Unconventional Stellar Classification

[robject]

I'm wondering what it would be like if stars in Traveller were classified more like starports -- i.e. player-centric.

How can I classify stars in a way that's Traveller-centric? In other words, a classification based on how much the star is like Sol? And what does THAT mean?

I think it means there are three variables: (1) the habitable zone's orbital track, (2) the Travel Time, in G-days perhaps, to the 100D stellar limit, and (3) the star's outer radius.

 

[EDG]

"Player-centric" classification is bad enough for atmospheres, and it won't work for stars. People know that M stars are red, G stars are yellow, and A stars are white. Getting them to learn a new system based on some obtuse traveller player scheme classification scheme isn't going to be beneficial.

Don't try to fix what isn't broken.

 

[robject]

Far too confusing would be a system that uses the stellar classes but changes their meaning. Convenient but FAR TOO CONFUSING.

Here's what I'm thinking of.

M-class (red) stars imply orbit 1 is the habitable zone.
K-class (orange) stars imply orbit 2 is the habitable zone.
G-class (yellow) stars imply orbit 3 is the habitable zone.
F-class (white-yellow) stars imply orbit 4 is the habitable zone.

That of course is for main sequence stars.

Type IV stars add 2 to the habitable zone orbit.
Type III stars add 3.
Type II stars add 4.
Type I stars add 5.
There are also stellar radius issues to consider.

Horrible, isn't it? It completely mangles the meanings of this nomenclature. The benefit is that the notation is understandable without a table.