So maybe it could be fun to update Bernards star?

[klopkr]

http://www.astronomy.com/news/2019/...he-new-planet-discovered-around-barnards-star

Giving it a guaranteed planet with a good possibility of being habitable wouldn't be too bad.

 

[exi123]

Mh. This is really interesting! I think this would be more accurate with this exploration now than the actual guaranteed world on sirius right?

 

[BigPony]

Well, to be fair, at the time they had made the game, the planet had not been discovered. And it will def. need to be terraformed to be liveable as Barnards star is 2-3 times the age of SOL and is already losing some of it's energy. It is highly unlikely anything other than microbes could be living there. But eh, for accuracy sake they probably should consider adding something there I guess.

 

[eagletrekkie]

Barnards star is 2-3 times the age of SOL and is already losing some of it's energy.

What? Barnard's star is a red dwarf, it'll live for so much longer than that, the low end of lifespans for red dwarves is in the trillion year range

 

[Evaris]

Well, to be fair, at the time they had made the game, the planet had not been discovered. And it will def. need to be terraformed to be liveable as Barnards star is 2-3 times the age of SOL and is already losing some of it's energy. It is highly unlikely anything other than microbes could be living there. But eh, for accuracy sake they probably should consider adding something there I guess.

I'd note that Barnard's star is a red dwarf, so even if it is 2-3 times the age of Sol, it's expected to stick around for thousands of times longer than Sol. As far as life is concerned, I'd say we'd more likely find microbes and microbe colonies (perhaps even symbiotic colonies similar to man o' wars) than anything else, given that Eukaryotic life has only ever evolved once on earth, while we have seen numerous examples of evolution of everything that comes after, in many different environments, from volcanic vents to the tops of thin-aired mountains. So while it wouldn't be due to the age, I don't think you're wrong on the "only find microbes" part, lol.

As far as in game, it would fit better than Sirius as far as a guaranteed first colony site, seeing as we know nothing about sirius to expect a rocky planet within the habitable zone.

 

[FiddleSticks96]

Hmm...based off the article, I'd say a guaranteed arctic world in the 20-25 size range would be fitting. Either that, or a large frozen world with the terraforming candidate modifier and/or with a special anomaly involving geothermal activity and the life formed around it that granted something like 3 energy and 3 society.

 

[BigPony]

Hmm...based off the article, I'd say a guaranteed arctic world in the 20-25 size range would be fitting. Either that, or a large frozen world with the terraforming candidate modifier and/or with a special anomaly involving geothermal activity and the life formed around it that granted something like 3 energy and 3 society.

Yeah, that would be pretty good tbh.

 

[Spaceception]

The habitable zone around Barnard's star is fairly small. According to solstation.com (A site that has fairly interesting star info), a planet to be habitable would have to orbit 0.034-0.082 AU, having an orbital period of 5.75-21.5 days, give or take a bit based on atmosphere/albedo/etc.
The planet astronomers found orbits ever ~233 days, faaaaar outside the habitable zone. And would need a very dense atmosphere with high greenhouse gas to be warm enough for liquid water. But due to the distance from its star, and the fact it's a Red Dwarf, it'd be a very dark place. If anything, it should be a frozen world with a guaranteed underwater life anomaly. For the devs to add a guaranteed habitable planet, Astronomers actually need to find one first

I would like the habitable planet around Alpha Centauri to orbit Proxima Centauri instead, and for the stars' name to be pre-scripted if possible.

Now, there are more options for guaranteed habitable planets near Sol, and a replacement system for Sirius (Since that doesn't/can't have habitable planets). http://phl.upr.edu/projects/habitable-exoplanets-catalog

Ross 128 b
This planet looks like it was removed from the list - possibly from being too hot. But it's about 35% more massive than Earth, and orbits every ~9.9 days. Could be habitable under certain circumstances, but I'm not sure.

Tau Ceti
This made the rounds back in 2012 for having 5 potential planets, and again a few years ago from being re-examined. At least some of its planets aren't confirmed, and won't be for some time it seems, but this could have a guaranteed starting location near Sol, with two habitable planets. Note: This star is already in the game, as far as I know, it just has a random location.

Luyten b
This planet is confirmed, is potentially habitable, and may be good for life. It's 12 light years away, and a bit less than 3 times the mass of Earth, so it's likely rocky. It orbits every 18.6 days, and seems just a bit warmer than Earth just based on Equilibrium temperature (temperature based on if it has no atmosphere assuming the albedo is same as Earth's)

You could also add Gliese 667 to the spot. It's a trinary system, of two orange dwarfs and a red dwarf. Around the red dwarf - c - lies a nice system with 3 potentially habitable planets. 1 confirmed, 2 unconfirmed due to iffy data. But that doesn't matter for Stellaris, just assume they're actually there

 

[Spaceception]

Speak of the devil. Tau Ceti e IS confirmed, f is no longer potentially habitable, but it does seem to spend a small amount of time in the HZ, perhaps it could be an artic world?

And Ross 128 is too hot.

https://twitter.com/ProfAbelMendez/status/1084888511394861061

 

[BigPony]

Interesting little video I ran across regarding this topic...

 

[Evaris]

Speak of the devil. Tau Ceti e IS confirmed, f is no longer potentially habitable, but it does seem to spend a small amount of time in the HZ, perhaps it could be an artic world?

And Ross 128 is too hot.

https://twitter.com/ProfAbelMendez/status/1084888511394861061

Well, F is no longer potentially a candidate to have likely devloped biosphere signs, but it does spend a third of it's year well within the habitable zone, it is an iron-rich superearth, meaning it likely has a robust magnetosphere.

So, if there is sufficient volcanic activity, I don't see why it couldn't harbor life, but it wouldn't be "earthlike."

E on the other hand, is probably venus-like, unless it has very little in the way of water, in which case if it had a breathable atmosphere, it would be basically Tatooine. With magnesium sand.

They both get a lot of asteroid impacts though, so... eh. I doubt there would be much chance for complex life. (even barring potential great filter issues.) But if they do have life, I see no issues for bacteria, whatsoever. (So if panspermia is a thing, it really comes down to the amount of water or greenhouse gasses on E, and if there's significant volcanism on F.)

 

[Spaceception]

Well, F is no longer potentially a candidate to have likely devloped biosphere signs, but it does spend a third of it's year well within the habitable zone, it is an iron-rich superearth, meaning it likely has a robust magnetosphere.

So, if there is sufficient volcanic activity, I don't see why it couldn't harbor life, but it wouldn't be "earthlike."

E on the other hand, is probably venus-like, unless it has very little in the way of water, in which case if it had a breathable atmosphere, it would be basically Tatooine. With magnesium sand.

They both get a lot of asteroid impacts though, so... eh. I doubt there would be much chance for complex life. (even barring potential great filter issues.) But if they do have life, I see no issues for bacteria, whatsoever. (So if panspermia is a thing, it really comes down to the amount of water or greenhouse gasses on E, and if there's significant volcanism on F.)

Fair points about real-life habitability, but there's no reason not to add them with the assumption that one or both are habitable.
I'm a bit partial to Luyten b and Gliese 667 though.