Question - Is Inserter item drop position intuitive?

[mrvn]

Now that splitters are configurable I wish inserters could be configured too. I'm not going to call the way it places items on the belt logical or illogical. However, to me it does seem consistent, being that it always places the item furthest away, and on the right-side when there is no furthest away.

Bob's adjustable inserters to the rescue.

[netmand]

Bob's adjustable inserters to the rescue.

Now if I could just get over my stigma of using mods...

[mmmPI]

Bob's adjustable inserters to the rescue.

Now if I could just get over my stigma of using mods...

Hoping to change, Haw again proposes a search for new cheese. However, Hem is comforted by his old routine and is frightened about the unknown. He knocks the idea again. After a while of being in denial, the humans remain without cheese. One day, having discovered his debilitating fears, Haw begins to chuckle at the situation and stops taking himself so seriously. Realizing he should simply move on, Haw enters the maze downloaded a mod

I learned a thing today

[Pi-C]

At the beginning of my main bus, I've placed some chests (store houses from a mod, actually) from where inserters take the required items and load them on the belts. Inserters have one disadvantage, though: they only load the belt on one side. Usually, I would use a belt balancer in such cases -- but on the bus, there are multiple lanes carrying different items close to each other, so this is not practical. I therefore thought of a way to load both sides of the belt in a way requiring less space. The clever way seemed to be to place an inserter each on two opposite sides of the chest that load onto underground belts:

inserter-direction.png (289.28 KiB) Viewed 4988 times

However, that doesn't work, and I've found the reason on the wiki:

Inserters place the item on the furthest lane. If a belt is in the same orientation as the inserter, the item will be placed on the right-hand lane, from the belt's perspective. In curves the inserter always places on the far side.

It's documented behavior (so clearly not a bug), but it came as a bit of surprise because I (and I'm not alone) have internalized that inserters will place items on the far side or on the right side, with the understanding that this is from the inserter's perspective.

I think it would be useful to change the behavior so that inserters always load the right lane from the inserter's perspective instead of the belt's. Would you, please, consider implementing this, or would that break too much?

[Ecu]

I agree with you. Having inserters place items based on their own orientation would open up more options.

[mmmPI]

I advise you this topic :viewtopic.php?f=5&t=71523

I am not sure it has been mentionned that it "should/could" be decided from the inserter's perspective. The fact that it is from belt's perspective and its consequences were discussed in details though !

I am a bit surprised by your picture because both inserter swing their +/- 180° movement toward the upper part of the screenshot. I had since the previous discussion always considered that the logic in the game was decided to allow easy rotation of setups at the cost of breaking mirroring setup. In the picture the 2 inserters seems a mirror version of each other instead of 180° rotation , the inserter on the right side i would have expected to swing counter clockwise when dropping an item using a swing movement toward the bottom of the screen shot.

Yet it is doing 185° swing to reach right side of belt, while the other on the left side only does a 175° swing as approximation. I would have only expected the rotation movement of the inserter to use the other half circle, to match the 180° rotation and symetry from the left one.

[Koub]

@OP : I feel we're going to restart the discussion mmmPI linked. OK for a topic merge ?

[Pi-C]

@OP : I feel we're going to restart the discussion mmmPI linked. OK for a topic merge ?

Sure! I didn't look much beyond the first few postings in that thread and therefore got the impression it was about issues with curved belts only. But it seems to fit there after all.

[Pi-C]

I advise you this topic :viewtopic.php?f=5&t=71523

I am not sure it has been mentionned that it "should/could" be decided from the inserter's perspective. The fact that it is from belt's perspective and its consequences were discussed in details though !

Thanks for pointing out that thread! I thought it was about curved belt issues only, but it seems to cover my case as well. I'll have to look at it more closely when I'll be home again, at my own computer with a bigger screen. Right now, I'm on a small notebook where it's difficult to see all the pictures in detail, so it's a bit hard to follow the discussion.

I am a bit surprised by your picture because both inserter swing their +/- 180° movement toward the upper part of the screenshot. I had since the previous discussion always considered that the logic in the game was decided to allow easy rotation of setups at the cost of breaking mirroring setup. In the picture the 2 inserters seems a mirror version of each other instead of 180° rotation , the inserter on the right side i would have expected to swing counter clockwise when dropping an item using a swing movement toward the bottom of the screen shot.

