Yes, having roboports also be ghost combinator would be really nice.

If you're using a belt, you will want it in "pulse" mode, which outputs a signla when an item moves onto it.

I really like that "toggle deconstruction" idea.

You can already set single modules via Z-swiping, as long as the machine recipie doesn't take that module.

I think 2.0 gives us this from map view?

[...] Does someone have a link to their explination? https://forums.factorio.com/viewtopic.php?t=20691 That's most probably what you're looking for, but there's not much detail unfortunately. I'm sure there was another round (heh) of errors and bug-fixing on this, because I didn't get factorio unti...

They also put some effort into making sure that you don't lose that infinitesimal tick of science progresson on the early sciences. Because people were getting really annoyed that you needed 11 packs to do 10-cost techs. Wait, is that why my tests to try and figure out what caused the infintessimal...

Consoles don't get mods, so it's no wonder they don't do well.

Yes, this stops being an infinite request if the set and request are on different wire colours.

But as long as we can't do that, this would cause a chest full of items if you set the request to one of that item. They would just arrive one at a time.

This has been requested over a hundred times before, and someone always has to explain why it would lead to infinite requests. Think for a moment about a requestor chest that is requesting its own contents, plus 1 belt, and how many belts would end up in it. You can do all the things you want this f...

Look up all the options with blueprints, you'll find what you're after.

Same with inserter throughput, there is simply no number to work with. That's truer than you know. Inserters don't have a consistent transfer rate. Sure, which is pretty strange in itself. Nevertheless there is nothing that prevents the game from doing a single calculation on inserter placement and...

aka13 wrote: ↑

Wed May 29, 2024 8:07 am

Same with inserter throughput, there is simply no number to work with.

That's truer than you know. Inserters don't have a consistent transfer rate.

The cost is 2 combinators per belt to keep track of the items on the belt. Well if you're going to allow combinators then it becomes really easy because you can just use the ratio, or count when an inserter takes a coal, or a hundred other ways. The hard thing is having the blueprint work with just...

while you cannot fully control from which lane inserters will grab the ore. You actually can if you wire the inserter to the belt it takes from with an inserter condition of "ore > 4" but when I do that it becomes much less stable on keeping the smelters fueled, and has a much harder time...

So I got inspired by AntiElitz's new smelter and figured I'd have a go at putting together something using the same principles. I think I've made it simpler and more robust than his (and with less wiring), so I figured I'd share. Only yellow belts and no combinators: Sushi_smelting.png The basic thi...

Nemoricus wrote: ↑

Sun May 26, 2024 2:30 am

A reasonable limitation would be to follow the belt forward and back, and stop when it hits a point of side loading or a splitter.

The easy option (assuming that their code is anything like I think it is) would be to match the "wire whole belt" length.

What "other problems" does it cause?

They also put some effort into making sure that you don't lose that infinitesimal tick of science progresson on the early sciences.

Because people were getting really annoyed that you needed 11 packs to do 10-cost techs.

Idea 2, please!

Please let us do mod groupings!

AND factorio already track every single item that exist in universe in the game. You could check this. Throw trash on ground, save the game then load the game. every item will be in place You know they do a whole heap of memory tricks to make items on belts not devour your CPU, right? They don't ev...