[0.17.31] Chemical Plant (Solid Fuel) with dual output inserters
[0.17.31] Chemical Plant (Solid Fuel) with dual output inserters
When you have a chemical plant producing solid fuel and have two inserters (maybe one going to belt and one inserting into box) they aren't taking turns/alternating like when you have two outputs from an assembler machine.
Re: [0.17.31] Chemical Plant (Solid Fuel) with dual output inserters
Thanks for the report. That's not a bug: inserters don't take turns.
If you want to get ahold of me I'm almost always on Discord.
Re: [0.17.31] Chemical Plant (Solid Fuel) with dual output inserters
When you have an assembler direct inserting into two other assemblers (or into boxes) they do take turns though, just not when you have two inserters coming from a chem plant?
Re: [0.17.31] Chemical Plant (Solid Fuel) with dual output inserters
No, they do not. There is *zero* logic that makes inserters take turns. If they happen to appear to work that way that's fine but we have written zero lines of code saying they should work that way and any behavior you *think* you might be seeing is purely coincidence.
If you want to get ahold of me I'm almost always on Discord.
Re: [0.17.31] Chemical Plant (Solid Fuel) with dual output inserters
Then do assemblers "request" materials from inserters somehow which would make it appear that way? That would explain why they round-robin direct insertion into multiple assemblers but not when outputting to boxes or into non-assembler things.
Re: [0.17.31] Chemical Plant (Solid Fuel) with dual output inserters
I know why it appears like inserters "take turns" but it's not a mechanic we've explicitly programmed and we have no plans to keep it working that way so I'm not going to tell anyone why it works like it does or that how it works is intended or will stay working how it does.
As I said: it might seem like they do, but from what we've programmed no one should ever rely on them working that way because there's nothing stopping us from making them work a different way in the future since we never said they *should* work any given way.
As I said: it might seem like they do, but from what we've programmed no one should ever rely on them working that way because there's nothing stopping us from making them work a different way in the future since we never said they *should* work any given way.
If you want to get ahold of me I'm almost always on Discord.