Factorio Forums

www.factorio.com
https://forums.factorio.com/

[1.1.74] Relative grid position restriction in blueprints with rail is unnecessary

https://forums.factorio.com/viewtopic.php?t=104607

Page 1 of 1

[1.1.74] Relative grid position restriction in blueprints with rail is unnecessary

Posted: Sun Jan 01, 2023 5:02 pm
by Tooster
When trying to setup relative grid OFFSET for a blueprint containing rails, there is a restriction for "grid position value for this blueprint has to be a multiple of 2". This is true for a grid SIZE, but when the grid is in a relative mode, this restriction is obsolete, as that would work for any offset. This restriction should only apply to the grid size and an absolute grid position.

Use the blueprint below and setup the relative position to -1, -1. It should be valid but the game reports error.

Code: Select all

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

Re: can't setup relative grid offset if blueprint contains rails

Posted: Sun Jan 01, 2023 5:12 pm
by Loewchen
This is not a bug.

Re: can't setup relative grid offset if blueprint contains rails

Posted: Sun Jan 01, 2023 8:19 pm
by Tooster
But it's not a feature either. Maybe it's not a crash, but it's clearly an oversight. If this got moved to Not a Bug then is this closed as wontfix or is it now in the backlog?

Re: can't setup relative grid offset if blueprint contains rails

Posted: Sun Jan 01, 2023 8:28 pm
by cbhj1
Rails are locked to the global grid in 2x2 pieces, any blueprints with rails have to be locked to the same 2x2 grid spacing to be valid.

Re: can't setup relative grid offset if blueprint contains rails

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2023 12:42 pm
by Tooster
Loewchen wrote: Sun Jan 01, 2023 5:12 pm This is not a bug.
cbhj1 wrote: Sun Jan 01, 2023 8:28 pm Rails are locked to the global grid in 2x2 pieces, any blueprints with rails have to be locked to the same 2x2 grid spacing to be valid.
I think you may have missed the point. As you can see below, it's impossible to create a RELATIVE grid for the blueprint with a rail:
Image

Currently only this kind of grid is possible - with even offsets in X and Y
Image

But this would also be a valid RELATIVE grid. The offset should not matter. Only the width and height should be divisible by 2.:
Image

Re: can't setup relative grid offset if blueprint contains rails

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2023 2:01 pm
by ickputzdirwech
Tooster wrote: Thu Jan 05, 2023 12:42 pm But this would also be a valid RELATIVE grid. The offset should not matter. Only the width and height should be divisible by 2.:
Image
Makes sense to me.

Re: can't setup relative grid offset if blueprint contains rails

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2023 5:37 pm
by FuryoftheStars
I agree with the OP on this one, too.

Re: [1.1.74] Grid position restriction in blueprints with relative snap and rail is unnecessary

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2023 6:58 pm
by Loewchen
I see grid position with relative snap as irrelevant either way, but I'll reopen this.

Re: [1.1.74] Relative grid position restriction in blueprints with rail is unnecessary

Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2023 9:23 pm
by robot256
The relative BP grid is only ever compared to itself, right? You get the same functional result with any 4-wide relative grid, no matter where the entities in the BP are relative to the grid. Each successive placement will be 4 tiles over from the last. Rails will still only be placed on the 2x2 absolute grid.

Wanting it to be centered around a single rail is a purely visual aesthetic choice in the BP GUI display.

Re: [1.1.74] Relative grid position restriction in blueprints with rail is unnecessary

Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2024 8:13 pm
by boskid
I am not considering this to be important to fix. Having this relative grid position be allowed to be out of core entity snapping would only have a cosmetic effect and tiny effects on the cursor position but it would not add any new behaviors or would not remove any existing behaviors. I will mark this as minor.

Re: [1.1.74] Relative grid position restriction in blueprints with rail is unnecessary

Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2024 7:01 pm
by BaconHoney
I was trying to make a blueprint off of a section of rails with Big Electric Poles aligned to the same grid as the rails are (so the Big E.P. occupies the same space as a Rail would). But making the blueprint to have a relative snap-to-grid is not possible due to me wanting to "cut" the rails and the Electric Pole in half with the repetition rectangle (see attached picture), so it doesnt place down 2 poles at every section end. Placing the poles off by one relative to the rail-grid doesnt work, because when you want to rotate the blueprint and stack it on top of itself (rotated 90°), the Poles will never align up.
Shifting the repetition rectangle off by one would solve the issue, but it would mean that the blueprint wouldnt be symmetrical (to the cursor).

I understand the non-importance of the blueprint, i think we can live with the non-symmetric blueprints for now, i would like to see it fixed in the not so distant future :)

Re: [1.1.74] Relative grid position restriction in blueprints with rail is unnecessary

Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2024 9:10 pm
by Tertius
You can already create that, no fix required. Don't try to move the rail, move the pole and the signals, because these are what is the problem with symmetry with your blueprint. You don't need signals on both lanes, because for the lane where it appears a signal is missing, the missing signal is added by the next tiled blueprint, so it isn't missing any more.

The blueprint you want to create is this:

11-18-2024, 22-06-16.png
11-18-2024, 22-06-16.png (399.88 KiB) Viewed 615 times
This blueprint is symmetric. It cuts the power pole in half, and so it overlaps the pole and connects with the next tiled version of itself. In a similar manner, a 90° curve can be created, a T-intersection and an X-intersection, and additionally roundabouts of course. All 64x64 blueprints.

The whole blueprint book:
All times are UTC
Page 1 of 1

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited