Store bots inside roboport in blueprints

[cannotloginanymore]

TL;DR

Store bot content of roboports in blueprints ( similar to train fuel or modules ) and make construction bots carry them to the roboport.

What ?

Automate delivery of first bots.
When creating a blueprint containing a roboport, there should be a checkbox in the 'Filters' block to "include bots from roboport" or "include 1 logistic/construction bot", and when checked, constructions bots should carry the initial bots to this roboport.

Screenshot 2024-01-08 221658.png (17.8 KiB) Viewed 970 times

Why ?

The construction area of the roboport is larger then the logistic supply area, this makes it possible to build a roboport that is disconnected from the logistic network.

Screenshot 2024-01-08 215618.png (9.68 MiB) Viewed 970 times

There is no (good) way of delivering bots to this roboport:
- It can be done with a belt across the roboport's logistic area, which is not a good solution in bot-only bases
- Or it can be done manually, which is not a good solution in Factorio.

[Illiander42]

Ooh, this would let grid bases expand without needing a tempory bridge roboport or player interaction.

[SoShootMe]

Related: Ghost bots. As I wrote in that thread, the mechanism used to deliver train fuel and modules (item request proxies) seemed to work for robots into roboports; in other words, only the option to include in the blueprint and generate the blueprint string accordingly are "missing" to implement this suggestion.

I'm still not convinced it's a good idea. In addition to what I wrote at the time, "Roboport robot requests" described in FFF-374 are similar but different which seems likely to cause confusion.

[cannotloginanymore]

Ooh, this would let grid bases expand without needing a tempory bridge roboport or player interaction.

Exactly what I'm looking for

[cannotloginanymore]

Related: Ghost bots.

This is basically the same problem with a different solution

"Roboport robot requests" described in FFF-374 are similar

I disagree. The point of this feature would be to deliver robots to disconnected roboports, the "Roboport robot requests" feature needs connected roboports

[SoShootMe]

"Roboport robot requests" described in FFF-374 are similar

I disagree. The point of this feature would be to deliver robots to disconnected roboports, the "Roboport robot requests" feature needs connected roboports

You seem to disagree with something I didn't write. They are similar but different: they are both "robot requests" but in different contexts and with different meanings, my point being that this is a potential source of confusion.

I think the announced "Roboport robot requests" makes your suggestion less likely to be implemented as a result (other pros and cons notwithstanding), even though it's not the same. But the good news is that you could, and probably still can, get the result you want anyway; the catch being that there's no UI for it.

[Illiander42]

But the good news is that you could, and probably still can, get the result you want anyway; the catch being that there's no UI for it.

Didn't they fix something similar from bob's inserters?

[SoShootMe]

But the good news is that you could, and probably still can, get the result you want anyway; the catch being that there's no UI for it.

Didn't they fix something similar from bob's inserters?

I'm not sure what you mean by "fix" or are referring to, but I checked now and the blueprint from my linked post still works in 1.1.100.

[Illiander42]

But the good news is that you could, and probably still can, get the result you want anyway; the catch being that there's no UI for it.

Didn't they fix something similar from bob's inserters?

I'm not sure what you mean by "fix" or are referring to, but I checked now and the blueprint from my linked post still works in 1.1.100.

It used to be that you could take a blueprint of an inserter set up using bob's adjustable inserters (which let you do all sorts of crazy pick up and drop off locations) and use that blueprint in a vanilla game, with the locations continuing to work how you set them.

This was determined to be a bug, and fixed.

[SoShootMe]

But the good news is that you could, and probably still can, get the result you want anyway; the catch being that there's no UI for it.

Didn't they fix something similar from bob's inserters?

I'm not sure what you mean by "fix" or are referring to, but I checked now and the blueprint from my linked post still works in 1.1.100.

It used to be that you could take a blueprint of an inserter set up using bob's adjustable inserters (which let you do all sorts of crazy pick up and drop off locations) and use that blueprint in a vanilla game, with the locations continuing to work how you set them.

This was determined to be a bug, and fixed.

I see the similarity but other than a duplicate, the only report I can find is 48834, classified as NaB... Did I miss something?

In any case, I reckon the chances are good that adding robots to roboports like my blueprint does (an "items" dictionary in the entity, same as eg modules for an assembler) will continue to work indefinitely. "Famous last words" of course.

[Illiander42]

But the good news is that you could, and probably still can, get the result you want anyway; the catch being that there's no UI for it.

Didn't they fix something similar from bob's inserters?

I'm not sure what you mean by "fix" or are referring to, but I checked now and the blueprint from my linked post still works in 1.1.100.

It used to be that you could take a blueprint of an inserter set up using bob's adjustable inserters (which let you do all sorts of crazy pick up and drop off locations) and use that blueprint in a vanilla game, with the locations continuing to work how you set them.

This was determined to be a bug, and fixed.

I see the similarity but other than a duplicate, the only report I can find is 48834, classified as NaB... Did I miss something?

In any case, I reckon the chances are good that adding robots to roboports like my blueprint does (an "items" dictionary in the entity, same as eg modules for an assembler) will continue to work indefinitely. "Famous last words" of course.

I'm running off memory, but I think someone the devs care about started using it, so they fixed it.

Might have been a speedrunner or youtuber or something.