I guess he means 'even if there was a planet path, it wouldn't be a problem because the ship would automatically land after intersecting with the exclusion zone' but you are right. There was never a problem in that regard so DS kinda solved a non existing problem.
Though you can get very close (see video below), a ship can never get close enough to a planetary sphere to collide with it, because it will be forced into the planet via it's simulated gravitational pull. That's
one way to solve the "problem" of some fool parked in the path of a moving planet.
In game dev, you don't waste time implementing useless stuff, unless it's integral to the game, or you're busy wasting someone else's money - and your time. That's why all games in a genre do things differently. If ED chooses to do planetary paths, it's because of its attention to detail in terms of simulating stellar bodies. It's that kind of game. My games are not. Star Citizen doesn't know what it wants to be; so it's highly unlikely that it will have rotating planets, let alone ones that orbit a star along a path. Unless croberts decides that it's good for fidelity - which it isn't. It's just more work, for very little gain. e.g. As in Star Citizen the planetary bodies in LoD are fixed, due to them being hand crafted into the scene. And in LoD the ship
gets destroyed if you breach the atmosphere. You can only get down there using a jump gate.
Awhile back, I
made a video illustrating the scope of a single region in UCCE. The start of the video shows a planet rotating. Around the 8:25 mark shows the planetary mesh body in the scene.
