After some sleuthing (and someone actually looking at the rest of the documentation), we found the two smoking guns

1. The wiki edit that added this field that's clearly about individual ingredient amounts:
https://wiki.factorio.com/index.php?title=Prototype%2FRecipe&diff=151568&oldid=150595
Credit ...

The ingredients list the limitation for the "amount" of ingredients.

This is confusing because the ItemIngredientPrototype themselves list that limitation by value of their types being listed as uint16. So I assumed it was referring to the number of *different* ingredients (albeit a little poorly ...

Theoretically having the engine iterate over the force players would be faster than a mod asking the engine to build a list of connected players and iterating it in Lua.

But this would also save from developers forgetting that they can pass the same table to each call and accidentally recreating it ...

quyxkh wrote: Sun Mar 15, 2026 5:48 pm Maybe they've got a special prize in the code for anybody who gets a map that far? That'd be funny anyway.

There is in fact a reason they upped the tick to uint64 (even though Lua would have problems with it after enough time)
https://www.factorio.com/blog/post/fff-388

What fields would even be on the LuaPrototypes? Graphics definitions aren't readable an other other prototype.

On the other hand, we need a is_valid_animation_path to match the is_valid_sprite_path because we can't currently validate random strings as valid animations. (Validating data from ModData)

Wouldn't it make sense to pass the item_number, if one exists? It wouldn't perfectly get the item that was opened since not all have them, but wouldn't it cover most cases where people actually care about the item, since it's usually those that have data tied to them?

So please at least add a description to it (and the LuaStyle) to indicate that it's the progress bar's "thickness" instead.

I only figured it out after looking at the base game's code comments. I spent too long not looking at the base progress bar style because I was trying to make it mimic another ...

Affecting pollution via triggers just seems to make sense to me +1

Though I'd type it as "pollute" to keep the possibility of it absorbing pollution instead

This is such a minor bug, but a bug it still is. With just the right length of name, the fusion reactor output fluid temperature tooltip field will wrap, but the value doesn't align to the bottom
11-29-2025, 17-05-22.png

Because the convention (from a boiler) is that it doesn't mention the fluid ...

Well it is documented. There's just no description of how it works, which is what I think you mean and want.

https://lua-api.factorio.com/latest/con ... esult.html
https://lua-api.factorio.com/latest/pro ... ce_as_tile

+1, while I prefer mine (127039), getting it in any form would be nice

I've seen a handful of mod bug reports where a player related event errors on a server, and people struggle to really explain what would have caused it because they aren't sure who caused it.

I'm proposing that for events related to a player (any that have a player_index), the ID and username of ...

Then this should be moved to Documentation Improvements so we can ask for that to be mentioned.
Something like:

Note: setting a non-zero value while it's zero will start a normal craft free of cost and irrespective of recipe quality. Set result_quality to have another quality result.


I'm not ...

I think I'm actively opposed to requiring categories. The vast majority of modders and recipes don't want anything other than the current default behavior (in my opinion).
I don't think modders currently even consider the category unless they specifically want something other than the default. As ...

I was under the impression that the latter of A was already going to happen (merging the fields).

And I do think I prefer a default of {"crafting"}. My question is, how would it behave if you were to give it {}?
I went and checked the machine, and it errors without any crafting categories, so I ...

It is listed as one of the main global objects on the prototype index

Not sure there's a good way to make them show up in the search..

If it can be made a "mode" type parameter where you can make it mark the replaced entity for deconstruction instead, then it could be manually destroyed without letting the user (or their bots) have a chance to actually mine it.

This would also be a possible fix for a bad bug I have in my mod that ...

I currently have a pretty bad bug in the mod Wide Containers . I previously tried 'fixing' one of the causes with a bug report: https://forums.factorio.com/130389
But it's been understandably deemed "not a bug".

Because the actual root of my issue was the LuaSurface::create_entity fast replace ...

It would require a big warning that they don't update until the inserters themselves update, otherwise I'm confident people would bug report it
(And some probably still will with it, but at just we can tap the sign)

As modder you can change recycling recipe generation yourself however you want.
It's not done in game engine, everything (except using specific recipe category) is done in lua.


While it is in Lua, it's not as if you can just change the code from another mod.
You can undo said changes, but we ...