How about giving the DSP devices their corresponding # in the chain, so you don’t have to count where it is, when you want to automate it in the effect column? Would save a LOT, and I mean a LOT of time 
YES!
The counting takes a lot of time indeed!
+#
I take the chance to relaunch the idea of adding the ability to rename DSP’s in order to easily distinguish what “Delay (5)” and “Delay (6)” do in a DSP chain 
^ YES!!
yes sir 
+1 to BotB’s device numbering idea, which would come in very handy indeed.
And +1 to this as well, which I actually tried to do without even realising it a few days ago, by simply double clicking on a device name and expecting it to magically change to a text input, and then going "…huh? 
"
1
1
+1
+1
And an internal synth, something like Sampletank2 would be nice.
That would be simply awesome because sometimes you use fx for something else then it is made for and renaming it would make it a lot more transparant!
+1 again!
bmup
9000
+1
and +1 for dry/wet control from the mixer level
Sounds good to me
+1
+1 and +1
doesn’t it show the relative corresponding pattern effect numbers in the very bottom left? I use them tremendously.
or is this about something completely different?
*ah okay I see, I do a large amount of on & off in the effect columns. So I always just get the number from hitting that IO switch.