quote:
Originally posted by Cyrien:
Actually mines are easy to explain if you look at it just a little differently.
They are not limited to the ecliptic either. Further a single mine unit is in fact a large group of mines not just one mine. Thus you have a largish wall of mines. And since most mines are put around one of the following...
A) A warp point
B) A planet
C) A star
Following explanation
mines suround the sector in a large globe, each mine unit being one globe of mines. Once one mine is activated the rest have simple computer seeking algorithms with one time use propulsion that allow them to target the offending ship and impact on it.
Simple easy explanation. 
To be a globe of mines would require constant thrust to keep the globe intact. If they had several different orbital planes, they would quickly disperse and be ineffective. If they are constantly thrusting, they should not be hard to detect and should require one engine component to keep them in place and a component to collect supplies keep moving (hyrdogen partical collecter).
The other alternative, is only allow them at planets, astroids, and star squares. I'd claim that warp points are not gravity sinks and cannot receive mine fields. That would make the game less defensive.
I'm inclined to turn off Mine technology in games anyway.
Re: Rationale for 2D world in which planets don\'t move
Threaded Mode