Personally I think it would make it more troublesome considering the speeds that the ships travel at.
It does indeed operate very much as the system/galaxy map. Most likely attributed to the budget assigned to its development and in turn restricting its technical application. I will try harder to make up something in my mind to validate its being this way.
From the exploration reveal:
No, you are putting words which I hadn't said in my mouth again. I was talking about interfaces, not games. Your "examples" used gameplay - pretty much any game's tutorials these days explain the gameplay mechanics, because the interfaces are self-explanatory.
Another thing you'd learn if you read up on it: it's not the user mis-using your interface, or using it bad.
Let's see. I've had detailed suggestions before, so I'll just sum them up in a nutshell now.
As I said, active gameplay there as well. Have the current system in as the safe alternative, and have another one where you actually have to fly your ship to your destination, with an option of failure as well. Think canyon racing, just in witch-space. The farther you wish to jump, the more difficult the generated course. If you "destroyed your ship", then you'd drop out somewhere else, with damage to your ship too.
Thanks for correcting yourself. Nothing there says it's been done explicitly for mapping stuff in the bubble. I
Not putting words in your mouth. Its just that is what it looked like you meant. My apologies. Why is it dumb because it needs explaining? Reasons please.
If you say so.
None. But the FSS didn't need one either. They just added it for people that wanted that help, none of us need to use the tutorial. Personally I find it a reasonably simple and intuitive system to use.
True - do enough of the Passenger missions and you can get Elite in exploration pretty quickly. It is a bit late now, but perhaps FD should have used a different metric for Exploration other than monetary compensation from exploration categorised activities - they could have based it on the actual numbers and types of scans for example.
That's primarily a matter of opinion. I, for one, don't think the base mechanics are poorly thought out. If they were genuinely poorly thought out, I wouldn't be able to quickly find the interesting orbital heirarchies, planetary alignments and other phenomenon I'm most interested in.
And for many players, once you'd honked, there was nothing left to explore, because the ADS had done interesting parts of exploration for you.
Personally I would remove the auto find in the bubble from the game. Either buy it, use the Nav Beacon or use the FSS. But it was added as a compromise for explorers that wanted to know if a system has been already discovered before moving on.
With a little practice, I've done while hurtling at multiples of c past gas giants... although I can usually only resolve one body before reaching the "auto resolve" range, and I have to plan my approach at that. Keeping the throttle in the blue while approaching part of a system I find particularly interesting while resolving distant icy bodies wouldn't be that challenging IMO. Doing the same while simultaneously flying my ship would be ideal. After all, flyving my SRV while operating the turret demonstrates that it can be done. I'd just like to do it.
"You'll be able to add a first mapped across any planet within the galaxy, including within the bubble. Giving all players that have joined the game since it's launch even more opportunity to make their mark on the galaxy." Emphasis mine.
Again putting words in my mouth. I said it's bad, not dumb. "Dumb" is a word that you use, not me.
The honk in itself is not exploration - there is more too it than that.
![[Diplomacy] Carnegie](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/123/123809.jpg?1553527149){kind=avatar}
