But why should a planet that is basically dead have a larger logistics pool on it? Desert planets at least have a population size that makes sense, and yes while they don't have has much as terran planets and have more logistics structures than them, at least desert planets make an attempt at supporting life by having an atmosphere. A barren planet just sounds like a bigger asteroid, and has the stats to back it up really, except for the ridiculous amount of logistics.

It's like Pittsburgh in the 1930's.

Except that the logistics structures are not "on" the planet per se.  They are in orbit.  Barren planets have lower population caps, which reflects their "barren" status.  Availability of stable orbital options is unrelated to the habitability of a world.

Of course, using the logic stemming from the distinction between orbital and surface structures inherent in this game, gas giants should be claimable/colonizable (perhaps representing the colonization of one of their moons) with a very small population cap, but a huge number of logistics slots in multiple orbits. 

There are 2 general things I can see that would affect orbital structures...

One is the mass of the planet...more massive planets should, in theory, be able to support more structures....this would suggest that gas giants could support the most, dwarf planets could support the least, and all other planets would more or less be the same at some value in the middle...

The other factor is debris...it makes sense that an asteroid in the middle of an asteroid field would field less (or perhaps no) structures because of both its small mass and the amount of debris around it...of course, the reality of asteroid fields is that the asteroids are actually very far apart and collisions are rare, but most people would buy into the debris argument...

This is probably one of the things that it's best not to think about - you're not going to find a reasonable explanation for the abundance of slots, Bacon. What really happened is StarDock couldn't come up with a good and original idea for a planet type that would fit into the game so they went with 'barren' - because hey, why not, and many other games have barren planets as well. And then, to make it different and not-just-a-strictly-worse-type-planet from the other types, they loaded it with log. slots. The end.

Lorewise, it may be annoying. But in terms of mechanics, it's probably fine. Ultimately, the game has far worse problems than this.

I'm ignoring planetary specialization for now since it is so bugged that it's anyone's guess as to what the values are supposed to be...

Let's play some what ifs though with planetary specialization...if social specialization doubles the population but halves trade income, that's only going to help a high population planet with low logistics and high allegiance...basically, your HW or a terran close to it....

If industrial specialization halves the population but doubles the trade income, that's going to basically be better for any planet but a terran HW or one close to it...

Granted, I just kind of made up some numbers (it's different for each planet and bugged), but I'm guessing that unless it's a HW or planet within one jump, you are almost always going to be better with the planet that has the most logistic slots, not necessarily the one with most population....

Planetary specialization could change that, but it would take some extreme values (though they already seem to be extreme)....

Well not entirely. The nice thing about the social upgrades is that you always get a bonus and if you don't have trade ports or shipyards there is not penalty for getting it. Every planet has population, so the industrialization specialization always has a costs to it, and doesn't do anything without trade ports or factories, which requires additional investment while the population bonus is free.

I agree the homeworld terran will be by far the biggest benefactor of social upgrades, but you are going to need to build research labs and things somewhere else as well, and putting these things on an industrialized planet would be a waste. It would make the most sense to concentrate research labs and culture centers on just a few planets and get social on them while you build trade ports and shipyards everywhere else.

It's not really for the culture. Any planet where you won't have tradeports or shipyards should get social if you have the funds for it for the extra population. And even if you're right that argument might require even more planets to have social upgrades as you'd definitely would not want to build a culture center on an industrial planet, and you'd need culture centers on planets more frequently if culture does not spread from industrial worlds well.

after thinking a bit, it seems too much, especially if you consider it doesnt need research to colonize and it is lightly guarded.. it could be like 28 to be unique but not reaching the desert planet values, or make it heavily guarded and make it need a colonization research..

its just a feature, they gave all races 1 population reserch for 1 planet type TEC Ocean, Vasari Ferrous, Advent Barren. Maybe the Advent likes Barren, almost similar to desert worlds, though with hostile atmosphere (or no atmosphere at all..)

the game too.. so many incorrect things..

Agreed, if we need research to colonize Oceanic, which are essentially Terrans with less land space, then why don't we need research to colonize Barrens?