New Engine Category(ies)?

[blorgon]

For those of us who like organization, it'd be nice if there were actually two (or even three, I'll get to that in a second), engine part tabs in the default part list.

Apart from the obvious additional tabs that most of us want, like dedicated electrical, I'd love if the engines were separated out into lifters and upper stage engines, and a possible third tab entirely dedicated to solid fuel boosters.

I'm aware of the mod that does this (although I haven't used it, and I'm not sure if it's possible to replace stock tabs with it, or only add new subcategory tabs)—this is more of a suggestion for the stock game to implement.

I was also thinking it'd be nice if certain engine types would grey out or otherwise indicate that they are not usable on a given stage, like for instance, if you place a xenon tank on your satellite, all but ion engines would be greyed out. Obviously in stock, this isn't really necessary as there's only one ion engine, but when we have mods that add engines of those types, being able to filter out engines that take a specific fuel would be nice. Again, none of this is needed, these are just things I can think of that would improve the workflow of craft design.

I think probably the best application for this kind of filtering would be with RSS/RO, where there are what looks like dozens of fuel types and combinations. I haven't actually installed RSS/RO yet, so I'm not sure how fuel type selection is implemented. Just thinking out loud here, I guess.

[RA3236]

Unfortunately it probably won't happen, as if they did so they'll have to make more for landing legs and electrical e.t.c. anyway. There aren't even enough parts in the stock game to be considered undercategorised.

The greying out though is an excellent idea. Maybe a modder will find the idea interesting and implement it.

[blorgon]

2 minutes ago, RA3236 said:

as if they did so they'll have to make more for landing legs and electrical e.t.c. anyway. There aren't even enough parts in the stock game to be considered undercategorised.

I'm not sure I entirely understand what you mean here. Are you saying that engine categorization won't happen because it'd mean they'd have to do categorization for landing legs and electrical too, or are you saying that there aren't enough engines to justify categorizing them?

I'd say there are enough stock engines to justify splitting them up between upper/vacuum ideal engines, and lifter/booster ideal engines. I'd also argue that there are enough batteries, fuel cells, RTGs, and solar panels to justify an electrical category, and enough landing legs and landing gears to justify their own category too.

[RA3236]

Just now, blorgon said:

I'm not sure I entirely understand what you mean here. Are you saying that engine categorization won't happen because it'd mean they'd have to do categorization for landing legs and electrical too, or are you saying that there aren't enough engines to justify categorizing them?

I'd say there are enough stock engines to justify splitting them up between upper/vacuum ideal engines, and lifter/booster ideal engines. I'd also argue that there are enough batteries, fuel cells, RTGs, and solar panels to justify an electrical category, and enough landing legs and landing gears to justify their own category too.

Sorry, didn't read your post correctly. Yeah, it's a good idea.

[Combatsmithen]

1 hour ago, blorgon said:

For those of us who like organization, it'd be nice if there were actually two (or even three, I'll get to that in a second), engine part tabs in the default part list.

Apart from the obvious additional tabs that most of us want, like dedicated electrical, I'd love if the engines were separated out into lifters and upper stage engines, and a possible third tab entirely dedicated to solid fuel boosters.

I'm aware of the mod that does this (although I haven't used it, and I'm not sure if it's possible to replace stock tabs with it, or only add new subcategory tabs)—this is more of a suggestion for the stock game to implement.

I was also thinking it'd be nice if certain engine types would grey out or otherwise indicate that they are not usable on a given stage, like for instance, if you place a xenon tank on your satellite, all but ion engines would be greyed out. Obviously in stock, this isn't really necessary as there's only one ion engine, but when we have mods that add engines of those types, being able to filter out engines that take a specific fuel would be nice. Again, none of this is needed, these are just things I can think of that would improve the workflow of craft design.

I think probably the best application for this kind of filtering would be with RSS/RO, where there are what looks like dozens of fuel types and combinations. I haven't actually installed RSS/RO yet, so I'm not sure how fuel type selection is implemented. Just thinking out loud here, I guess.

