Based on the small amount of Googling I've done, there really isn't any standard for naval combat irl.
Maps like these don't have unified symbols, and are illustrated in retrospect, but they're an okay start.
NATO does have standard symbols for land warfare.
With these IRL references in mind, let's consider what would be important for an admiral examining a local area in space, strategically, with warcraft moving about.
Maps like these don't have unified symbols, and are illustrated in retrospect, but they're an okay start.
NATO does have standard symbols for land warfare.
With these IRL references in mind, let's consider what would be important for an admiral examining a local area in space, strategically, with warcraft moving about.
- The acceleration and velocity of the warcraft. Where are they heading, and are they accelerating, or slowing down.
- The affiliation of the warcraft.
- The size/classification of the warcraft.
- Simplicity and readability. A tactician should make one glance at a map and quickly understand the players involved and their pieces, and be able to replicate the map quickly. This will come at the sacrifice of details, but since space combat strategy is built strategy, assets are unlikely to change in performance quickly, thus giving strategists and tacticians plenty of time to learn the capabilities of a faction's vessels at a certain size or classification. Considerations should also be made for colorblindness.