I'm pretty sure I set this up by rotating the inserter, not by mirroring the other one. Then again, I'm only pretty sure, it's not dead certain.

[Koub]

[Koub] Merged newer topic into older, same overall subject.

[Generico]

It appears that inserters placed inline with belts always place items on the right-hand side of the belt, no matter what direction the inserter is facing. This pretty much ruins the ability to insert inline, because the game will only ever use the right side of the belt. It's also not very intuitive. Most people would assume the inserter places items relative to itself, not the belt, because hat's how it works when you side load. The inserter puts items on the side of the belt farthest away relative to itself. It doesn't place items only on the right-hand side of the belt regardless of which side of the belt it's on, because that would be stupid.

inserter bug1.png (49.81 KiB) Viewed 4648 times

Mining drills are also subject to this problem, and this space efficient layout which seems like it should produce balanced belts doesn't work because of this nonsensical behavior.

inserter bug2.png (217.09 KiB) Viewed 4648 times

[5thHorseman]

I agree with you 100%, but it's been suggested before and shot down

[Kyralessa]

You never said what you're suggesting the change should be.

items have to go either on the left side or the right side. Are you suggesting it should be random? Or should it alternate? Or start on one side consistently, but fill the other side if the first side is full?

[5thHorseman]

You never said what you're suggesting the change should be.

"Place items relative to inserter orientation instead of belt orientation" in the title.

What he and all these other posters (and I) want is, that inserters should put items into the far right quadrant of the belt*, relative to themselves. Right now they do so relative to "up" on your screen. But only when belts are not perpendicular to the inserter.

*or anywhere, so long as it's consistent. far-right is just the most consistent with how they place items now.

[Koub]

[Koub] Merged into the older discussion about the same subject.

[Pi-C]

Mining drills are also subject to this problem

Wow, I never thought you could do that with miners:

inserter bug2.png (33.9 KiB) Viewed 4597 times

Inserters? Of course, they can reach over the underground's cover[*] and dump items on the belt -- but mining drills? Always thought the cover would block them. Thanks for the picture, just got up and learned something new already!

[*] Question to the native English speakers: Is there a better term for these things over an underground's entry/exit?

[5thHorseman]

[*] Question to the native English speakers: Is there a better term for these things over an underground's entry/exit?

Probably the best word here would be "hood"

[Kyralessa]

You never said what you're suggesting the change should be.

"Place items relative to inserter orientation instead of belt orientation" in the title.

What he and all these other posters (and I) want is, that inserters should put items into the far right quadrant of the belt*, relative to themselves. Right now they do so relative to "up" on your screen. But only when belts are not perpendicular to the inserter.

*or anywhere, so long as it's consistent. far-right is just the most consistent with how they place items now.

Sure, but what's not in the title or the text is anything about how this should work. Always place on the right? Always place on the left? What even is right or left? Is that left/right when facing the inserter, or left/right the way the inserter itself is facing? And again, what happens if the side the inserter would place on is full? Does it then place on the other side, or does it just get stuck (like now)? And would the inserter text indicate which side items go on, or would people just have to remember that it's always [right/left]?

[Kyralessa]

Incidentally, to me, personally, debating how this should work is like talking about the precedence of + and * and % and ^ in programming. Yeah, you can memorize the rules in various situations, but if it matters, then use parentheses; don't leave it to chance.

Similarly, if it matters which side the inserter drops on (and it usually does), then don't do weird things like dropping on a curve or dropping on a belt parallel to the inserter. Anything you have to "just remember", you're probably going to forget.

[Pi-C]

[*] Question to the native English speakers: Is there a better term for these things over an underground's entry/exit?

Probably the best word here would be "hood"

Thanks! Never thought of that because "Hood" has multiple meanings (hood of a car, a hood you put on your head). But given its origin ("Middle English hode, Old English hōd; cognate with Old Frisian hōde, Dutch hoed, German Hut hat", according to dictionary.com), this really makes sense -- if the context is clear. So, would you go with "belt hood" or "underground belt hood" (seems a bit too long)?