A very nice idea indeed.

I assume this is the same as has been reported for 0.10.x: https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... =11&t=4322

No problem if that helps =)

Then you have an answer! It's a "known issue" and should be categorized as one.

Well I've had this bad allocation save issue and it basically occured at any next save after certain something hapened that corrupted the game. This "next save" in many cases was "autosave" and indeed was corrupting the file.

Your definition of a bug is perfectly good for development team which has actual "specification" and knows what is "expected/planned" and what is not. In case of alpha/beta testing we (players) have to do a lot of guessing including the common sense. This is why the expected &quo...

0.10.0 indeed had such a bug https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... =11&t=4161 but it has been fixed in 0.10.1

I'd suggest you try latest (0.10.2) version maybe isntalling it in a different folder just in case you want to preserve your 0.10.0 and see if the issues persists.

In the save file https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16452197/Defect_05.zip I have on average FPS 30 until trains are lauched. My FPS when trains are stopped: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16452197/No%20Train%20FPS.jpg When I launch the trains (I think 7 in total) by addin missing rails path n...

I've done multiple rounds of replacing these chests with passive provider or requesters. It partially solves the immediate issue but after some time (quite a short period I must say) the problem comes back.

Happened to me in 0.10.2. I was placing some rail blueprints and switched from one (curve) blueprint to another (long straight) and... couldn't palce it. No matter how hard I tried and even at some distance of location. I could place other blueprint though.

Save/Load fixed it.

In my save file (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16452197/Defect_03.zip) I have achieved a situation when I have a bunch of full active provider chests, loads of empty storage chests and ~3k idle logistic bots: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16452197/lazy%20bots.jpg Save description: 1. Pla...

Good thing about posting a defect, is that you should not really pay attention to the implementatuion details. It's defect and that's it. It might get rejected, postponed, treated as minimal or explained as a feature later though. In current case if the feature required to fix a defect is not availa...

100% not a code defect, but rather a game design one. I suppose such defects are reported here too.

Currently max count condition in logistic (and probably circuit) networks on smart inserters is 20k. This is probably a defect as the game even in it's middle stages starts opertaing numbers like 100k and more for certain resources. I don't know what the max number should've been by original design ...

I agree that there might be valid reason for not copying them. As well as there could be many otehr aspects. But agree with me it's strange that action designed to do a carbon-copy misses/omits some stuff? I'd say all stuff like "place without modules" or "place without rules/limits&q...

When blueprinting buildigns and then building them modules are not inserted.

I expect they should be as basically every other aspect is copied including limits, rotation and logic.

All in all blueprints shoudl allow you to copy setup and replicate it with 0 extra efforts.

Wow! A great solution! I would love to see that in game =)

- if you followed my suggestion A from above nothing is produced anymore. Is it so? If not why complain? Was and probably is noob at this game. Thought that limit on providers would be enough - why do you have so many provider chests, when you need only one to satisfy everything? I was optimizing m...

Just now I've ahd an example I decided that old setup of 100 chests + 100 inserters (placed one after anotehr in a row) + ~20 poles was not optimal and needed to delete all inserters. Preserve the rest for later usage but delete the inserters. It was no fun at all.

A) Because being new to the game I expected existing limits (passive providers) to be enough
B) Agreed. Didn't think of this

And still these robots carrying too much create extreme amounts of garbage in my storage chests