I made this reactor design interested in feedback.
It has 19 eff, 950eu/t and uses 10 mox/run.
Not the highest power possible and very close to, but not quite, the most efficient (without reflectors) but its a decent balance of both for people running a 6 chamber reactor.
Let me know what you think
I like it. Looks like you're riding the absolute threshold of how much heat can be moved away from a tightly clustered cell configuration. I'll add this to the list once I get back home and can access my price calculation spreadsheet.
Its my best project of reactor. It makes 360 EU/t and do not blow up
I named it "R17M4"
Well, if nothing else, this is an acceptable design for producing a lot of plutonium really fast, at the cost of grossly wasting all your uranium. I suppose if you play PvP and need the biggest nuke the fastest possible way...
However, for uranium designs you probably want the other thread. This one is not about uranium reactors. And no, your design will not work with MOX.
This project allows you to leave the reactor running without having to worry that you will have a hole in the ground. In addition, the EU produces 72,000,000 in the process. The other projects did not exceed 50,000,000.
The heat makes a difference only if you are using Quad Fuel.
I know it's inefficient if you all time take care of it, but if you wish leave reactor alone, you need save project.
If you need big effi and need save try this:
...and neither will this. It's just bad, regardless of which fuel type you use.
I'll give you the same advice I repeat to everyone new to reactors: Try your design out in a legit survival world first, for at least one full cycle, and monitor closely how it behaves (ideally with a remote sensor kit). You will quickly notice severe issues that the reactor planner will never show you. That's why I can instantly spot any "theory only" design I come across - it takes more than just making some reactor planner numbers look fancy to make a practical design