Unlike others I think I get what you're saying and it's not ridiculous it's just that I disagree about what would be best for the game and think that the "tightness of the screws" that we currently have is a good balance between some semblance of realism and an interesting degree of variety in our planets (given the current capabilities of the terrain generation algorithm).No.
So far the best Results came from the RNG being out of Control.
The more Screws and Limits you Add.
The more Equalized the Results are.
Because the more Strict the Range is on which the RNG can Add Features. The less Features there are and the less these Features Differ from each other.
So the more Screws are in Place. The more every Planet will look exactly the same.
Just to lay my credentials on the table here, I have over 25 million metres (i.e. over 25,000 km or 15,000 miles) in the SRV. I've completely circumnavigated 2 different moons (Pleione 3A and Chi Herculis/Kumay), written articles in Sagittarius Eye magazine on the subject of both Planetary Circumnavigation and advanced SRV driving techniques, established the Pomeche Ridge Challenge (perhaps Elite's foremost standing SRV time trial event) and am widely known as a massive fan of both planetary terrain and SRV driving. That's not to say my opinion is any more valid than anyone elses, just that it's based on a LOT of experience.
I think perhaps the easiest way to illustrate what I mean is by showing a selection of screenshots of some of the terrain I've seen.
(ignore the pointing finger - that was to illustrate something else in the original use of that image)
Oh, and I think the mountains we have are plenty extreme enough!
All that "loosening the screws" (as you put it) would achieve is to make those variations more extreme (pushing some generated surfaces outside the realms of believability), we wouldn't get new types of variation.