Attributes the Drake equation misses....<br>a) is the planet tidally locked <br>b) how active is the star (red dwarf stars throw off lots of radiation)<br>c) exo-moons<br>d) position within host galaxy (you wouldn’t want to be near center if active),(reply>), @Marcus Cicero I agree with you that those are all important factors to consider, and simply including all planets within the 'Goldilocks zone' is likely to lead to overly optimistic estimates.  I might add too the presence of a strong magnetosphere and, possibly, active plate tectonics as being important to wether or not a planet will likely remain hospitable long enough for more complex life to evolve.,(reply>), @Andrew Murphy Ok maybe "misses" is a strong word but those above factors would help to refine the equation,(reply>), Are those not simply implicit factors in the estimation of <i>ne</i> (the average number of planets that can support life)?,(reply>), Yes that would make it difficult for a new intelligent species to form on such planet but not for intelligent life to go and live there,(reply>), Yes, these all modify the habitability factor, but maybe not in the way we think at first.  For instance, even a tidally locked water world could have a habitable ring at the day/nigh boundary that could be quite inviting to an intelligent squid being, and living beneath the water would even protect against red dwarf radiation to some extent.  It doesn't sound that exciting to humans though and our ability to communicate with intelligent marine species is astonishingly low,