Move Monopropellant tanks from 'Propulsion' to 'Control'

[Bobnova]

The Place Anywhere RCS port can be used as an engine easily enough. It's not exactly long on thrust and the throttle control is only marginally better than a SRB, but it works

I'd definitely like the monoprop tanks in Control.

[MartGonzo]

I agree with moving the RCS to control and Ion engines to propulsion

One other suggestion I'd like to add (this one might be slightly controversial) would be moving fuel lines to utility.

[Superfluous J]

Actually with some thought, I think "propulsion" should be split up between engine and fuel tanks, and anything not in those categories should go in Utility, though Utility needs split into a couple categories.

The whole thing is a mess, really, and needs an overhaul.

[MR4Y]

I would still love to see adapter plane parts that aren't fuel tanks. Is that too hard to do?

[Jouni]

How about re-doing the entire list of all items into a more organized system to make parst easier to find?

The first thing that comes to mind is a system using some sort of tags. Parts would have tags based on things like type, size, fuel etc and then you would simply select one or more tags to filter your list by, hence being able to easily find a monoprop 2.5m tank, or a radial science part etc.

Definitely this. Tags are generally superior to hierarchies when organizing things. As can be seen in this thread, different people have different conceptual hierarchies for the same items. If you organize the items hierarchically, you are forcing everyone to use your hierarchy, which may be incompatible with theirs. On the other hand, a properly designed set of tags can support many different hierarchies reasonably well.

[Captain Sierra]

Actually with some thought, I think "propulsion" should be split up between engine and fuel tanks, and anything not in those categories should go in Utility, though Utility needs split into a couple categories.

The whole thing is a mess, really, and needs an overhaul.

Utility, specifically, is a mess. The config files have the provision for a subcategory system, so how about we use it?

And yes, parts need a series of tags.

The tags should be things like: diameter, mod, length, etc.

There should also be the ability to autotag things (and manually override) based on their parameters like: weight, resource production/consumption, part module, etc.

[Shna_na]

I agree with the OP. It's something that kind of narks me a little, but suggesting a change never came to mind. Isn't it just changing one word in the config files?

Examples:

category = Pods
subcategory = 0
title = PPD-12 Cupola Module

^The Cupola command pod (Pods section)

category = Science
subcategory = 0
title = SC-9001 Science Jr.

^The Materials Bay (Science section)

These were taken from the config files for the parts in question. I'm in no place to say this, but wouldn't this take somewhere along the lines of 5 minutes to do? It's only changing 1 word in each of the RCS tank .cfg files, right? With only 5 parts at up to 1 minute each, it can't be too much of an impact on development time.

Anyway, after straying into the no-go zone of mentioning whether it would be easy to implement or not, I will now huddle into a corner and await my punishment.

EDIT: Oh, also, am I the only one wondering what the use of "subcategory" will be? It seems to be "0" for all parts... I just wonder how these subcategories will appear.

Edited February 20, 2014 by Shna_na

[Superfluous J]

Anyway, after straying into the no-go zone of mentioning whether it would be easy to implement or not, I will now huddle into a corner and await my punishment.

No punishment here, and it actually is that easy to make that one change, but the problem isn't that 5 things are in the wrong places, it's that the entire idea is wonky and getting worse as they add more parts. Really they need to redesign it and until they do, they should probably leave it alone. Unless they plan on leaving it as-is which is unlikely because - as you pointed out - there is already framework in place for more classifications that they aren't using yet.

[Shna_na]

No punishment here, and it actually is that easy to make that one change, but the problem isn't that 5 things are in the wrong places, it's that the entire idea is wonky and getting worse as they add more parts. Really they need to redesign it and until they do, they should probably leave it alone. Unless they plan on leaving it as-is which is unlikely because - as you pointed out - there is already framework in place for more classifications that they aren't using yet.

OK, leaving this corner - how would you go about fixing it? What kinds of categories and subcategories do you foresee?

[Rakaydos]

OK, leaving this corner - how would you go about fixing it? What kinds of categories and subcategories do you foresee?

Hmm... Utility, in particular, needs an expandable subcategory list- You need a place to put Kethane parts, KAS parts, and Infernal Robotics parts.

[Superfluous J]

OK, leaving this corner - how would you go about fixing it? What kinds of categories and subcategories do you foresee?

I honestly don't know. I don't have a major in Design like the person I hope they're paying or will pay to make things pretty

But at the very least there should be a way to get any given part (I'm looking at you fuel lines) onto the first page of any given section, always and by default. And there should be an obvious way to tell at a glance if a fuel tank is 0.625 or 2.5 meters wide. Like, group them or have them go down in columns small/med/large.

[TMS]

Backing a tag and 'filter' system here. It works for online shopping.

Trouble is, it sounds like an advanced feature and I can see SQUAD wanting simple categories for new players.

Would also be nice to be able to 'favourite' certain items into a commonly-used list.

[Kasuha]

Maybe it could work similarly to how science archives work. You get list of all parts and can filter them by traversing a nested tree-like category structure. I don't think it would be complicated for new players. Quite the opposite - having all of the few parts at the beginning of career available on single page could be comfortable.

With the current approach I would probably start by renaming 'pods' to 'control' and adding reaction wheels there. The remaining two categories would be 'high thrust' with LO engines and tanks, and 'low thrust' with RCS and ion. Dividing parts to engines and tanks sounds logical but involves much more clicking when building a ship.

[allmappedout]

I also like the idea of stickying specific parts, like you can do with important emails. As 5th Horseman says, Fuel lines are something that always gets used, and I want to be able to grab it all the time. I think filtering is the key though, being able to filter by size, fuel type (ie: LF only, LF/Ox), and various other sub-categories (Power/Legs/Engines/Fuel Tanks, etc etc etc).

[Superfluous J]

I sometimes think you should be able to go into "strut mode" and "fuel line mode" where you have a strut (or fuel line) tool that you just click in 2 places and get a strut between them. Essentially what happens now, but you don't have to go get a new strut each time.

Or a mode where when you place a part, you keep that part on your cursor. Like how some programs consider the part to be a pen. Think laying roads in Sim City.

[Deta]

how about break it up into fuel types. Liq fuel, mono, ion. that way you could go right to the type you need, then break it up by size 1m,3m etc.

Even a failed launch yields new data.

[federicoaa]

Is there any discussion also on general ways to rearrange the parts ordering?

I noticed in every part file has a subcategory entry, which now is 0 for everything. Does this means that the parts ordering will have also subcategories inside every category? In this case, RCS thrusters and containers could be under propulsion/RCS subcategory.

[NERVAfan]

Id like to have the most used parts filtered up to the top so you arnt always clicking to the next page for something you use all the time.

Yes - I would like decouplers to be on the first page of structural.

[problemecium]

I second the OP.

[thereaverofdarkness]

I agree, but would also like to see sub-categories for more sorting. Some things could fit into more than one sub-category:

[Command] could be divided into [Cockpits and Command Modules] [Crew Seating Units] [Viewstations] [Probe Cores] [Misc. Control Units]

[Propulsion] could be divided into [solid Fuel Rockets] [Jet and Misc. Engines] [Rocket Engines] [Cylindrical Tanks] [Radial and Misc. Tanks]

[Control] could be divided into [Reaction Wheels] [sAS Units] [RCS Thrusters] [Monopropellant Tanks] [Misc. Control Devices]

[structural] could be divided into [Fuselages and Corridors] [Girders and Struts] [Paneling] [Decouplers] [Adaptors]

[Aerodynamics] could be divided into [Control Surfaces] [Wings and Lift Surfaces] [Nosecones and Fairings] [Air Intakes] [Misc. Aerodynamic Parts]

[utility] could be divided into [Docking Ports and Attachment Devices] [batteries and Energy Storage] [Energy Collectors and Generators] [Wheels] [Misc. Utility Devices]

[science] could be divided into [Data Collection Tools] [Materials Study Kits] [science and Processing Labs] [Data Review Centers] [Misc. Science Units]

Lots of parts could fit into more than one group, for example:

RCS tanks into cylindrical/radial tanks and monopropellant tanks

Modular Girder Adaptor into girders and into adaptors

Canards and AV-R8 Winglets into misc. control devices, control surfaces, and wings/lift generators

In-line Docking Port into fuselages/corridors and also into docking ports

Sepratron into solid rockets and also into decouplers

Ion Engine into misc engines as well as misc utility devices

R.A.P.I.E.R. into jet engines as well as rocket engines

Hitchhiker Storage Can into fuselages/corridors, crew seating, and even misc. utility (food storage)

Tail Fin into wings/lift surfaces and also control surfaces

LV-1 into rocket engines and also into decals

[Nemrav]

One thing people here haven't looked at is simply expanding on what squad already has, if you look under gamedata/squad/parts you will find that they have already divided their parts more logically, instead of just "utility", propulsion and such, they have

"aero", "command", "electrical", "engine", "fuel tank", "science", "structural", "utility", "wheel"..

so what we really need is more gui buttons for each of these categories respectively instead of the current generic ones...

and yes I agree put the ion engine in the engine category !!

[Justin Kerbice]

And why not just just split categories into engines (rocket, jet, anything) and fuel tanks (almost all kind of energy storage except batteries) ?

[Kasuha]

I definitely don't like the idea of separating engines and fuel tanks from each other. It's exactly that kind of approach which makes logical sense but is completely impractical for use.

When building a rocket, you place a few fuel tanks, an engine, a decoupler, more tanks, more engines, more decouplers and so on. Putting fuel tanks, engines, and decouplers of corresponding diameter to the same part page may not seem logical, but is comfortable for building.

[Superfluous J]

I definitely don't like the idea of separating engines and fuel tanks from each other. It's exactly that kind of approach which makes logical sense but is completely impractical for use.

When building a rocket, you place a few fuel tanks, an engine, a decoupler, more tanks, more engines, more decouplers and so on. Putting fuel tanks, engines, and decouplers of corresponding diameter to the same part page may not seem logical, but is comfortable for building.

Hmm, so have a couple main categories, maybe? Control, Propulsion, Utility, Science. And in each, have 4 (Soon 5) tabs, Radial, then size 0, 1, 2[, 3]?

Control would have pods, reaction wheels, RCS thrusters and the like. Propulsion would be pretty much the same as it is now, perhaps minus RCS tanks (which go in control*), etc.

*See what I did there? My post is on topic!

[Rakaydos]

Since Xenon works like RCS fuel (tanks dont have to be connected to the engine) I would be comfortable with moving Ion engines to Control. Also power storage and generation, to keep the reaction wheels spinning.