sub-assembly saving

[sql_yoda]

I know there are mods that can do this. I know it's also listed in the sticky on things not to suggest. I just really think this would add so much to the game, to not have to download a mod and then rebuild something you've already built that works very well, just in order to save it again.

Maybe the actual topic of conversation should be - why can't ANY part be the first one in a save file? Wouldn't that solve the problem and still keep the spirit of the game intact?

[Faark]

Why the hell do you make a thread about it? Yes, its in the "do not suggest"-list. For a reason, since it was requested over and over again. You should also read this or that.

Next, why do you make your thread in "General Add-on Affairs"? Its not about any mod, not a mod request (since such mods already exist) or a question to modders only.

Btw, how do you want to make a strut or fuel line the first part? It usually need a starting and end point. Same for radial attachable stuff. Most of the time you cannot do anything with it except attaching it to sth else. So it would not help in terms of subassemblies. I'm sure there are other reasons why other parts are not available as the first one, although i don't know them.

[Eric S]

Not only is this on the "do not suggest" list, but if you'd been reading the announcements of what the devs are working on, you'd know that at least part of the reason it's on the list is because the devs agree and it is coming. In fact work is already in progress, and it may make it in 0.22, with the may in there just in case something goes wrong.

As for what can be a starting point, there are two requirements as I recall.

1) It has to have attachment points

2) It as to be able to have things surface attached to it.

I can understand these requirements, as it reduces the frustration of someone new to the game by eliminating the "I just started a craft, why can I not attach the second part to the craft?" though I'm not sure how strong that argument is. I think the first rule is a good rule, as I can't think of a single part that surface attaches that would make a reasonable core of the ship. The exception to this would be radial decouplers, though to be honest, that only matters when it comes to subassemblies, and I put the radial decouplers on the main craft and then mount the subassembly on them, so them not being an exception has never been a problem. I'm less sure about the second rule but don't see it as a huge issue.

[HeadHunter67]

Not only for all these reasons, but also because there's already a plugin called Subassembly Loader which does just that.

[sql_yoda]

Not only is this on the "do not suggest" list, but if you'd been reading the announcements of what the devs are working on, you'd know that at least part of the reason it's on the list is because the devs agree and it is coming. In fact work is already in progress, and it may make it in 0.22, with the may in there just in case something goes wrong.

Well forgive me, the wiki page says nothing about this being worked on at present. In fact the only thing flagged on that page as being worked on is the tech tree.

[sql_yoda]

Btw, how do you want to make a strut or fuel line the first part?

because doing so would catastophically fail, as the base game was designed to do.

[sql_yoda]

Also you cannot even instantiate a fuel line object or a structural strut object without having two other objects to connect. There is no good reason from a design standpoint to not allow any object to be the top one in a .craft file.

[sumghai]

Well forgive me, the wiki page says nothing about this being worked on at present. In fact the only thing flagged on that page as being worked on is the tech tree.

You should not depend on the wiki, as it is only updated sporadically.

Also, the following threads have been stickied at the very top of the Suggestions subforum, so I don't see why you could have missed it:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/36863-What-not-to-suggest

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/44952-Already-Suggested-List

[sql_yoda]

I have read both, thanks. I also paid for the game. If you're telling me I should not be concerned about where it's going and how fast and in what direction, I must insist you are wrong.

[sumghai]

If you're telling me I should not be concerned about where it's going and how fast and in what direction, I must insist you are wrong.

I never said anything of the sort.

I simply said that the most accurate and up-to-date information is here on the forums.

[sql_yoda]

I appreciate it. I really only wanted to suggest that allowing any part that can start an assembly would eliminate the need for an addon. I'm not talking about fuel pipes or struts. any part that can be laid down alone should do it.

[Eric S]

Well forgive me, the wiki page says nothing about this being worked on at present. In fact the only thing flagged on that page as being worked on is the tech tree.

My comment probably came across in a way other than it was meant. I wasn't calling you out for having not read everything ever written about the game, I was just going into detail as to why it was on the "do not suggest" list. If you're interested in the future of the game, though, I'd recommend augmenting the wiki ToDo page with the developer blogs and weeklies, they often go into details that haven't made it to the wiki yet.