I've come around to geoschmo's way of thinking on the matter. The way it works is really the way the game was designed. It's not a bug like the infinite retrofit, or an oversight like the maintenance issue might be. It'd would be like saying that taking over a homeworld with just a freighter and troops is too easy, so don't do that.
If the developers didn't want surrendering the way it is now, they could have changed more races to surrender at 50x score, like the Amon'Krie and Sergetti. If you don't nip those guys early, you may be sitting over their HW for a while, trying to strangle them to the point of surrender.
I guess I'm pretty much against any changes at this point that don't deal directly with obvious, serious bugs, or ways to maniuplate the scoring system.
Multiple retrofitting, mothballing ships, and bare bones ships can be problems. People who use these techniques can either build ringworlds from start to finish in a cpl of turns, maintain a massive fleet for scoring purposes for no maintenance cost (mothball), or minimal maintenance (bare bones).
Purchasing lower maintenance has trade-offs,(and I think the trade-off hurts you) so it isn't something you have to do to be competitive, even though it doesn't seem like the effect was intended.
Forcing surrender is just another tactic that can work well if you handle it correctly, not an exploit that should be Banned.
Just my opinion, of course.
-Drake
[This message has been edited by Drake (edited 05 February 2001).]