I've still got some wonky worlds in my sector

[Stattick]

My suggestion on the starports is to make any roll of less than 2 be an E rather than an X starport.

X starports should be rare, even using HS unless there are no people.

If there are even just a couple dozen people, there is going to be a bare spot with a search light or a landing beacon, either of which would qualify it as an E starport.

Yeah, after quite a bit of thought about it, I finally just did that. So, no X starports on inhabited worlds, unless I put them there intensionally.

 

[Stattick]

So, I'm just about done w/ the new spreadsheet, written with the corebook and hard science instead of the playtest.

I've got nearly no IC worlds. I'm still not sure if I made a mistake somewhere that I'm just having trouble spotting, or whether the new options dramatically lowered the incidence of IC worlds...

Ok, I'll admit that I haven't read the Trade section yet, so I'm not entirely sure what those trade codes do. But since I'm actually using the Temp rating that Mong added (tacked onto the end of the UWP), it seems to me that I could easily reassign Frozen and Icy worlds with water to IC as well. Also, I'm thinking that a world that's Frozen or Icy (or Hot/Roasting for that matter) would be pretty much useless for Ag. Would I just be creating problems for myself by hacking the trade codes in such a manner, or does it sound reasonable?

 

[AKAramis]

hot may be viable ag worlds if the uniformity of climate is low,

Hot, hydro at 6-8, massive rainforests.
cold, might have abundant sea resources, might have massive summer bloom.

The Frozen and Boiling, unlikely.

FOr hot and cold, redact it unless you have a story reason.