Inserter drop point inconsistency

Place to discuss the game balance, recipes, health, enemies mining etc.
Koub
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 3747
Joined: Fri May 30, 2014 8:54 am

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by Koub » Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:12 pm

I actually still prefer the way inserters used to work before the 0.12 optimizations on belts and inserters.
The wiki page on inserters still decribes the previous behaviour : https://wiki.factorio.com/Inserters#Ins ... nteraction
Now, to remember how it works, I always plonk :
- a chest with items,
- an inserter,
- a belt,

and I see where go the items, and then, I can plan my factory. And I hate this tedium :)
Koub - Please consider English is not my native language.

User avatar
Lav
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 10:12 am

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by Lav » Mon Jun 05, 2017 5:41 am

Tested this issue a bit.

Inserters do follow a strict set of rules. The discrepancy comes from the fact that when unloading onto a straight belt that moves directly from or to inserter, it will always drop onto right side of the belt, not inserter's right side.

So I retract my earlier statement. While current behavior's a bit unobvious and it would be nice if it was changed, it's still a stable set of rules and is rotation agnostic. Thus, not a bug.

sparr
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 959
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:52 pm

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by sparr » Mon Jun 05, 2017 3:31 pm

Lav wrote:and is rotation agnostic. Thus, not a bug.
Test again.

north inserter and east inserter onto the same north-facing belt, right lane full, left lane empty.

blueprint, rotate 180 degrees, plonk

south inserter and west inserter onto the same south-facing belt, both lanes half-full.

User avatar
Lav
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 10:12 am

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by Lav » Mon Jun 05, 2017 5:44 pm

Not sure what you mean by "north" inserter (from the north? to the north?). So I tested two setups.

Both are consistent.

Image

gustaphe
Inserter
Inserter
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2016 6:50 am

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by gustaphe » Tue Jun 06, 2017 10:40 am

This is "consistent" insofar as it doesn't care about the direction of the setup.
But if you rotate only the belt in the lower left (for instance), you'll see that the inserters care about the direction of the belt, which is the problem.

User avatar
Lav
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 10:12 am

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by Lav » Tue Jun 06, 2017 11:08 am

gustaphe wrote:This is "consistent" insofar as it doesn't care about the direction of the setup.
But if you rotate only the belt in the lower left (for instance), you'll see that the inserters care about the direction of the belt, which is the problem.
I'll tell you more: if you rotate an inserter 180 degrees, it suddenly stops inserting resources into your assembler. :-)

Seriously though: if you rotate a part of the setup without regard for the rest of setup, setup is likely to malfunction. I don't see anything surprising here.

PacifyerGrey
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 965
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 10:02 am

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by PacifyerGrey » Tue Jun 06, 2017 11:50 am

As already said.
The problem is only with inserters facing the belts (from behind or in the face) that they put items on the right lane of the belt (and does not depend on inserter's position) and not the right lane from inserter's perspective.
This is consistent (as the 100% predictable rule exists) but is counterintuitive.
All other cases work as expected.

gustaphe
Inserter
Inserter
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2016 6:50 am

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by gustaphe » Wed Jun 07, 2017 7:14 am

Lav wrote:
gustaphe wrote:This is "consistent" insofar as it doesn't care about the direction of the setup.
But if you rotate only the belt in the lower left (for instance), you'll see that the inserters care about the direction of the belt, which is the problem.
I'll tell you more: if you rotate an inserter 180 degrees, it suddenly stops inserting resources into your assembler. :-)
The important part is "if you rotate an inserter". If I rotate the assembler, I don't expect the inserter's behaviour to change.

User avatar
Lav
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 10:12 am

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by Lav » Wed Jun 07, 2017 8:35 am

gustaphe wrote:The important part is "if you rotate an inserter". If I rotate the assembler, I don't expect the inserter's behaviour to change.
The important part is "without regard for the rest of setup", which you haven't quoted. :-)

And sure, different parts of a setup have different tolerances to modifications of other parts. Again, nothing surprising.

