Auto-remove mod parts if mod is removed

[Tortoise]

Instead of a ship being completely locked once you remove a mod from your game, when you have a part that belongs to the mod on that ship, how about just give the user an option to automatically remove the part from the ship and load it without those parts?

[Greenfire32]

Instead of a ship being completely locked once you remove a mod from your game, when you have a part that belongs to the mod on that ship, how about just give the user an option to automatically remove the part from the ship and load it without those parts?

Because then your ships would literally fall apart and scatter debris everywhere...

[sumghai]

Because then your ships would literally fall apart and scatter debris everywhere...

Precisely - especially if the root part of the ship is an add-on part itself (e.g. a third-party crew capsule)

[RidingTheFlow]

I think at least "leaf" parts could be removed...

[vexx32]

Not the best of solutions. Especially automatic removal.

I think a better solution would be for a "dummy" part to replace any mod parts. What would be optimal is for it to replace the mod parts on load, but if you save the craft with the mod part still on the craft, it should still be saved using the part's existing information, so the part can still be used if the mod is reinstalled. The size of the part could be defined as a minimum perhaps slightly bigger than the endpoint of a strut, and if it is a part in a stack, or connected with more than one node, or a connecting part (e.g. radial decoupler of some kind) that is between two surface connections, it could simply be sized to span the gap between two or more connections, with an obvious colour like bright yellow or fluoro pink/purple, so you know there's an unusable part.

You could then load the craft, remove the part(s), replace them with suitable substitutes, or just alter the craft and have the mod parts sitting there and waiting for you to reinstall the mod, if you wished. Obviously, launching the craft with those parts still in the file should not be allowed.

[BudgetHedgehog]

I just wish I had some in-game way of deleting locked crafts due to invalid or missing parts. I keep forgetting to go into the actual Ships folder and delete it myself.

[Padishar]

I just wish I had some in-game way of deleting locked crafts due to invalid or missing parts. I keep forgetting to go into the actual Ships folder and delete it myself.

Isn't there a delete button in the "load craft" dialog?

[BudgetHedgehog]

Isn't there a delete button in the "load craft" dialog?

Yes, but it's greyed out if the craft is locked. You can't select it which means you can't delete it.

[Padishar]

Ahh, yes, that would be a problem... doh!

[Justin Kerbice]

I have already suggest to replace missing part by a dummy one with the exact same dimension (and shape). For example, if Rockomax Hub is removed and have all nodes populated, tit could be replaced by a kind of 3D cross with all 6 nodes, maybe looking like 6 girders with a distinctive texture to show a part is missing.

The worth case scenario: a ship build full of (removed) mod(s) parts .

Yes, but it's greyed out if the craft is locked. You can't select it which means you can't delete it.

Here you'll have to get your hands "dirty" and remove the craft file in your save folder.

[Alshain]

Here you'll have to get your hands "dirty" and remove the craft file in your save folder.

While you can do that, from a standpoint of software HF&E, you always disable the button that allows you to do something to an item, not the selection of the item itself. So the load button should be disabled, not the selection of the craft, and the delete button should then be available. Just speaking from a point of development experience, that load screen is using an improper convention.

[MR4Y]

Not the best of solutions. Especially automatic removal.

I think a better solution would be for a "dummy" part to replace any mod parts. What would be optimal is for it to replace the mod parts on load, but if you save the craft with the mod part still on the craft, it should still be saved using the part's existing information, so the part can still be used if the mod is reinstalled. The size of the part could be defined as a minimum perhaps slightly bigger than the endpoint of a strut, and if it is a part in a stack, or connected with more than one node, or a connecting part (e.g. radial decoupler of some kind) that is between two surface connections, it could simply be sized to span the gap between two or more connections, with an obvious colour like bright yellow or fluoro pink/purple, so you know there's an unusable part.

You could then load the craft, remove the part(s), replace them with suitable substitutes, or just alter the craft and have the mod parts sitting there and waiting for you to reinstall the mod, if you wished. Obviously, launching the craft with those parts still in the file should not be allowed.

Now, we only need someone to make a mod out of it to "help convice the developers".

[Laie]

Because then your ships would literally fall apart and scatter debris everywhere...

Precisely - especially if the root part of the ship is an add-on part itself (e.g. a third-party crew capsule)

OTOH, removing mechjeb modules should be easy and painless. You could as well undertake an best-effort attempt to strip the craft file of offending parts. If it works, great. If not, the craft file will be broken. Considering that it was unusable to begin with, the latter doesn't seem to be a big deal.

I don't see much need for that function, however. While it would come in handy at times, those times are few and far between.

[Greenfire32]

OTOH, removing mechjeb modules should be easy and painless.

Yes, but there's no way the base game could possibly have a record of every mod ever made (past, present, and future). So there's no way KSP could distinguish parts that are core rocket bits from parts that are "leaf" bits.

The reason why the OP's suggestion won't ever work is because the base game would have to handle all the mod-checking rather than the mod itself due to the way mods are currently installed (there's no setup wizard, it's all manual). Upon starting the game, KSP would have to run checks to see which mods are installed and whether or not to remove parts based on the availability of mods. This can't happen because mods are developed independently from the base game and by people with absolutely zero connection to the official devs. There are mods that exist today, that didn't yesterday.

There's no way for KSP to keep up with that.

But let's say, theoretically, that it could and that there's a daily update that includes a database of every mod ever.

KSP still wouldn't be able to tell a mod-engine from a mod-texture. It would only keep/disable mod-parts based on whether or not they exist (installed), and not by how important of a part it is.

Removing/disabling crafts with mod-parts that are no longer present is not only the easiest way to do it, but also the only way to do it.

You could as well undertake an best-effort attempt to strip the craft file of offending parts.

You could, yes, but it would ultimately be easier for beginners and advanced players to just delete the craft and rebuild it from scratch in-game rather than try and edit the craft file. Which is currently what happens anyway.

[RidingTheFlow]

Any invalid part which links something together could be replaced by "procedural dummy" which is basically like a truss linking the connection node locations.

If it just attached on one side, it can be safely removed completely without having any adverse effect.

This will at least allow to fix the craft in editor after mod removal instead of losing it completely.

Edited July 12, 2014 by RidingTheFlow