Force-place Incomplete Blueprints

[dopefish]

I searched this forum as best as I could to avoid making a duplicate request, but the search functionality on this forum seems rather bad. I apologize if I missed a thread about this subject.

One major annoyance I've ran into when doing large scale building is when edges or previous construction interfere with blueprints and you have to manually place things, or ignore large areas and be very inefficient. This is especially true since you can't manipulate water right now without mods, there's no way to make a nice square section of land where everything fits if you play on a map with a lot of water.

My suggestion would be the ability to force-place the parts of a blueprint that fit, ignoring the rest. This would allow you to build tightly around water, around Roboports, powerlines and whatever else might be in the way.

Simply hold Shift (or Ctrl) when placing the blueprint and it will be force-placed.

I suppose it might be a bit too powerful, make base-building too easy? I don't know, I don't really think so. I think it'd be a fine addition, removing some irritating tedium.

[Tinyboss]

I strongly support this. In fact, it's the way I'd expect it to work even without shift/control clicking. I was a bit surprised by the all-or-nothing current behavior.

[Nova]

I wanted to suggest this today / yesterday, but was too lazy.

[The Lone Wolfling]

Ditto, I support this, maybe even by default.

(Hmm... What about having it refuse to place the first time, but if you try to place it a second time without changing position it'll force-place?)

[bobingabout]

I agree, this should be a thing.

Also, I use that exact same blueprint layout for my solar power system too!

[Boogieman14]

Also, I use that exact same blueprint layout for my solar power system too!

I suspect anyone who's put any thought into their solar layouts will have come up with this exact setup

Also, +1 on the suggestion. I like Wolfling's suggestion of a second click indicating I really want to build it in this spot, restrictions and all.

[Nova]

Well, I use the same layout, but only to make it nice. If I wanted to make it as efficient as possible, than I would use a layout with big power poles to minimize the need for the big transformator stations. (Was that the name?)

I don't like the suggestion of The Lone Wolfling. Clicking two times is nothing I would expect, but shift clicking is pretty normal in this game.

[BurnHard]

Must-have-feature to implement, best via modifier-key

[SkySo1dier]

Great idea! I do need it!

[keyboardhack]

Good idea. Would make me a lot less frustrated when there is something in the way.

Maybe construction drones should also automaticly remove trees if they are in the way of the blueprint construction area.

Also, I use that exact same blueprint layout for my solar power system too!

I suspect anyone who's put any thought into their solar layouts will have come up with this exact setup

tbh i never came up with that nice design. Instead i use a blueprint with a robotport in the middle of the solar panels so i don't have to manually extend the logistics network. I can see the usefullness of the design, but i never thought of it.

[ssilk]

I add, that it would be supercool to place a blueprint above trees, so that the bots will first cut the trees and then place the entity.

[GewaltSam]

ssilks suggestion added to the idea of force-placing makes a lot of sense. I like!

By the way, I use a blueprint for solar cells and one for batteries, they go to different locations on the map; huge separate accu and solar farms look nicer in my opinion than those combined blocks

[Devildog]

This would be a great feature to have added to the game,

[dopefish]

I add, that it would be supercool to place a blueprint above trees, so that the bots will first cut the trees and then place the entity.

I approve of this generally, although cutting trees with the deconstruction print is quite easy already... the problem is that you have to wait for them to disappear before you can place down a blueprint.

[Align]

Question is if anything else covered by the blueprint should be deconstructed. Could be useful if you've got some stray belts in the way, could be bad if you use some sort of repeating asymmetric pattern.

[Boogieman14]

I would say only trees would get marked for deconstruction, anything else should simply cause any entities in that spot to not be placed.

[ssilk]

Hehe. I try to sum up:

These modes of setting a blueprint:

- Normal (like now)
- As good as possible (The part of blueprint isn't placed, if the entity is red/not placeable, cause of lake or other entity in place)
- Place a remove mask (This destructs all entities, which are in the way for this blueprint) ). You first set a remove-mask and immediately the place mask. The placed entity can only be placed, if there is no more entity to remove. Sounds complicated, but it is just like "Remove everything in the way and then place the blueprint". This mode is also interesting for setting a ghost-building.


I can think of much more modes, like a mode, where you
- drag a the blueprint to repeat it.
- drag some kind of border around it, to place only parts of it (shrink a blueprint)

[Ranakastrasz]

Support this 100%.

Also suggest that if you try to place normally without this, the red items should flash visibly, since sometimes they are hard to see.

[Cloner]

+1 this feature is essential, i was surprised it is not imlemented yet.

[Psycix]

+1
This should have been the default behavior.
No control or shift clicking needed. When I click with a blueprint it is obvious that I want to place it, thus it should place everything that is possible to place, regardless of overlap with existing geometry.
I believe we already had a patch that allowed placement over the same buildings (which was even more annoying before that), but this should definitely be added as well.