I have been playing for a few months now and one thing has really started to irk me. It is the lack of options for defenders during planetary invasions. Why is it that when you invade a planet you get all these interesting options on how to attack but when you defend you get nothing? This results in pretty lopsided battles where a few million troops can take out a much larger force. I have two thoughts on this.

First would be a whole set of planetary defense options. Just like the attacker you would get to pick one and whatever bonus' it gave. Things like a "Scorched Earth Policy" that would resemble Tidal Destruction in scope but would affect the planet no matter the winner. Or perhaps "Guerilla Warfare" where if you lost it would apply a negative morale percentage bonus to the planet. All the defender options would have their own cost and negative effect even if the invasion were repulsed.

The second way of dealing with the invasion would be to allow the defender the option of selecting abilities that specifically counteract the attacker options. These would negate what the attacker selected making the battle simply a matter of straight troop numbers and inherent soldiering bonus'. However, the defender would be able to select multiple options but they would all have to be paid for in hard currency and/or negative planetary effects. Players would then have the option of spending thousands of bc to cover all attack scenarios or they might try to get lucky and select only one counter in hopes that is the one the attacker selected. This could even be affected by spy penetration. The player (or AI) would have a chance to see what the attacker has selected and pick the appropriate counter.

I think either course would add a little more depth and variance to invasion strategies.