Petition for new Reactor Naming system

  • Wich will suite the best to specifie Reactor 11

    1. HAYO at 1+2 (3) 27%
    2. New suggestion: pls verify (3) 27%
    3. HAYO at 2 (2) 18%
    4. Adding Name code before or after (1) 9%
    5. NO new Naming (1) 9%
    6. HAYO at 1 (1) 9%
    7. Eff rating with Numbers (0) 0%

    The old naming system is outdated, we need a better more advanced version,
    many reactors with huge diffrences between them are named the same.
    I have already with an advanced eff rating for my reactors,
    2 reactors that are classiefied the same...


    1. Expand the EA-EB-EC-EE so it would match with the Eff 7 Reactors:
    EA=7
    EB=6
    EC=5
    ED=4
    EE=3
    EF=2
    EG=1


    2. and something to define the price or output more precisly?
    like how many chambers are on that reactor
    or how many uranium cells are in it?
    new naming would look like this


    Eff=4
    Chambers:6
    cycles: infinite


    Mk-1-EC-6

    Change the scheme, alter the mood. Electrify the boys and girls if you'd be so kind.


    [b][i][u][url=' [url='http://forum.industrial-craft.net/index.php?page=Thread&threadID=7745']HAYO CORP: Nuclear Power (FREE: Reactor Blueprints)

    The post was edited 4 times, last by skavier470 ().

  • Why not Zoidberg Class A, B, C, D, E, F or G where "Class A" is Eff 7 and "Class G" is the Eff 1.


    And for the Heat we still have the traditional Mark I, II, III, IV or V Annotation (like Alblaka commanded us)

  • 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

    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.

  • 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 :D
    and i think that E7 sounds definitly better than EA.

  • i added a poll


    and i would appreciate an official statement
    considering that alblaka did come up with this in first place

    Change the scheme, alter the mood. Electrify the boys and girls if you'd be so kind.


    [b][i][u][url=' [url='http://forum.industrial-craft.net/index.php?page=Thread&threadID=7745']HAYO CORP: Nuclear Power (FREE: Reactor Blueprints)

  • 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.

  • yea i like the idea of adding things like CC or NR to it,
    but it should be categorized as different types
    Like CRCS for Cooling with Coolingcells
    another HAYOish name for LSH-Condenserreactors
    And of course the normal ones like
    CASUC
    Normal
    it would be like
    CRCS Mk-1-E5.56
    or
    Mk-1-E5.56-CRCS

    Change the scheme, alter the mood. Electrify the boys and girls if you'd be so kind.


    [b][i][u][url=' [url='http://forum.industrial-craft.net/index.php?page=Thread&threadID=7745']HAYO CORP: Nuclear Power (FREE: Reactor Blueprints)