Thank you, more blocks used to more your reactor then nessicary is wasted space that could be used for other systems.
Space isn't a bottleneck in systems 2.0. There's more than enough of it without needing to make any effort.
I'm talking about using less blocks total. Add a small number of stabiliser blocks to save a large number of hull blocks.
Thats not an issue with 100% efficiency, that is an issue with the base design of 2.0 and how it creates a forced design of empty space between reactor parts.
Forced empty space between reactor and stabilisers?
You've spent your last half a dozen posts alternating between criticising me for showing a mechanic that can reduce that space (if someone so desires) and singing the praises of empty space (which I don't disagree with).
You have failed to see the entire point of why your building method is flawed, your suggestion that you should be adding more blocks then nessicary is wasted space and reduces efficiency.
Efficiency of what?
I'm pointing out the potential benefits of low stabiliser efficiency, nothing else. I'm advocating using fewer total blocks than you are.
Your design of adding unessicary reactor component blocks is wasted space that could be used for other systems.
Please make up your mind: will there be forced empty space in systems 2.0 designs or not?
It creates more power but at the cost of filling up your space with unessicary reactor blocks that takes away space for systems that use that power and thus ruins the entire point of creating that extra power in the first place.
Wrong.
If the lightest stabiliser efficiency ("LSE" - I can't be bothered typing that out in the future) for your ship is 15% but you need to use at least 25% SE to fit all your systems, then the solution to this "problem" is obvious to anyone: you use 25% SE.
Your power/mass ratio hasn't gained as much as it would at 15%, but it's still better than at 100%, and you fit all your systems.
Enough space for systems is a non-issue - anyone can achieve it in systems 2.0 without even trying.
[doublepost=1512272653,1512272251][/doublepost]
For the same volume (since this seems to be the variable that is being discussed) is it better to have a smaller reactor that takes up less volume to use that space for systems, or is better to use that available volume to make a more powerful but less volume efficient reactor?
How important is volume within a ship?
It's important obviously, but there's really no issue with it within the context of reducing stabiliser efficiency.
Internal space is very, very abundant in systems 2.0
Even if you have a design with an extremely low LSE that might actually be capable of causing space issues (say 10% LSE) avoiding the issue is trivial and obvious - just use a slightly higher SE that gives you enough internal space, instead of the LSE. No space issues, and your power/mass ratio still benefits from lowering your SE.