overlapping design options

[cr_gixxer]

I'm running into an issue with design options that is getting complex, and I don't know if its possible to simplify it.

Working on a townhouse design, where I have each unit type as its own linked file with design options for a number of things (stone front, balcony, interior plan options, bumpouts, etc...)

The problem is that for instance I have a balcony design option (one with one without). This means that a specific wall and hosted windows/doors is repeated in both options. (cumbersome for changes but I can live with it)
Now for 3 of 4 interior options, the windows are unaffected by the changing interior layouts. But in one of the options I have to slide a window over, and I don't want to have to do this for all options, since its not so nice on the elevations.

how do I manage a design options when things start to overlap?
Or does the this mean just more and more of the model needs to live in each of the design options thus reducing their efficiency.

[cr_gixxer]

thought I might just be able to bind the linked file into each set I build and commit to a design option to bypass this issue......but the model reverts to the primary option upon binding.

[damon.sidel]

If you're going the way of the bind, could you just do a Save As for each (combination of) option(s) and link them in separately?

[JohnCAVogt]

Am I missing something? Why wouldn't sliding the window over just be in a different Revit option set?

[cr_gixxer]

If I have an exterior set called "stone"; 2 options: YES stone, NO stone (siding). Each option has the same windows in the same location
I have an "interiors" set; 3 options: rear kitchen, upgraded rear kitchen, and front kitchen

Now for the most part treating the shell and interiors separate works, and imho is most desirable, but with one of the kitchen options (front kitchen) the window has to move.

So to me because adding the window to the interior set, I am forced to include the hosting wall doubling my options in the set
So my interior option set would have to have a few options:
rear kitchen WITH stone
rear kitchen WITHOUT stone
upgraded rear kitchen WITH stone
upgraded rear kitchen WITHOUT stone
front kitchen WITH stone
front kitchen WITHOUT stone

I think The original "stone" option would have to remain as well to catch the rest of the exterior walls. (to cut down on some repetition)

Now if I have to change something let's say the client says we want to change the casement to a fixed window.....that's a whole bunch of places to change it in.

I guess it might be more efficient to add more options to the stone set rather than the interiors looking like this:
YES stone - original window
YES stone - moved window
NO stone - original window
NO stone - moved window

4 beats 6, so I might just go this route

What I really would like to see is that a window/door could be part of an option set without having the need for the hosting element to be a part of the set. In my mind, it makes sense that if the hosting element is part of the main model, it should be available to every option.

[cr_gixxer]

If you're going the way of the bind, could you just do a Save As for each (combination of) option(s) and link them in separately?

that makes sense, but not if there is a small change that I would then need to fix it in each combination.

My ultimate goal in any project is to mitigate the impact of changes when they arise....because they always do.....and I'm too lazy to want to have to do things over and over