If it doesn't reach max speed, then there's no issue. Unsetting my modification when they start braking takes full care of that. Except the train starts braking with the old friction in mind. It can't stop in time and either passes the station or stops abruptly and unnaturally. Weight *absolutely* ...

This just sounds like a total pain in the ass that would add a massive amount of annoyance to the gameplay and massively restricts dozens of playstyles. If you're "totally fine with it", you obviously did not think through the implications at all. If anything this is ridiculous anti-QoL t...

That friction approach would allow me to set it when they change state (and checking every few ticks until they're at max speed to undo it), rather than requiring on_tick all the time to constantly look at all trains. You assume it will reach maximum speed. *And* it would mean everything about the ...

Would a sticker work?

This should still be added, but My specific use case for this is my Power Satellites mod. The player can use the rocket silo to launch the power satellites to orbit, like they would launch satellites in a non-SA game. Satellites launched to orbit are expended and start generating power received by r...

Sorry, I wasn't sure! It's just there's already a way for mods to have stuff ignored so you don't need a new engine feature for it. Oh, didn't notice you were pointing out the ignore mechanic specifically. That mechanic is a massive hack. Field named "ignore" can easily collide with a leg...

Would be great if this was available to mods. There are other mods that add properties in this manner. I think they're talking about the --check-unused-prototype-data command line option, so its only an opt-in check. Also, according to https://wiki.factorio.com/Command_line_parameters, mods can opt...

Rseding91 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 07, 2025 3:47 pm I'll make the engine mark it as used even if it doesn't do anything with it. That way it can stay during the whole data stage.

Would be great if this was available to mods. There are other mods that add properties in this manner.

BraveCaperCat wrote: ↑Mon Jan 06, 2025 8:26 pm What I do imply is that distance and orientation do have to be relative to the parent_object in the other request, but not for this one.

Same thing. Relative to anything but parent will make it annoying to use.

This request is a subset of that request and implementing this request would not also mean implementing the other request. Sorry! Then you'll have to elaborate, because I don't see a difference between "allow setting center of orbit to another space location" and "allow setting cente...

For the future I recommend making up your mind whether you are making a help request (which should go in Modding help) or an API request. And to have some patience (for the latter, at least).

That's weird, since there is no such restriction at runtime.

But I guess you shouldn't be dealing in unlocalized strings right there, that defeats the point of localization.

Duplicate of viewtopic.php?f=28&t=125282

Actually, I think auto_recycle should not be changed, if (re)generating a recycling recipe. I believe the intent of the field is to not generate a recycling recipe. I took that line from the quality mod's data-updates.lua script, but I think for my purposes, it should be left alone. Hmm. Actually, ...

There should be indication which feature adds the property. Right now they all just say "requires Space Age to use".

I find it important for cases when a user wishes to play a Mod A in "vanilla" mode, but Mod B enables feature flags for some extraneous use, forcing Mod A to run in "DLC" mode whether or not the user wants it. That's solved by Mod A creating a setting if it so desires, we've bee...

protocol_1903 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 12:56 am ...and so observation 1 is never crossed and mods can instead check for the official feature flag mod(s)

Why?!

Feature flags are already checkable by themselves. Why add a pointless indirection? Why is it so important to you which mod enables which flag?

Duplicate of viewtopic.php?f=28&t=121788

BraveCaperCat wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 10:25 pm What if you made a power pole with a connection radius of 0 and a supply area of 1? (or more if that's not enough, it just needs to be able to cover the combined entity)

It's not the power pole that's the problem, it's every other power pole with its own supply area.

It doesn't make any sense for there to not be linked energy sources. I mean, there's already linked belts, linked containers/chests and linked fluid boxes/pipes, why not linked poles? (or linked energy connectors, sources, etc) Poles can already be linked. But the OP explicitly explains that poles ...