Turbo transport belt researcg VS Logistics 4

[MianenCZ]

I found inconsistency in the naming convention for belt research. It started with Logistics 1-3 and then suddenly dropped to just "Turbo Transport belt."
The expected value is "Logistics 4".

It's as simple as that.

[Vippopper]

same goes for the description for them too

[Koub]

[Koub] Merged two suggestions with diametrically opposite solutions to the same issue.
Now fight

[valneq]

Honestly, I think the suggestions are legitimate, in a way. The observation is that the status quo feels inconsistent. Either have all the technologies that have (nearly) identical icons have (nearly) identical names and descriptions, or make them distinct enough to justify it being called differently or being described differently.

I could see this going either way, as long as the final state is consistent. Either

• Keep Turbo-Transport Belt as a name and rename Logistics 2 and 3 (and descriptions)
• Rename Turbo-Transport Belt into Logistics 4 because it already has the same icon as the others..

Until we reach that point, this suggestion (or a variation of it) will come up repeatedly.

[Wiwiweb]

A small thing in favour of "Logistics N" is that it displays a little digit that shows which belt tier this is, which I find satisfying.

image.png (24.28 KiB) Viewed 297 times

[Stargateur]

name make thing better, I think the research should have been logistic, fast logistic, express logistic, turbo logistic. That feel so much better than 1,2,3,4 boring number.