I once jumped into a system and spent ten minutes flying around trying to work out why the station appeared to be always behind the star. Then discovered I'd forgotten to reset the destination!! (Newbie mistake!).
Since then I've noticed that the station never appears to be behind the star or a planet, I've always had a straight run from my jump-in point. Even when the station appears to be in an orbitally complex group of planets.
So what are the odds of that? I know space is big(!) but surely we should occasionally have to manoeuvre round other bodies.
The same seems to apply on jumping out of a system. I once had a message something like "Destination masked" and the Frameshift was aborted, but when I repeated the jump it worked straight away.
Perhaps this has been done to make navigation easier and will be changed later? Should we be looking for greater realism? Navigating past astronomical hazards would certainly make the otherwise tedious station approach more interesting and introduce an element of uncertainty into mission time limits!
Since then I've noticed that the station never appears to be behind the star or a planet, I've always had a straight run from my jump-in point. Even when the station appears to be in an orbitally complex group of planets.
So what are the odds of that? I know space is big(!) but surely we should occasionally have to manoeuvre round other bodies.
The same seems to apply on jumping out of a system. I once had a message something like "Destination masked" and the Frameshift was aborted, but when I repeated the jump it worked straight away.
Perhaps this has been done to make navigation easier and will be changed later? Should we be looking for greater realism? Navigating past astronomical hazards would certainly make the otherwise tedious station approach more interesting and introduce an element of uncertainty into mission time limits!