I get the feeling this new skill map (it is no tree) was designed backwards, that is to say starting by how it should look at the end, five pairs of picks in each aptitude field, for a total of ten that should feel like a "significant" choice.
The end result is that some skills are more significant than others, some picks make some sense together, sorta
But in the end this isn't even a skill tree, this is are perks
Skills would be how good you are doing X or Y, be it how good you are with kinetics or with beams, or how good you are as a helmsman, maybe modified by ship classes, how good a destroyer skipper you are, or a carrier driver or whatever.
in the end the "skill tree" doesn't do that, it offers me some perks (at the expense of others) and sometimes it offers me perks I don't care about (say Leadership 2) or puts perks I want waay up the end of the tree (leadership, Combat)
Think about the choices as well, Combat one: better helmsman (move faster, more agile) or a carrier skill (mind, the helmsman skill is also useful to carriers)
What about industry 1? more cargo, fuel and personnel, or a better salvage experience? mind a scavenger would like both.
Iindustry 5? more colonies or a slightly better colony? (I'd get if it were a tall versus wide, but it isn't at this moment) it also still isn't a skill
The only real picks that make sense to me in the tree are combat 3 and 4
AND then you have the issue that the perks have limits that water them down as the game goes on. so early perks become less interesting and useful as you progress thru the game (it should be the other way around, new perks should be special and interesting, desired, not important because the old ones are now a watered down variant of themselves)
Finally we have the immersion breaking perk, derelict contingent, but I've mentioned it a lot (I think I am going to make it my Carthago delenda est, or rather it is quickly becoming my thing)