Ruler: undo last step (so you don't need to chain from scratch)


#1


#2


#3

I have thought many times about how helpful this would be. I agree and like your mock-up. Good job with it.


#4

Yeah that would be nice. Probably not too hard.

There are other problems I’ve been noticing (or remembering) about it, namely flakiness with warp ETAs between carriers and stars. It doesn’t always get it right and sometimes the warp ETA is incorrectly just the normal ETA. If I remember that may have to do with how it tries to figure out if a carrier is between two gated stars and display the normal ETA as the warp ETA.

I might take a look at it over the holidays since I contributed the code that makes the ruler chain like it does.


#5

Well, remember if dividing an imperfect time by 3 (for warp gates), the system has to round. So like if it were 7 hours in a normal game, it’d still take 3 hours with a warp gate. Not saying that’s the issue you’ve been having, but it has thrown me off a time or two.

As for carriers already en route, it won’t calculate the warp time until you’ve built the gates and gone to the next tick. You can’t pre-calculate warp time if considering whether to build gates for a carrier already en route, unless you do it in your head. Maybe that could be a built-in feature. For the ruler have: “distance” time (how long to cover the distance measured), “warp time” which ALWAYS assumes you have warp gates, and “total distance” which does a real-time calculation, taking into account how everything is right now. I know that’s the intended use now, but right now it doesn’t work for carriers that jumped without two gates.


#6

GREAT suggestion (and implementation mock-up) by ILIANos
Yea, be great if you could add this feature dakotahawkins.


#7

When I think about it… maybe it would be more consistent if it was the same “minus” icon as for the waypoints:


#8

Thought I’d bump this because it’s still a good idea, and now that Jay is working on NP again it might be an easy feature to slip in.