Please remesh the splitters next

[Xyphos]

you know the bi, tri and quad splitters? IMHO, they could use a remesh with a selector;

the bi doesn't change but the tri and quad could be made into inline forms;

old 1.25m -> 1.25m tri | new 1.25m -> 1.25 tri (inline)
   o                   |  ooo
 o   o                 |

old 2.5m -> 1.25m quad | new 2.5m->1.25m quad (inline)
 o  o                  |  oooo
 o  o                  |

 

Edited September 10, 2020 by Xyphos

[AlamoVampire]

@Xyphos I like this idea! Im not sure Im reading you right so forgive if I misunderstand, but I like the idea of having a choice between old style and inline. If I read you right it seems you are suggesting just a flat change? If we have both styles that would open so many options for stations, engine layouts and so on. Perhaps KSP2 will feature such a choice?

181409102020

[Xyphos]

@AlamoVampire aye, that's the idea, but on specific splitters

Edited September 10, 2020 by Xyphos

[HebaruSan]

How would symmetry work for parts attached below?

[Xyphos]

4 minutes ago, HebaruSan said:

How would symmetry work for parts attached below?

I guess in mirror mode, I haven't had much luck with symmetry on these particular parts anyway.

[HebaruSan]

4 minutes ago, Xyphos said:

I guess in mirror mode, I haven't had much luck with symmetry on these particular parts anyway.

So it would no longer be possible to switch to radial symmetry?

[Xyphos]

15 minutes ago, HebaruSan said:

So it would no longer be possible to switch to radial symmetry?

I know what you speak of, but I'm not responsible for that ANNOYING behavior. I'm only suggesting inline splitters here.

I suppose the devs would have to figure out a work-around, or just disable symmetry on it like the HubMax, which is also technically a "splitter"

Edited September 11, 2020 by Xyphos

[Geonovast]

Moved to suggestions.

[jimmymcgoochie]

I don’t see the point in having inline splitters like that- the part would end up being too wide especially with 4 1.25m stacks in a line plus some wiggle room so the attached parts don’t end up inside each other, the symmetry would be really weird (although there are ways of making different sets of nodes work on different symmetry patterns, but that does have some odd quirks) and I don’t see what the use case is. What do you need this part for? What would this part offer that, say, a radial stack attachment point (it attaches radially but has stack nodes top and bottom), using cubic struts with an offset or just side attaching a nosecone type B or a fuel tank, doesn’t already?

Bigger versions of the existing stack splitter/multi-couplers e.g. going from 3.75m to 5x or 7x 1.25m or to 2-4x 2.5m, I could see several uses for that as an engine adapter or for mounting bigger payloads, but again they’d be clustered, not linear.

[JadeOfMaar]

@Xyphos @HebaruSan ... The variant system allows for symmetry switching along with node sets. Once you set this number to be 1 (n - 1, where n is the total number of nodes, and assuming there are 2 nodes) for the particular variant, you have mirror symmetry.

Edited September 12, 2020 by JadeOfMaar