|
Post by subunit on Mar 14, 2017 14:50:16 GMT
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Mar 14, 2017 15:00:19 GMT
Microsoft Megacorp, ruling the planets with electronics since J1975
|
|
|
Post by thorneel on Mar 14, 2017 18:29:41 GMT
Microsoft Megacorp, ruining the planets with electronics since J1975 ftfy Everyone knows that windows on spaceships only exist on XXe century tech space taxis and soft-SF space boats anyway.
|
|
|
Post by subunit on Mar 14, 2017 20:36:45 GMT
To return to the topic, I'm starting to feel like the intercept plotting system and engagement range/combat instancing system would work better if they were separate. Maneuvering and targeting are conceptually different, and they could easily be represented separately- render an "engagement envelope" bubble around each fleet (ideally adjustable in-mission for player fleets) and just plot the trajectories as normal, with the intercept info popping up when one fleet's trajectory will take it through the engagement envelope of another. This would have the benefit of allowing you to see how your fleet's trajectory will carry you through the enemy's engagment envelope as well, which would be useful for flyby-type attacks. If you could pre-plot burns *within* the engagement envelope that would carry over to the combat instance (maybe with a special associated order you need to give to the fleet to stay on the pre-plotted track), that would give the amazing burn tools we have direct tactical utility as well.
|
|