 

YES RSS/RO IS A PAIN IN THE ASS WITH SO MANY PARTS! (EXCUSE MY LANGUAGE)

[swjr-swis]

1 hour ago, blorgon said:

I was also thinking it'd be nice if certain engine types would grey out or otherwise indicate that they are not usable on a given stage, like for instance, if you place a xenon tank on your satellite, all but ion engines would be greyed out.

I'd rather this would not happen. I do not always build 'in order': it is a quite common thing for me to place things on a craft that are not directly (or even at all) related with the next part I am going to place. Iow, I would be one where placing a Xenon tank can very likely be followed by placing a LF engine, or other such 'illogical' combinations.

I would get very frustrated very quickly if the UI started to actively interfere with what I am trying to build by 'intelligently' greying out things I want to use next.

Edited June 15, 2016 by swjr-swis
automated censorship.. another one of those UI handholders...

[Deimos Rast]

we definitely need more categories or the ability to better customize our organizational framework. Not everything can be in the "Utility" tab.

[Andem]

35 minutes ago, Deimos Rast said:

we definitely need more categories or the ability to better customize our organizational framework. Not everything can be in the "Utility" tab.

/\/\

This.

There needs to be Electrical, Docking, and Gear tabs at least.

[blorgon]

1 hour ago, swjr-swis said:

I'd rather this would not happen. I do not always build 'in order': it is a quite common thing for me to place things on a craft that are not directly (or even at all) related with the next part I am going to place. Iow, I would be one where placing a Xenon tank can very likely be followed by placing a LF engine, or other such 'illogical' combinations.

I would get very frustrated very quickly if the UI started to actively interfere with what I am trying to build by 'intelligently' greying out things I want to use next.

Replying to your edit note. I definitely don't need the UI to do any hand holding, I simply prefer clean, uncluttered workspaces. Greyed out options shouldn't be unplaceable, like radial parts when starting a new craft, but just sort of out of the way. As far as your 'illogical' craft building techniques, I don't think that's a fair argument for something 99% of other players probably wouldn't have an issue with.

[swjr-swis]

30 minutes ago, blorgon said:

I don't think that's a fair argument for something 99% of other players probably wouldn't have an issue with.

About as fair as any other feature request for which we can make up random usage statistics, perhaps?

I am sure for every one of the features you feel you represent a majority of users for, there are probably other things you do that you are a small minority in. How many of those would you willingly allow to be crippled (according to your gameplay style) so the 'other 99%' can get their convenience?

[blorgon]

21 minutes ago, swjr-swis said:

About as fair as any other feature request for which we can make up random usage statistics, perhaps?

I am sure for every one of the features you feel you represent a majority of users for, there are probably other things you do that you are a small minority in. How many of those would you willingly allow to be crippled (according to your gameplay style) so the 'other 99%' can get their convenience?

Well, firstly, I used the word 'probably'. I figured anybody with decent reading comprehension would understand it to mean that I'm saying that yours is more than likely an edge case, and not applicable to most users. It's speculation, but it's also an educated guess.

As for 'crippling', I don't know if you didn't bother reading my reply, you're looking to argue with somebody, or you just don't know what that word means, but there's nothing about my suggestion that would limit your ability to build whatever you want. All I'm suggesting is a cleaner, tidier UI.

[RocketSquid]

Utility needs to be split, and we need a "sort by origin" thing in advanced mode to sort by mod.

[blorgon]

1 hour ago, RocketSquid said:

Utility needs to be split, and we need a "sort by origin" thing in advanced mode to sort by mod.

Honestly, this is something I wish more modders did themselves, adding their mods to their own custom advanced mode tabs like some of them do.

But yeah, there's plenty of room for more default tabs. And Utility is definitely a big offender. I didn't really want to talk about it here too much since it's been discussed plenty of times already and the consensus is pretty much set in stone on that one. I'd rather talk more about engine categories, since that doesn't seem to come up as often.

[BriXman]

But what if the parts had tags? So that you could search for the tag "lifter" and only get parts tagged as lifters.