I have to admit though that getting quick with the shank on the FSS seems rather dreadful to me, sorry to say. It's not something I particularly enjoy doing either way.
Beyond it seeming excessively gamey to me, it's the frequency of use when out exploring. I often take extended breaks from it, even finding just jump honking along to be more compelling gameplay, seeing what I can spot in new systems instead.
If getting good or not is desireable or fun for you was not what i refered to. Your statement was that it doesn't require any skill, which i wanted to correct.
On it being interesting and fun: it's better than what i dreaded it to be, but i also see that using it too much means it's quite repetitive. Just like the "honk and jump" was very repetitive for me. I see little difference there. The problem you describe doesn't root in the new mechanic, but in the intention to cover many systems. So if anything, we have to blame it on the size of the game world.
And on it being gamey: yes, it is. A lot. It might be connected to being a game mechanic and this requiring a certain level of accessibility. But didn't the honk even more feel like a game mechanic and nothing else? Of course FD could have made it more complex and thus more interesting in the long run. But it also would've meant that a number of people would've been left behind.
Mind you, we already now also have people here who go like "i won't ever touch the FSS, it's too much work". Despite it being as simply as it is. What would've happened if the new method would've had more complexity? I am rather sure that if it was more complex and thus harder to use, the forum would've been up in arms yet once again, as it already was so often. FD would've given in and overnerfed the thing, to a point where really any possible skill would be eliminated.
So really, i find that once, just once in a long time, FD managed to get to a good spot. It neither iscompletely braindead, nor does it overstretch the capability of too many gamers.
But again: yes, i understand that you consider it repetitive when doing it too much and it cuts into your fun. I also think that some more info (see other postings) displayed would make things easier and more interesting. And yes, i am aware that a lot of good suggestions were already made during the beta. (Although burried below several layers of hate-postings. ) But i also understand that a beta is only about finding bugs and completely broken mechanics in something you want to roll out. You don't have the time to completely rework and add big new features into it any more.
I still hope that somebody at FD takes the time and add some of the things we collected in the other FSS related thread around. There'd be many good things in there, which i'd love to have and i think would improve the experience we have.
What we players can't tell is if they consider it or not, if they have the time and manpower to do it or not. We can only give feedback and hope for the best.
I think you misunderstood skill ceiling, and skill in gaming in general. Skill ceiling would be the maximum impact you can get out of a gameplay mechanic, despite you improving your mechanical skills further, and also where there are alternatives - usually brought up in relation to competitive games. Skill floor would be the minimum amount of skill required to make some impact. Below which skill a player would fail to contribute anything meaningful. (Alternatively, it's often used to mean the amount of minimal contribution a player with next to no skill can still do.)
So it should be easy to see how none of these apply to the FSS. There is no possibility of failure, it's not a competitive activity, and your reward is of course always the same. If you improve your familiarity with the interface, then the only thing that will improve will be the time required to get through a system.
If you take that as a skill, then there are lots of other skills too: Firefox skill, Chrome skill, Frontier forums skill, and so on. Mind you, that's still a valid opinion.
Skill ceiling for you is only if you get mechanically better and the reward is not improving? Interesting definition. Considering that google can only provide me with discussions about this term, without any dictionary being able to provide a proper definition... fine, thank you for correcting me here.
On the possibility for failure: i dare to say there is. I've seen a let's play where somebody needed several minutes to map a rather small system. Wasting that much time by moving the camera around without succeeding very much is failing.