Make splitters smaller

[sparr]

As much as I like artificial constraints, I am constantly annoyed by the layout requirements imposed by splitters. Instead of a 2x1 parallel splitter, I would love to have a 1x1 splitter that sends the second flow out sideways. This plus one conveyor (for another 90 degree turn) would almost completely replace the 2x1 parallel splitter, and it would make most complex conveyor configurations (splits, combines, etc) simpler, easier to build, easier to visualize, etc.

I suspect there is some reason behind this related to item collision boxes as they exit the splitter. I hope that could be overcome if this idea has merit otherwise.

[Coolthulhu]

+1 for 3-way splitter or even 4-way one.
However the current splitter has uses that 1x1 splitter could not replace (full-speed 1 tile shift, merging), so the new splitter should not be a replacement, but an addition.

[sparr]

+1 for 3-way splitter or even 4-way one.
However the current splitter has uses that 1x1 splitter could not replace (full-speed 1 tile shift, merging), so the new splitter should not be a replacement, but an addition.

By full-speed you mean without the corner penalty? If my suggestion existed, you could use a splitter to make a full speed corner (which would cost significantly more than a simple corner), so you could still do a full speed 1 tile shift with two splitters. Also, you could use three small splitters for merging, which would come along with a one tile shift.

Perhaps the splitters could be smarter so that tiling them changes their behavior? Put two 1x1 splitters next to each other and you get something similar to the existing splitter, possibly with inputs or outputs on the currently unused sides?

[ssilk]

Hm. In which situation would you see this as absolutely needed? Is there any setup, which can't be done, with the current splitters?

[ray4ever]

I actually like the constraint that the 2x1 splliter imposes on you. That way you have to do a lot more of preemptive thinking and planning which I consider fun.

[AlexPhoenix]

interesting, is it a way to add the modded splitters with custom outputs?
or we just limited to standart layout?

as i think we can use 3 sided.
and 2 sided better be as side-output, not two lined.

[Sedado77]

I like the idea of 1x1 splitters, but with a twist...
Hear me out.
1x1 splitter wouldn't split per se. it would have an "arrow" pointing to 1 side, then you coud ADD another 1x1 splitter in the arrow, making it to be the regular splitter we all know and (some) love. BUT (AND THIS IS THE IMPORTANT PART) if you put a 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc... 1x1 inserter in the same "arrow" line, the splitter would split evenly between all the 1x1splitters.
So, it woudn't change the 2 way splitter in any way than the construction of such, (and maybe you could put it on top of a belt without erasing the belt) AND it will give you the ability to 3way split, 4way split, and N-way split in an EASY to construct and EASY TO CODE way

Do you like the idea?
I think it's a good idea

[AlexPhoenix]

I like the idea of 1x1 splitters, but with a twist...
Hear me out.
1x1 splitter wouldn't split per se. it would have an "arrow" pointing to 1 side, then you coud ADD another 1x1 splitter in the arrow, making it to be the regular splitter we all know and (some) love. BUT (AND THIS IS THE IMPORTANT PART) if you put a 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc... 1x1 inserter in the same "arrow" line, the splitter would split evenly between all the 1x1splitters.
So, it woudn't change the 2 way splitter in any way than the construction of such, (and maybe you could put it on top of a belt without erasing the belt) AND it will give you the ability to 3way split, 4way split, and N-way split in an EASY to construct and EASY TO CODE way

Do you like the idea?
I think it's a good idea

very flexible thing, i like it.
not hard to code.

but in this thread i found that i start to thinking also about smart splitters, cuz smart inserters not so powerfull.

[sparr]

I would love to see an N-way splitter and/or a smart splitter.

[Bleda]

@Sedado: I had the same thought. The splitters on the edges could even be rotated which will give even more flexibility. but honestly, It's true that the current splitter allows for all kinds of constructions, with a little space and fantasy. So maybe, such a more flexible splitter would just take some of the fun away.

[Sedado77]

@Sedado: I had the same thought. The splitters on the edges could even be rotated which will give even more flexibility. but honestly, It's true that the current splitter allows for all kinds of constructions, with a little space and fantasy. So maybe, such a more flexible splitter would just take some of the fun away.

Yes, the facing of the edges could be pointed to diferent sides...
I think smart splitters can be a hell of a good thing too. but it is a little harder to code... this change i'm saying would be easily implemented

[ssilk]

I think smart splitters can be a hell of a good thing too. but it is a little harder to code... this change i'm saying would be easily implemented

How do you know that?

[3LollipopZ]

I love these ideas Smart splitters all the way.

I think the splitter could be moduler, meaning 1x1 for each and you can place as many as you want next to each other. sort of like the unlimited chest idea

[Sedado77]

I think smart splitters can be a hell of a good thing too. but it is a little harder to code... this change i'm saying would be easily implemented

How do you know that?

Because I can think a way to code it, and I'm just a very basic programmer. Splitters are already implemented, and they divide things by 2. the only change you would have to do is change the 2 for a variable like .splitter.count(x) where X is the amount of splitters next to each other.

Smart Splitters would mean to code a whole new system for them...

THIS IS IMHO, I CAN BE WRONG, AND PROBABLY I AM.
AND I am not saying your idea is bad in ANY SENSE. I WOULD LOVE SMART INSERTERS. I just think it would be a lot more work than what i am saying... Even the Graphics, the 1x1 splitter can be done by "cutting in half" the normal splitter, while the smart splitter needs a new grafic, plus new stats (electricity?) and the interface (it's not the same as smart inserters, because you don't "filter", you have to say how much each side) and lots of other things I have no idea about

Again, i HOPE smart inserters are the way the devs end up going... My idea is just for a "quick fix" that would help a lot of people while they make the smart ones, and even then, I would prefer (I think it would be more usefull) to split in 3-4-5-(N)ways before having something that splits 2 to 1 ratio for example.

AGAIN, IMHO.

[MF-]

@code
I think you missed all the complications (and possibly race conditions) caused by dynamic data structures
needed for "online" attaching / detaching splitter segments (while the splitter is running)

Note that I like both the corner penalty and the need to combine 2ix2o splitters into whatever ratio needed