Factorio Forums

Yes, I know, a similar thing has been suggested.

While deconstructing stuff with bots I found that they will not carry stuff away - it literally has no destination. If I place down a logistics storage chest, it immediately becomes a mess, as every resource in the network suddenly is brought there. So, I propose a setting for storage chests, akin to previously suggested "formatting", but more general, along the lines of "only buildings", "only raw materials", "only <tabname>" etc.

I've always had this issue with storage containers, they just felt useless before. Now that the logistic network is connected with smart inserters, they work pretty good. I haven't completely reworked my entire factory to account for this, but most of what I have works great. No need to wire (unless you desire) inserters with chests, just plug it all in as logistics conditions (condition won't copy right now, but maybe 0.9.1). The linked storage is for all connected roboports. Roboports chains that are not connected to each other form their own storage and are not considered part of other network's storage (brilliant!). This means you can use logistic conditions without worrying about some unconnected base on the other side of the map sending items or skewing totals. Items on the way to storage are counted towards the total, so no worries there either. I don't think it makes much of a difference, but I've started using smart inserters to limit input instead of output.

You can position storage chests closer to where overflow production might be consumed. Perhaps they could be given filters like requesters while retaining the ability to store and send. Requester chests are not considered part of the logistic storage network and can't be taken from by bots, so filters on storage wouldn't make them obsolete. With proper logic, this could somewhat alleviate the issue of lopsided chest where bots prefer the closer/shortest-path provider chest while others go untouched.

The downside is that you end up spending a little bit more resources on chests. You might also need more bots as they could go from provider to storage to requester if not needed immediately.

Lastly, does anyone else think the default logic operation should be less than instead of greater than? Using logic based on what you have is surely useful, but I almost always use less than. Not much of an issue once copying of smart inserters works, but this has always been a minor annoying for me.

What if there was another type of chest that is between a provider and a storage chest? Call it a production chest.

Logistics bots would only take items from production chests to requester chests. They would not take items from production chests to storage chests, and they would never insert items into production chests.

Then a provider chest means "take these items and put them in storage" and a production chest means "you can use these items, but I don't want them moved to storage."
And storage chests provide space for centralized "cloud storage" where you don't care how things are organised, you just want them to be stored somewhere.

The downside is that you end up spending a little bit more resources on chests. You might also need more bots as they could go from provider to storage to requester if not needed immediately.

There is more to it than that. One, you require A LOT more bots, as with storage chests every resource you wish to insert into logistics network tries to find its way over. Two, sometimes they increase travelling time, wich amounts to even more bots required. Logistic network condition on smart inserter is really awesome, this is all too true. Maybe I have not yet discovered a way to use starage chests effectively.

What if there was another type of chest that is between a provider and a storage chest? Call it a production chest.

As per your description, it doesn't solve the problim in my original post: how can I disassemble a factory if I have an extensive logistics network with lots of items in it and lots of bots and do not want to wind up with everything in a couple chests?

With the logistics in the smart inserters, the logistic is now very useable. The only thing I see as needed is, that I can reserve a minimum space for some items.

The problem is: when I cut too much wood, I fill all storage chests with it. Nothing else can be stored then!
I thought a bit over that: it would make sense, that a logistic network reserves automatically stacks for all items.

Sir Nick wrote:

What if there was another type of chest that is between a provider and a storage chest? Call it a production chest.

As per your description, it doesn't solve the problim in my original post: how can I disassemble a factory if I have an extensive logistics network with lots of items in it and lots of bots and do not want to wind up with everything in a couple chests?

You use production chests everywhere you currently use provider chests. Then you place storage chests to store the deconstructed items.

I try to find the logic. You introduce a new type of chest, but I think you didn't understand, how they currently work.

ssilk wrote:I try to find the logic. You introduce a new type of chest, but I think you didn't understand, how they currently work.

My understanding is:

• If there is at least one storage chest, bots will try to empty out provider chests and move the items to storage chests.
• If there are no storage chests, items in provider chests stay where they are.
• Bots will move items from storage chests and provider chests to requester chests as needed. They will prefer to empty provider chests before storage chests.

Which part of this is wrong?

Very good. Shorter than mine. anywhere above I mixed up something, sorry.

And as I understand your production chest means:
- items in production chests are moved to requester chests only.

?

Hm. Well. I think technically no problem... It might be a idea. Because you can build the logistic network in those two ways, either with provider and requester only, or with provider, requester and storage chest. Any other setup doesn't make sense. Your fourth chest enables to make both setups in one logistic network. But does it bring the wanted effect? And is it understandable?

immibis wrote:

Sir Nick wrote:

What if there was another type of chest that is between a provider and a storage chest? Call it a production chest.

As per your description, it doesn't solve the problim in my original post: how can I disassemble a factory if I have an extensive logistics network with lots of items in it and lots of bots and do not want to wind up with everything in a couple chests?

You use production chests everywhere you currently use provider chests. Then you place storage chests to store the deconstructed items.

Whoops, didn't read your post attentively enough. Yeah, that solves the problem.

Storage chest purpose + logistics robots that pick up from ground = I could just drop non-required items on the floor for them to pick up.

Do you mean purpose as "picked up from griund" or as "set item which should/may be stored"