Janus 4 (the Horta planet) seemed lifeless on the surface and required generators to provide air beneath. Right?
To take one of the most iconic shots in Trek lore and nitpick?--I just don't get it.
Human colonies and planets with similar humanoids would require a sun and breathable air, similar gravity, etc.
I want story not dry exposition for my 50 minutes of entertainment. It's not Forbidden Planet where they have 100 minutes for McCoy to say "wow, look at that purple sky, and that warm sun and that nice clean air." Although he does, sort of, in paradise syndrome.
As the OP here I think I am being picked up wrongly on this, I`m not nit picking iconic Trek imagery or demanding meaningless and meandering dialogue to explain why theres a certain type of foliage on a certain planet.
I was merely stating that it would have been more challenging for a crew or landing party to encounter a different type of world, one which demanded life support suits or whatever, to give any story another dimension. By using the word "convenient" I was merely saying that its always a sunny terrain, always warm, no need for a jacket eg.
Surely even other Class M worlds would not all be so hospitable weatherwise ?
As for information being given on planets and their Sun which they orbit, I have always believed that info to be in the dialogue.
Surely eg, Eminiar 7 is the seventh planet orbiting the sun Eminiar. surely Talos 4 is the fourth planet in orbit of Talos in the same way as Earth could conceivably be Sol 3 ?