Make anomalies and data vaults persistent on the map

[Falcrack]

Would be really nice if, after discoering these things, they stick around on the map even outside of radar range. Because they don't move after all, just like stations. And no, please do not suggest dropping nav beacons or satellites!

[Techedge]

THIS is so obvious that I've never thought of it...

Is there a reason why they are actually not persistent? Am I missing something?

[gorgofdoom]

And no, please do not suggest dropping nav beacons or satellites!

At risk of sounding like an impetulant child.... Why? Isn't that the purpose of those devices?

[Falcrack]

And no, please do not suggest dropping nav beacons or satellites!

At risk of sounding like an impetulant child.... Why? Isn't that the purpose of those devices?

At the risk of sounding like an impetulant child... What is the purpose of a nav computer that can store positions of static objects in space?

[dtpsprt]

And no, please do not suggest dropping nav beacons or satellites!

At risk of sounding like an impetulant child.... Why? Isn't that the purpose of those devices?

Being (once upon a time) an impetulant child I may say that while it is OK to drop a beacon near a Data Vault, it is absolutely useless to do so in the case of an anomaly (more important than a Data Vault) since it will push the beacon away making it obsolete very soon.

[Falcrack]

The reason why I dislike the dropping of nav beacons next to data vaults is that frequently, I either do not notice a data vault when I fly by it, or do not notice it when one of my NPC piloted ships flys by it. When out of radar range, there is nothing to indicate that it was there in the first place, but now the fog is uncovered in that area, so I do not know to look there.

[LameFox]

And no, please do not suggest dropping nav beacons or satellites!

At risk of sounding like an impetulant child.... Why? Isn't that the purpose of those devices?

Being (once upon a time) an impetulant child I may say that while it is OK to drop a beacon near a Data Vault, it is absolutely useless to do so in the case of an anomaly (more important than a Data Vault) since it will push the beacon away making it obsolete very soon.

You can drop them nearby, that push is pretty short-ranged. Though once pushed, beacons sometimes just float off, so you should be outside the range before you drop it.

It does feel pretty pointless using nav beacons for anomalies and data vaults, though. Initially I thought it made sense, when I was discovering them for the first time. To find some weird thing and mark it with a beacon felt like an intuitive way to explore. Later I realized they always appear in the same location, and do not move. So in each subsequent game it just feels like tedium—not exploration—to place beacons near them. Mostly I do not even bother, and ignore them altogether instead.

Beacons do feel a bit purposeless, but marking a set of things that are always there seems like a poor use to give them. Exploration just doesn't have a lot of content in general, so there's not much to mark, and they serve no actual navigation purpose either as far as I can tell.

[gorgofdoom]

And no, please do not suggest dropping nav beacons or satellites!

At risk of sounding like an impetulant child.... Why? Isn't that the purpose of those devices?

Being (once upon a time) an impetulant child I may say that while it is OK to drop a beacon near a Data Vault, it is absolutely useless to do so in the case of an anomaly (more important than a Data Vault) since it will push the beacon away making it obsolete very soon.

I deal with it by placing the beacon about a km away and scanning on approach. But I agree: anomalies really should be represented on the map. What makes them any different than any other point of interest?