simple question about biomes

having one biome depending on how far the planet is located from it's sun makes sense.

it makes sense ? heu in earth we have different biomes , ocean, forest, desert etc..
so my question is simple :
will there be in starbound planets with multi biomes ? ( like in terraria )

 

There will be mini biomes on each planet, but most of the planet will be one big biome.

 

Probably yes.
We've seen biomes within biomes so I suppose we will see something similar to Terraria.
Weird stuff, I know.
Biomeception.

 

The planet will be one big biome. So all desert, no jungle on a single planet. There will be mini biomes such as a desert planet can have an oasis spawn in it. All planets have some kind of core biome but we don't know the details of this yet.

 

But what we do know is that they're generated by "coordinates", which is similar to seeds in minecraft.

 

I kind of like the idea of one big biome for each planet
I don't know why but it would be cool if there was just a planet that was just one big forest biome
and of course being the malevolent tyrant that I am I will likely build ether a city and expand and consume its resources or I will build a some town which it only purpose is to collect lumber and to dispose of any native tribes who will not agree to supply me with resources

 

Earth is special because of its location in orbit. Its warm in someplaces and cold in others; Mars is an example of what should happen with a planet...so is any other planet in our solar system. I like the single biome mainly because the blending between biomes tends to look gross, biomes just sort of start.

 

Yep! Totally correct!
Earth is in what is called "The Goldilocks Zone", where it is perfect for our temperature, weather conditions, and the development of life(as we know it). This is a very specific region and distance from the star, our sun, that allows for a varied environment that we enjoy to this day. But because of it's rather selective nature, most planets do not have this luxury, and usually only have one 'biome', and sometimes two with a 'light' and 'dark' side, either due to positioning or proximity to the sun.

 

Mars has vast differences in temperature among its' surface. On poles, there are caps of frozen CO2. Near equator, temperature is fine, it could be habitable if it had well-developed magnetic field and atmosphere.

Titan, as it seems now, is a very dry world, but it has both deserts and lakes with rivers. Of course, these deserts may be formed from H2O sand and liquid in these rivers and lakes is CH4, but still, different biomes.

Venus has too thick atmosphere, and this fact dominates over everything else which may be happening over there. In this case, yeah, single (overheated pressure-cooking hell) biome.

Mercury average daytime temperature is about +350 °C, nighttime is about -170 °C. Still, its' surface is very rough, and there may be a water ice on the bottom of the most deep craters in polar latitudes.

Earth is not special, and being placed in the Goldilocks zone has not much to do with biome diversity. Sure, extreme cases like Venus or Pluto (not a planet, just like Titan, but good enough for the purpose of this discussion) can be counted as having just one biome. And yeah, from purely ego- and anthropocentrical standpoint, all known non-Earth planets in Solar system (it's hard to speak about exoplanets) have just one biome, "non-habitable". Yet of course, various parts of most planets are different from each other enough to be counted as different biomes.

Also, for hypothetical ammonia-methane-based lifeform, originated on some world not unlike Titan, Earth is far away from its' preferred "Goldilocks zone". After all, it can't have liquid methane on its' surface, ergo it is too hot to live, probably some kind of stupid overheated desert. On the other hand, another hypothetical (and even less plausible, but still fine) lifeform from Venus-like pressure cooker will dismiss Earth as obviously uninhabitable and uninteresting rock without basically any atmosphere of note.

//

As far as I remember, Chucklefish decided to take planet=biome route because they found it better fitting to their concept of "expendable planets". Personally, this is one of the very few features of the game I do not really like, but meh, terraforming and mods.

 

We can't really compare SB planets system to Earth and real life becoz 99,(9)% of them would have to be some kind of empty deserts with no fauna, flora and any life form

 

Unproven. We can only be partially shure about our Solar systems eight planets. And even this gives uninhabbitable/habbitable planets ratio much higher than 99,(9)%

 

Its been stated that we'll have single biome planets, with some smaller sub-biome areas on the planet.

Not sure if there'll be planets with multiple biomes.

 

They originally had planets with multiple biomes. But decided to switch to single biomes with sub/mini-biomes because the mulit-biome planets started feeling the same and blurred together. By giving planets one main biome each planet is able to feel unique in its own way.