Thanks, @docara, for the feedback on this topic.
You raise a good point about the difference between assigning colors for the purposes of the design (all your components may be made out of the same kind/color of plastic, for instance), vs the Component Color Cycling mode, which is really more of a tool to help you determine component boundaries at a point in the design where you don't necessarily care about the final appearance. So, my suggestion of just using Appearance for this probably is not as good as it sounded to me at first.
Yes, the sectional analysis does obey the component coloring, which is helpful.
Your "slight grumble" is an interesting suggestion. One thing we have struggled with in Fusion is its mix of "part modeling" and "assembly modeling" in a single environment. So, it's hard to tell whether you are doing "part stuff" or "assembly stuff" at any given time. Starting in color cycling mode might not make sense if you are doing primarily part stuff, but it might make sense if you were in the flow of doing other assembly stuff. We struggle with this in other areas as well. Should Move default to Bodies or Components? Should a new design start with an empty child component active? Should Extrude on an empty design default to "new component" or "new body". The short answer is: we don't have a good answer. Personally, I like your suggestion, and often I will switch on color cycling, and leave it on for days.
Back to the original request: Yes, it might make sense for color cycling to be more of a user-controlled and persistent thing. Have an environment where you can auto-assign colors, but shift them around if you need to, and have those colors stick. I did not see this on the Fusion IdeaStation. You should add it there. The closest I found was: color-cycle-by-sub-assembly
Jeff
Jeff Strater
Engineering Director