jdrexler75 wrote: Sun Nov 17, 2024 11:28 pm xplained why in my post. It's extremely useful for simple setups with deciders

yeah. and it extremly can break a setup where this is not the intended function and it cant not be controlled.
at least put in a checkbox if ingredients should set the recipe.

It's difficult to say anything about it without seeing your setup. I've never had this weird behaviour occur on crushers. Most probable answer would be that you've got a signal contamination somewhere.


i did not post a screenshot because its would show 16 deciders + 1 constant combinator, and i ...

The crusher will select metallic crushing if you have "set recipe" enabled and it receives a metallic chunk signal.


really. of course it gets a metallic chunk singal. i use that signal to control other stuff.
i want to control my crusher. i want to use the reciepe signal to control the reicpe ...

i have a crusher that frequently selects "metallic asteroid crushing" for a tick when switching between "no recipe" and "metallic asteroid reprocessing", throwing off my control logic and breaking my system.

i double, tripple and 10x checked if there was any combinator with that recipe which could ...

so, i have a crusher that gets its recipe by combinators.
no combinator is signaling "metallic asteroid cruishing".
yet, i see the crusher selecting this recipe frequently, it seems to default to this recipe when it has no recipe for a tick before selecting "no recipe" (as it should).
this is very ...

i loved spaceships, like all of the expansion for the most part.
i like that the expansion and spaceships made me use circuits.

however, this changed with the ships i need to build to survive at the system edge or bejond.
there is the shier size and complexity of the system that takes forever to ...

I think you got the recipe and not the actual fluid. Make sure you're using the molten signals on the fluid tab.

I encountered this issue too. Maybe a way to differentiate the icons better?


aaahhh.. i so dumb. thank you! that seems to be the issue. its a bit mean tho, the symbols look the same ...

grafik.png

the image shows a combinator set to produce a signal when molten copper > 20k. it shows that molten copper is at 25k, yet it does not produce a signal.
in the second image its shown that it will produce a signal when set to molten copper < 20k, despite molten copper being at 25k ...

look, i just give up now. you do not seem to accept any answer you get, you just repeat your question.
when asked something, you do not reply in any other form then repeating your question.
i tried. i can not do this with you. you are excluded from this challange and any of my further challanges ...

i see your design in game.
i asked you to explain it.
i feel that i might not be equiped to provide the form of comunication you seem to require and i start to get the feeling that it might not be helpful if i tried further.

no the quantity is choosen in the constant combinator

i see a value of 2147483645 for all types which would make it possible to fill the wholes store with one ore type if it was used to limit the quantity.
i see that the inserters try to insert carbon, ore and whatever to the crushers. i do not ...

so, if i undertand this correctly, you just fill up the whole hold of your ship with chunks, which is not forbitten (though imo also not very useful as a solution).
however: if i understand your solution correctly, you have nothing installed that would prevent the whole hold to be filled with one ...

again i accept your oppinion, it just does not apply here. the rules for this challange are in the first post.


This is not true, because in the first post you use one belt for all 3 asteroid, but later you said it was necessary to use 3 crusher to avoid using a single belt of output.

I don't ...

When looking at the blueprint you posted as example, it uses one belt for all chunks, then i asked the question why 3 crusher, you answered because otherwise we could use one belt only.


This is still puzzling me because it seem to me that it's not smart to use 3 crusher when only 1 can be ...

i see where a different judge might come to a different conclusion. however: this is my conclusion. as there is no official authority we could take this, i fear we are stuck with my personal ruling. imperfect as my sole ruling might be, based on one oppinion, it was not any more perfect if it ...

Cause that happens sometimes that people make challenge but then the complexity of defining precisely the rules overwhelm them.

look, here is a peace offer:
for this challange, we are stuck with my ruling. however: i appriciate your input, and i actually like your solution even IF i rule it ...

i will repeat this one more time: i can not rule out that a solution has been posted it the past.
however: it was not yesterday, it it was not in the post you linked.


I still don't understand that part.


Are you avoiding this on purpose ?


are you? at this point, i can not even re ...

no, but it required manipulation when empty.

i will repeat this one more time: i can not rule out that a solution has been posted it the past.
however: it was not yesterday, it it was not in the post you linked.


I still don't understand that part.


Which storage need to be in which state for you to validate an entry with only 1 ...

mmmPI wrote: Tue Nov 05, 2024 3:41 pm

Rauschkind wrote: Tue Nov 05, 2024 3:40 pm the requirement is, that it might not ever jam. its not enough to run untill the storage is filled. it also might not jam once all storage is used.

Which storage ?

see previous post.