eleazar wrote:your SSs have 15 levels, and last time i checked (april) there were 16 levels. IIRC the last level was hardly noticeable, but it was there.
Has this changed? I'll need to be able to unambiguously refer to a different zoom levels for this to make sense.
There's a slight rounding / precision error that makes the last tick before reaching the exact max or min zoom not quite reach, so that if you scroll again in the same driection after coming all the way from the opposite max/min, there's a very slight adjustment to the actual min/max. I don't imagine there's enough difference between levels 15 and 16 (or 1 and 2 if you come from the other direction) for anything you're going to suggest to matter though... So, don't worry about it, and just refer to the 15 levels in that image.
However, in future, we could make the zooming more continuous, perhaps by adding a zoom slider that isn't fixed to discrete points. Internally, the decisions about what to draw on the map will probably be written in terms of the zoom level as a scale factor, not the number of ticks away from (the current) max or minimum zoom level. So whatever levels you want things to appear or not appear at will be translted into a zoom scale factor, and continuous vs. discrete zoom levels shouldn't matter.
Also i can assume that the stars in this example come about as close as they ever will, right?
I think this is a typical galaxy. There are various star placement algorithms, and we might have more in future, but working with that assumption based on this set of images is probably fine.
I know there's a setting for starlane length.
There's a setting for number of starlanes, but not one for their length. There might be a secondary effect in the code where more lanes or fewer lanes tends to produce longer lanes or shorter lanes on average, but it wasn't added intentionally, and isn't mentioned in the UI.