It simply makes no sense. If I can map space myself and thus create my own starlanes I can essentially connect every star to all other stars. This is a) annoying micromanagement and b) it destroys the purpose of starlanes.
Which brings me full circle... I, personally don't like the idea of starlanes in the first place. I think they impose an artifical restriction on the game play.
I'm a point and go type of guy. And seeing the descussion about having an option to turn off starlanes is right up my alley.
As long as speed is no longer affected by not having the starlanes.
However if they, starlanes, are a discovery during a"mapping" a new route it adds to the game in both depth and complexity.
Then by all means, uncheck "Starlanes" in the options menu and play without them.
Two more things we need to know about Starlanes, then I guess this one is ready for public review:
How long are Starlanes? Can they span the entire galaxy or do they connect to the nearest stars first and then the next nearest, and so on.
I think we can make this a configuration option. MOO3 has a similar option where you specify starlane length and the number of them.
Is the number of Starlanes per system completely random, meaning that a system with only one starlane can occur everywhere and not just in the outer rim?
If you can think of any other things we need to know about starlanes, feel free to add them.
I think the answer to this depends on your first question. If we have starlanes only connecting close planets, then one would assume that you'd have only outer rim systems with one starlane. If they're fairly random, then I don't see why we couldn't have "dead end" systems in the core. I personally favor this second idea.
We definitely should limit the maximum length of a starlane, though. I think it would just clutter up the UI if we had starlanes going from one end of the galaxy to the other.