Orango

Any time, @TheBirdy. If you need some help with determining some planet parameters, I'll be happy to and try my best.

@Tallisar Oh wow, um, thanks for that advice.

I'd just go with picking a mass near the desired spectral type, @TheBirdy. Gravity is not really a necessity when it comes to building stars, which is why focusing on mass is better, as you can then determine the gravity (optional)). About selecting the mass for your star, there is a little bit of wiggle room. An example is Toliman or Alpha Centauri B, a K1V star. Spectral type K1V stars typically have a solar mass of 0.860 M, and an effective temperature of 5170 K. However, the actual mass for Toliman is 0.909 M, and the effective temperature is 5260 K. This is more consistent with a K0V/G9V. So, there is a little wiggle-room with the values listed. The effective temperature should stay fairly close to the desired spectral type (or table if you're choosing), but its mass can vary two to three rows up or down. Or, you can simply use the values listed on the tables--it doesn't really matter. I'm just saying: if you want to vary them for the sake of customization, you can. Just don't get too carried away. Do check this Wikipedia page for determining spectral types.

@Tallisar Does surface gravity determine mass? If so i'l definitely use your feedback to hopefully make more realistic stars in the future.

This star, for what it is, is somewhat realistic. The radius is within the range of a K0V star; however, the reported temperature (in my opinion) is too high for a K0V star and is instead akin to a G2V spectral type. Moreover, the reported mass is substantially low for a K0V. This mass is closer to the spectral type M1V rather than K0V. Furthermore, the luminosity is higher than that of a typical K0V and is comparable to that of a spectral type G8V, though this may be fine.

New talent...always a beautiful sight! If you need help with anything don't be afraid to reach out to me! I will eeply when I can

it looks like sun