One small (but difficult I  understand) request:  I am trying to perform a slingshot / gravity assist to escape from solar system and do a voyager style interstellar mission. I know that I can just put a spacecraft at an appropriate point close to a planet and do it that way  but would it be too much to ask for an orbiter style tool/MFD like trans-x or IMFD that would allow for a calculation of appropriate ejection time window, escape vector and duration of engine burn?

hiding now...

► Show Spoiler

I agree on this point and may give SpaceEngine some gameplay elements. I tried once to slingshot using a black hole to go to another galaxy and slow down with another black hole... it's near impossible only using your eyes

it's near impossible only using your eyes

Even with a computer guidance system that would be exceptionally difficult.

it's near impossible only using your eyes

Even with a computer guidance system that would be exceptionally difficult.

By using a KSP kind of maneuver and aiming for the exact center of a galaxy (automated of course), I think it wouldn't be that hard.

I have seen some people avocating for a thing called 'NoGiants True' which would be scripted into a system and disable the generation of gas and ice giants. Particular around lower mass stars. I would like to see this implimented.

I have seen some people avocating for a thing called 'NoGiants True' which would be scripted into a system and disable the generation of gas and ice giants. Particular around lower mass stars. I would like to see this implimented.

The idea was originally posted in Science And Astronomy Questions, page 9, in case anyone was wondering
But a very nice thing to have indeed!
I think it could solve the thing with many catalog stars not having any planets whatsoever

Canleskis, the video you linked was awesome :)

I have seen some people avocating for a thing called 'NoGiants True' which would be scripted into a system and disable the generation of gas and ice giants. Particular around lower mass stars. I would like to see this implimented.

The idea was originally posted in Science And Astronomy Questions, page 9, in case anyone was wondering
But a very nice thing to have indeed!
I think it could solve the thing with many catalog stars not having any planets whatsoever

Canleskis, the video you linked was awesome :)

It makes no sense to have giant plants around M0 stars and below in my view, as they would have sucked up most, if not all the material when the system formed. Thus not allowing Terrestrial planets to Exist. Perhaps there could be something also called "NoTerrestrial True" which would disable the generation of Terrestrial planets, around stars like 51 Pegasi, where the gas giant planet is very close to the star, and would kick the other planets out of the system by moving inwards.

It makes no sense to have giant plants around M0 stars and below in my view, as they would have sucked up most, if not all the material when the system formed. Thus not allowing Terrestrial planets to Exist. Perhaps there could be something also called "NoTerrestrial True" which would disable the generation of Terrestrial planets, around stats like 51 Pegasi, where the gas giant planet is very close to the star, and would kick the other planets out of the system by moving inwards.

Nice ideas However, i would probably say M0V or below systems not being able to have giants, and hot Jupiters destroying all the other planets in the system is a bit extreme. I would say M3-6V should be lower limit for systems with giants instead of M0V, and hot Jupiters merely severely decrease number or chance of planets, but that is only my personal opinions

It makes no sense to have giant plants around M0 stars and below in my view, as they would have sucked up most, if not all the material when the system formed. Thus not allowing Terrestrial planets to Exist. Perhaps there could be something also called "NoTerrestrial True" which would disable the generation of Terrestrial planets, around stats like 51 Pegasi, where the gas giant planet is very close to the star, and would kick the other planets out of the system by moving inwards.

Nice ideas However, i would probably say M0V or below systems not being able to have giants, and hot Jupiters destroying all the other planets in the system is a bit extreme. I would say M3-6V should be lower limit for systems with giants instead of M0V, and hot Jupiters merely severely decrease number or chance of planets, but that is only my personal opinions

When Hot jupiters move in, they will mess up the orbits of the planets outside of their orbit, but probably not kick them out entirely, if there are planets inside the orbit of the hot jupiter, they will probably get kicked out. 
For example, theres probably a few M systems out there with only 1 single Jupiter sized planet, the fat kid that all the candy, so to speak.

"Human mode" you are only able to move on surface, able to walk literally forever at around 1 m/s, higher than that burns stamina at higher rates for higher velocities, not moving recharges stamina.

Temperatures should differ based of where you are on a planet, not just altitude.

Planets like WASP-12 b actually being eaten by stars.

Also, i have an idea with this "NoGiants true" thing, chance of NoGiants true around MV stars is "(class number x 10) + 10" What this means is that a M2.1V star would have a 31% chance of having no giants, M5.8 a 68% chance of having no giants, and so on.

If i remember correctly, stellar/system metallicity also influences giant planet formations. Maybe NoGiants and/or NoTerrestrials can be tied into that as well?

M-dwarf stars are less likely to produce giant planets, but by observation we know that it does still happen:
A few examples include Gliese 876, HIP 57050, and HIP 79431.

There's not really a problem with the planet formation consuming the available material (even an M9 star is 80 times more massive than Jupiter, and an M0 is 470 times more massive, and there is plenty of material in the surrounding disk.)  It's more about how quickly the planets can form vs. how long the circumstellar disk survives, combined with where the snow line is and how migration plays out.

If there should be some implementation of "noGiants true" then it should work by probabilities like Xoran suggests.  Short-period giant planets should occur around M-dwarfs a few percent of the time, for instance.  Modelling suggests that this should be also be a linear relationship with the mass of the star, but not nearly so steep.  There are a lot of studies we can can call upon to try to get the best information to try to fit with reality. 

If i remember correctly, stellar/system metallicity also influences giant planet formations. Maybe NoGiants and/or NoTerrestrials can be tied into that as well?

Yes indeed, though I don't think SE does anything with metaliicity yet.

M-dwarf stars are less likely to produce giant planets, but by observation we know that it does still happen:

► Show Spoiler

A few examples include Gliese 876, HIP 57050, and HIP 79431.

There's not really a problem with the planet formation consuming the available material (even an M9 star is 80 times more massive than Jupiter, and an M0 is 470 times more massive, and there is plenty of material in the surrounding disk.)  It's more about how quickly the planets can form vs. how long the circumstellar disk survives, combined with where the snow line is and how migration plays out.

If there should be some implementation of "noGiants true" then it should work by probabilities like Xoran suggests.  Short-period giant planets should occur around M-dwarfs a few percent of the time, for instance.  Modelling suggests that this should be also be a linear relationship with the mass of the star, but not nearly so steep.  There are a lot of studies we can can call upon to try to get the best information to try to fit with reality. 

If i remember correctly, stellar/system metallicity also influences giant planet formations. Maybe NoGiants and/or NoTerrestrials can be tied into that as well?

Yes indeed, though I don't think SE does anything with metaliicity yet.

Maybe the percentage for giant planets for m stars should be decreased or something? For stars like Trappist 1, there are no gas giants and we can assume the same for other M stars and other stars out there. Perhaps having a 0.004 percent chance for stars with no giant planets or something could be a thing.

As far as I can see, a "NoGiants true" parameter should do exactly what implies, complete inhibition of gas giants for that system.
The probability of gas giants should be managed according to stellar types by algorithms anyway, if such parameter were tied to probabilities it would be redundant and ultimately of doubtful value.

As far as I can see, a "NoGiants true" parameter should do exactly what implies, complete inhibition of gas giants for that system.
The probability of gas giants should be managed according to stellar types by algorithms anyway, if such parameter were tied to probabilities it would be redundant and ultimately of doubtful value.

Perhaps. I was discussing the Probability of that parameter. Like some M stars would have it and others wouldn't.

It is possible to add ambiental sounds when you are on a planet with atmosphere?  Examples: The sound of the waves, wind, violent wind on Gas giants