Remove the 'fuel systems' dependency for the crossfeed toggle on radial decouplers

[swjr-swis]

Please revert the change from 1.2 to radial decouplers (TT-38K, TT-70, Hydraulic Detachment Manifold) that prevents the 'toggle crossfeed' from showing/working on radial decouplers until one has researched the Fuel Systems node.

 

I actually thought this was a bug because it used to work before, and all other decouplers/separators/docking ports have the 'toggle crossfeed' option at all times, including the TR18-A stack decoupler which is available even before the TT-38K.

Only after searching the forum I discovered this was introduced on purpose during the 1.2 update - the rationale we got for adding this weird exception was as follows:

On 8/25/2016 at 8:43 PM, SQUAD said:

in order keep fuel lines relevant radial decouplers can now not toggle their crossfeed until the Fuel Systems node is unlocked

I do not understand why adding this strange exception was considered necessary in the first place: fuel lines have their own use cases that do not depend on decouplers being able to crossfeed or not (for example, 'proper' asparagus staging requires the one-way fuel lines if you want radial stack engines to cut off when they've expended their 'own' fuel, instead of continuing to feed off the other stacks due to crossfeed across decouplers being bidirectional).

But disregarding any possible explanation that I can't think of, the way it's implemented now it completely fails to achieve the intended goal, since the FTX-2 fuel ducts whose 'relevancy' is supposed to be protected by this exception are not unlocked until that exact same R&D node!

In other words: the fuel lines do not even become available at all to be or stay 'relevant' in any way... until the exact moment when the 'toggle crossfeed' option on radial decouplers is unlocked; which according to the logic used to introduce this change, makes them immediately 'irrelevant' as soon as they are available.

 

So, hereby a heartfelt plea to please undo this weird exception that obviously does not actually do what it was intended to do (while adding limitations to the possible uses of the early radial decouplers).

Alternatively, if reverting this change is absolutely out of the question... at least move the FTX-2 fuel ducts to a much earlier node (I suggest the same node as the radial decouplers, since them not allowing crossfeed yet would be the main use case for the ducts), so they actually have a chance at 'being relevant' during some time until the radial decouplers are deemed worthy of 'toggle crossfeed'.

[MR L A]

Respectfully disagree.

It's just one part that gets a part upgrade with the fuel node. Before the upgrade it can only attach and then jettison things. After the upgrade, fuel can be transferred through it too. That seems like a pretty logical and linear progression to me.

I'd ignore any reasoning tied to the fuel line, it only confuses things unnecessarily and both parts/functions remain separate and relevant anyway. For example, once the fuel node has been unlocked, the decoupler allows fuel to be shared (or not) between tanks and subsequently jettisoned when empty. The fuel line allows the flow of fuel in one direction rather than both.

perhaps it would be useful to think of the decoupler as a bi-directional fuel line?     

[swjr-swis]

48 minutes ago, MR L A said:

I'd ignore any reasoning tied to the fuel line, it only confuses things unnecessarily and both parts/functions remain separate and relevant anyway.

It cannot be ignored, since the dependency, which was not there before, was introduced explicitly and solely because of the fuel lines - see the dev notes quote. With the fuel lines being unavailable until the very moment the dependency is 'lifted', the change completely misses its intended purpose.

[MR L A]

4 hours ago, swjr-swis said:

It cannot be ignored, since the dependency, which was not there before, was introduced explicitly and solely because of the fuel lines - see the dev notes quote. With the fuel lines being unavailable until the very moment the dependency is 'lifted', the change completely misses its intended purpose.

It can be ignored and should. I'm telling you to ignore what the dev notes said and look at it logically. One part has a progression that allows it to transfer fuel bidirectionally. Another part becomes available that forces one way fuel transfer.

They aren't really related to each other in any meaningful way beyond that.