User avatar
Deadly-Bagel
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1492
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 10:12 am

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by Deadly-Bagel » Thu Jun 29, 2017 12:34 pm

Well the issue isn't so much rotating blueprints, it's clarity and intuitiveness. I notice the Wiki has now been updated to explain they always insert onto the right side from the belt's perspective which is what we were all missing, no doubt at some point we all checked the wiki for interaction mechanics and got an idea that was, in specific cases, incorrect. Now that the behaviour is explained correctly there shouldn't be a problem, at least with new players.

If the entire blueprint is rotated then there isn't an issue. If you're only rotating part of a blueprint you need to know how those two halves interact so there aren't any problems - eg if you do the same with pipes you know you need to ensure that two pipes don't accidentally touch. When a Chemical Plant or Oil Refinery is rotated, the inputs and outputs rotate instead of flipping. As long as the behaviour is simple, documented and consistent there isn't a problem.
Money might be the root of all evil, but ignorance is the heart.

mrvn
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 2487
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:10 am

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by mrvn » Thu Jun 29, 2017 12:53 pm

steinio wrote:Surprisingly 1 million buyers have no problem with the current functionality.
Except they did and do. It's not the first complaint about this issue.

Anson
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 4:41 pm

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by Anson » Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:23 am

a never ending subject ...
Deadly-Bagel wrote:... Well the issue ... is clarity and intuitiveness.
I notice the Wiki has now been updated to explain they always insert onto the right side from the belt's perspective ...
Now that the behaviour is explained correctly there shouldn't be a problem ...
just tested with the newest version 0.16.37 :

(marked cyan)
- when dropping items on a belt facing or opposing the inserter, they go to the right side from the belt's perspective
- when dropping items on an underground belt facing or opposing the inserter, they go to the right side from the underground belt's perspective
BUT:
(marked green)
- when dropping items on a splitter along the splitter, they go to the right side from the splitter's perspective,
and to be more exact to the "far right" corner from the inserter's perspective, thus not being split
- when dropping items on a splitter opposing the inserter, they go to the LEFT side from the splitter's perspective,
and to be more exact to the "far right" corner from the inserter's perspective, thus being split
SplitterDrop.PNG
SplitterDrop.PNG (299.06 KiB) Viewed 716 times
in my opinion, there should be no different behavior of inserters depending on whether items are dropped on belts, undergrounds or splitters (or any other beltlike objects, assemblers or whatever).
thus i consider the current behavior to be a bug in any case, no matter whether people think the perspective should be that of the inserter (then belts and undergrounds are buggy) or that of the target (then splitters are buggy).

to have "clarity and intuitiveness", behavior of inserters should always be the same no matter what the target is, and IMHO most intuitive would be that robotic inserter arms always drop items from their own perspective without checking first what the target is.
this can IMHO best be achieved by specifying the drop location as "far right from the inserter's perspective" (just like it is now with splitters, marked with green dots in the screenshot), and this should even reduce the number of rules to a single rule for perpendicular as well as parallel inserters.

edit: new screenshot, and thus i discovered that for belts and underground belts, the drop location seems to be the entire right side (because the plates seem to fill the entire length of the tile and not only from one specific drop location to the end of the tile)

ps: for me, the drop location isn't a big problem since i am mostly using bob's adjustable inserters and thus can adjust that position however i need it for a specific setup. but i still would want to have a single simple rule as default so that i don't have to check for problems and adjust the drop locations as often as i have to do now.

User avatar
tzwaan
Inserter
Inserter
Posts: 31
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2016 12:12 am

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by tzwaan » Thu Apr 26, 2018 4:09 am

I have absolutely no problem with the inserters putting it on the right side of the belt from the belt's perspective. As long as it's consistent.

