Symmetry Suggestions

[CuAnnan]

Parts should remember if they were added via symmetry. Currently, removing a part that has been added via symmetry and moving it causes the symmetrical parts to dissappear.

Adding a part to a symmetrically added part should add them symmetrically by default.

Parts that are successfully added symmetrically should be added symmetrically. In large builds, it gets exceedingly frustrating to check that struts are connecting on all parts. Stopping the build process to focus, rotate and ensure that the program does what its told is a time sink.

You need to implement double axis symmetry in plane mode, because this is the only place you can build lifters and they need four legs. Two sets of two leads to all kinds of needless micromanagement of stages and difficulties in manually balancing that should not exist.

Also, parts that are added symmetrically don't necessarily end up in the same group, leading to morestill micromanagement of stages.

Edited July 31, 2014 by Claw
multipost

[Claw]

Moved to suggestions, since these mechanics are by design and you're suggesting they change.

Cheers,

~Claw

[Yoha]

Parts should remember if they were added via symmetry. Currently, removing a part that has been added via symmetry and moving it causes the symmetrical parts to dissappear. Adding a part to a symmetrically added part should add them symmetrically by default.

Well, they do, check the .craft file ;-) . It's actually the editor which does not update the symmetry on selection. That would be a handy change indeed.

You need to implement double axis symmetry in plane mode, because this is the only place you can build lifters and they need four legs. Two sets of two leads to all kinds of needless micromanagement of stages and difficulties in manually balancing that should not exist.

Check out Editor Extensions. Although:

That should be stock

Also, parts that are added symmetrically don't necessarily end up in the same group, leading to morestill micromanagement of stages.

Yeah, there is usually a glitch that makes it so that the first added part is alone while the mirrored parts are soundly grouped. Anyway, the whole staging editing could use a rework (when connecting a launcher to a vessel, add the stages below, don't just merge them!).

[Sky_walker]

There is a mod for that

If anyone would like to hear about the mod - they would post here: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/forums/4-Add-ons

[Yoha]

Although:

That should be stock

I just felt it would be more helpful to also give a solution for the current situation since there is one.

[RenevB]

Parts should remember if they were added via symmetry. Currently, removing a part that has been added via symmetry and moving it causes the symmetrical parts to dissappear.

If this is implemented as Yoha said, that when you pick up a part that was added with symmetry X, then the editor changes to symmetry X, that is a good idea.

Adding a part to a symmetrically added part should add them symmetrically by default.

Somewhat disagree. The only options to adding to an X-symmetic part are symmetry X and no symmetry. Whatever the default is, you'll likely need the other one regulary, which is only one push of the x button away.

Parts that are successfully added symmetrically should be added symmetrically. In large builds, it gets exceedingly frustrating to check that struts are connecting on all parts. Stopping the build process to focus, rotate and ensure that the program does what its told is a time sink.

You need to implement double axis symmetry in plane mode, because this is the only place you can build lifters and they need four legs. Two sets of two leads to all kinds of needless micromanagement of stages and difficulties in manually balancing that should not exist.

No opinion on this, because I do not quite understand your suggestions.

Also, parts that are added symmetrically don't necessarily end up in the same group, leading to morestill micromanagement of stages.

In my experience they always end up in the same stage, but occasionally not all grouped together and that can be annoying if they're put in the wrong stage. So agree.

[Yoha]

Somewhat disagree. The only options to adding to an X-symmetic part are symmetry X and no symmetry. Whatever the default is, you'll likely need the other one regulary, which is only one push of the x button away.

One good example of this is aspargus, where you don't want to add six liquid fuel booster by hand, but need to put asymmetric (w.r.t. to the ×6 symmetry) fuel lines.