Sent in a question to qOS asking about the difference between a name embedded title of Rich and Rich Trader vs a smaller focused custom.
Question
Good day,
I am wondering what the difference in subconscious processing and density would be between a name embedded major combining Rich and Rich Trader vs a focused custom of the 2 cores and 8 modules.
As I understand it with the name embedded option Would have double the supporting scripting and the custom would only have it once.
An additional question regarding name embedded titles with ZP standard vs ZP Quantum build options. Is ZP standard easier to run and process?
Thank you in advance and have a wonderful day!
Answer
Hi,
Thank you for your thoughtful questions — these are great ones that get into the architecture of how our products are built.
Name-Embedded Major (Two Titles Combined) vs. Custom (2 Cores + 8 Modules)
The distinction is a bit different from what you’ve described, so let me clarify how it actually works:
A name-embedded major combining two titles (such as R.I.C.H. + R.I.C.H. Crypto) contains two complete major title scripts merged and name-embedded throughout. This gives you the full breadth of both titles’ programming — broad, comprehensive coverage across every theme each title addresses.
A custom with 2 cores + 8 modules works differently. Cores are intentionally leaner versions of the major title scripts — they carry the foundational programming for that title but without the full supporting scripting of the standalone release. What replaces that breadth is precision: your 8 modules deliver targeted scripting aimed directly at your specific goals.
If your goals align tightly with what both cores already do, the custom is often the stronger choice — because you’re adding exactly the programming you need on top, rather than receiving everything each title covers whether you need it or not.
ZP Standard vs. ZP Quantum
Regarding your question about ZP Standard vs. ZP Quantum build intensity — I want to be transparent with you: our current documentation on build options covers ZP Standard, Terminus (2× density), and Terminus Squared (4× density). I don’t have documentation on a “ZP Quantum” option specifically, so I wouldn’t want to give you an inaccurate comparison.
I’d recommend verifying the available build options directly on the Q Store at the time of ordering, as offerings can be updated. What I can confirm is that ZP Standard is the recommended starting point for most users — it’s the most stable intensity and tends to produce the most consistent integration, especially when running multiple titles in a stack.
If you have any further questions, we’re happy to help!
Best regards,
Support Team