several possiblities to make space bases very interesting.

So a begin would be to experiment and release different scenarios with bases in it. One problem could be in a standard engagement scenario where bases are not practical. But in scenario types where one is the defender and the other the attacker, they could be very nice.

The same is for planetary installations like PDBs or asteroid defenses or so. One of the uses could be a scenario where it is necessary to troop assault a central base which is protected by rings of defensive installations.
Planetary installations could have special features like a different SU table (because there is much less space restriction on a planetoid) It could have special equipment like stone or ice armor. It could have caverns with many opportunities to fight trooper vs. trooper.

In a planetary base rule system you could include environmental factors like dense athmosphere or vulcans or underwater which influences the tactic a spaceship has to use to fight against a planetary installation. Many new weapons and equipment is possible like planetary bombs and streamlined hulls.

So a full fledged planetary assault scenario could include:
-setting up a planet or an asteroid (maybe with random environmental tables)
-space superority units (for attacker and defender)
-planetary defense installations for the defender which are worth VPs
-stationary orbital combat platforms (for defender)
-landing units (for attacker)

I think the troop combat resolution of starmadas previous editions was good enough. No need to introduce combat odds.

I guess you dont give this marines-stuff a high importance in Starmada, at the moment (at least compared to the new detailed missile and fighter design) But it would be fine if we could see in the future more about troops in space.  I would love to see boarding and troop action as an attractive optional way instead of weapon fire in order to bring an enemy down. Boarding actions have much tradition in SF operas. 

Technically you are right if we look only at the starmada rules. Bases are ships without engines. But what is with the settings and their athmosphere? Eg. we have many special rules for fighters and missiles and satellites, (and they are excellent) even if not every setting in SF use such gear. So we can maybe say that fighter rules etc. are not really necessary for Starmada (fighters and sats can be probably recreated with small SU hulls or missiles could be made with the standard weapon design rules) but good for recreating the athmosphere of some great movies like SW or BSG. The same is with space bases. They can be titled as "hulls without engines". But does this approach hits exactly the athmosphere of SF operas which have great space bases like B5 or so?

It's not that I don't see marines as important -- just not AS important as some other things.

I would presume some more detailed boarding rules will be developed ... especially if someone wants to do an "Age of Sail"-type setting.

I see your point -- but even in your example, what makes B5 different than a (really big) hull without engines?