Petition for new Reactor Naming system

why not E1, E2, etc.?

We maybe should add a single letter mark for show the use of Condensators and Reflectors.
With this new system, uranium is no longer the only thing that must be raplaced after all...

i think that using letters in chronologically reverse order to what they symbolize is not very reasonable

Quote from GregoriusT

From the psychologically standpoint i have to say, that a good Class-A-Reactor sounds much better than a good Class-F-Reactor, like Grades in english schools or the european Energy-Efficiency-Standard, where "A+++" is the best and "H" the worst. This naming could reduce the Noobs, who spam bad Designs.

Or Talonius adds a Description on how good or bad, the designed Reactor in the Planner is. Hmm, i should add such Description to my own Planner.

that's why we should use numbers. i don't understand why people would use letters when they want to represent numbers instead of using numbers directly. just look at something like "A+++". it looks to me as if someone once decided A or A+ to be the best. then something better came, which resulted in a problem since there's no letter prior to A. the solution was to add another + and now we are at A+++.... it simply looks that way. grades in school somehow still represent their respective numbers, as A is 1, B is 2, etc. in germany this changes later in highschool where we switch to a 15point system. i just don't like the idea to limit the scalability of the naming system by starting in a dead-end.
i also don't think it does prevent noobs from posting their designs as it doesn't represent any quality of the design itself, it just shows how you use your cells. you can still build an E7 reactor that has double the cooling it actually needs
and i think that E7 sounds definitly better than EA.

I think part 2 should include replacables or consumables.

For example: An Efficiency 7 reactor that requires Neutronium Reflectors to be replaced twice in the cycle, but otherwise runs indefinitely is:

Mk-1 EA NR2

If you are continuously cycling components, you'd need to add a CC to it.

So for my DDoS I'm designing, it might look like this:

Mk-2 EC CC-60kCS

Also, instead of letters, I think it should be numbers, simply because you can hit fractions. For example:

Mk-1 E4.305

instead of Mk-1 EC

If you like, truncate after decimal to make it look like this:

Mk-1 E4

But that's just my opinion.