View Single Post
Old 07-26-2007, 07:35 PM   #34
Captain Joy
 
Captain Joy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Heartland, U.S.A.
Default Re: [Space] System Generator

Quote:
Originally Posted by Agemegos
My spreadsheet is producing output like this PDF file.

If I want to get much more on I'll have to (a) use even tinier type, (b) go to landscape layout, or (c) take a couple of lines per object. Either (b) or (c) would have many systems wrapping over onto the second page.
I caved and went with a landscape layout. I don't see any way around this if you decide to add further info. More of my suggestions follow.

As far as the stellar data goes, nobody says gigayears; use 10^9 years or billion years. Of course, if computer geeks took over and formed a meritocracy, then stay with gigayears. :) Also, "K4 V" is how a stellar class is usually given, as opposed to writing out "K4 main sequence"; but this deviation from the norm is not an egregious as using the prefix "giga".

The mass and class of the companion star did not get printed. Also, the units for the periapsis and apapsis aren't given. Btw, I like the idea of giving periapsis and apapsis as opposed to the semi-major axis and eccentricity for the stellar companions.

The first column(s) should give the planet number and/or name. E.g. 3, Earth or Sol 3.

Consider using things like "N2, O2" or "CO2" instead of "breathable" or "suffocating". I think your planetologist PC will enjoy looking at a Survey report, seeing a more raw from of the data, and coming to the conclusion him/herself that the atmosphere of the 2nd planet is probably breathable.

Unless hydrocarbon oceans are of importance to your campaign, the hydrographics column could be done away with. As I said, most people really only care about surface water, and any planet that has significant surface water will be worth a dedicated planetary recordsheet anyway. For the quick survey list of all the system bodies, the world type, Habitability Index, and colour coding are plenty enough to decide what planets are worth a more detailed look.

I see you didn't include the length of a day or year. People seem to want to know that, but I'm thinking now it's only important if they intend to land on the planet; in which case they'll want the full Planetary Record Sheet for that planet anyway. So now I'm thinking leave it off, especially since you're already including the interesting case of tidelocked on the system overview.

Consider at least adding the RVM to the Habitability Index. Something like HI(RVM) wouldn't take up much for space, and is at least as important as knowing what the liquid hydrocarbon coverage is.

Agemegos, this looks great!
Captain Joy is offline   Reply With Quote