In that regard I completely agree that the current splitter is not consistent with the rest. Inserters should be putting it on the right side from the splitters perspective, and either always put it before the split, or always put it after the split, but not have it one way but not the other. (I'd prefer the inserters always putting it in front of the split. So you could insert onto a splitter and have the resources go both ways)

User avatar
bobingabout
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 5914
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 1:01 pm

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by bobingabout » Thu Apr 26, 2018 7:59 am

Other topics about it:
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=59806
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=49059

There's actually a mod (though I highlight some issues with it in the topic, and the author states it's designed for base game only) in the mining drills topic that fixes this issue on both Drills and Inserters.
And I am changing my mind from the reply I posted earlier, it would be nice to see this in the base game. I might even include this in my mods in the future.
Creator of Bob's mods. Expanding your gameplay since version 0.9.8.

mrvn
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 2487
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:10 am

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by mrvn » Thu Apr 26, 2018 8:10 am

Inserters should behave the same with or without belt present, as they do with splitters. It makes no sense that the presence of a belt (or underground belt) magically reprograms the inserter.

So +1 to changing inserters to behave like they do with splitters on all types of belts.

Hedning1390
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 226
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 8:47 pm

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by Hedning1390 » Thu May 17, 2018 12:34 am

Why should inserters not take belt direction into account? There are many benefits to having them always place on the right side. Many people like to use the ability to place on half a belt, using the other half for another product. Right now this is easy and doesn't require you to consider which side of the assembler you output from. If you want things on both sides then side loading is the easiest thing ever. Side loading has to be intentional, while outputting from the "wrong" side can be a mistake.

The splitter bug is what should change. I assume it hasn't been fixed because it requires a setup which is extremely unlikely to be built in an actual game.

mrvn
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 2487
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:10 am

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by mrvn » Thu May 17, 2018 10:10 am

Because it is inconsistent with how they behave with belts going other ways.

And if you want items only on one side then side loading is just as effective there. That is no argument for or against the behaviour of inserters.

Hedning1390
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 226
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 8:47 pm

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by Hedning1390 » Thu May 17, 2018 2:52 pm

mrvn wrote:Because it is inconsistent with how they behave with belts going other ways.

And if you want items only on one side then side loading is just as effective there. That is no argument for or against the behaviour of inserters.
You feel it is inconsistent, but it is not any more inconsistent. And yes you can side load, but the point is that you can't make a mistake with the current rules, but you could with your proposed change. I feel as if I have to repeat what i said in the other topic here:

Is it more consistent just because insterter direction is considered in both cases? Not really. Perpendicular and parallel are fundamentally different anyway so you still need two rules (also corners are treated as perpendicular).
From: Perpendicular = Far side (insterter). Parallel=right side (belt). Two rules
To: Perpendicular = Far side (insterter). Parallel=right side (inseter). Also two rules.

Right now all inserters placing on a belt going around will output on the same line, and all inserters placing on belts going underneath will also place on the same line. This is easy to understand and hard to mess up. If you mix which side (left right) the inserter is placing on depending on the inserter direction that means inserters outputting from the same machine may fill both sides of the belt. It means you have to be incredibly careful if you have 2 lanes with different items. I don't think it's a good idea, and it would also break every save file forcing people to either restart or spend a lot of time fixing their factory (though that's less of an issue considering its EA status).

mrvn
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 2487
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 9:10 am

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by mrvn » Tue May 22, 2018 8:13 am

Hedning1390 wrote:
mrvn wrote:Because it is inconsistent with how they behave with belts going other ways.
From: Perpendicular = Far side (insterter). Parallel=right side (belt). Two rules
To: Perpendicular = Far side (insterter). Parallel=right side (inseter). Also two rules.
The issue issn't a difference between taking and dropping. It's with different relative belt directions. Belt going N-S:

From west: Perpendicular = far / left side (belt)
From east: Perpendicular = far / right side (belt)
From north: Parallel = right side (belt).
From south: Parallel = right side (belt).

See, three ways to put items on the right side and only one on the left. It's unbalanced.

Hedning1390
Fast Inserter
Fast Inserter
Posts: 226
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 8:47 pm

Re: Inserter drop point inconsistency

Post by Hedning1390 » Mon May 28, 2018 1:11 pm

Yes, because of the right hand rule it is easier to place on the right hand side, but I also explained why I think this is better.

Post Reply

Return to “Balancing”