Splitters - only connected exits receive goods

[arl85]

I read about the possibility to use splitters as "joiners" so you can join two different transport belts, but when I used it I found that joining two transport belts in one cause the "free exit" of the splitter to retain a couple of goods.

You can see it in this image from wiki (upper right splitter has an copper plate on left exit)


It's not a big problem, but I would like to "save" these few goods.

My suggestion is to change splitter so that only "connected" exits may receive goods (connected exit = exit linked with at least one transport belt or another splitter)

Code: Select all

	  v unconnected exit - no goods delivered
=====>
=====>======
     ^ connected exit - goods delivered

I think that, since splitter has quite a logic (working per item, ability to balance even if one exit is stopped - up to 5 now, etc...) having this feature will not appear too strange.


The only drawback I can see is that you cannot put an inserter immediately next to the splitter anymore (in following images, inserter is marked as "X")

Code: Select all

NOW WORKING - IT WON'T WORK ANY MORE
      X <--- inserter
=====>
=====>======

THIS WILL WORK
      X <--- inserter
=====>=
=====>======

[sillyfly]

Well, as I see it you are proposing to "waste" an additional transport belt (if I want an inserter after the splitter) instead of "wasting" two items.
I must say I don't see why this would be better. I really don't mind the extra 2 items hanging there, but I sometimes to appreciate the fact that I can pull items from right after the splitter without an additional belt segment (think about a case where you have tight fitting belts, and you can't really put another one after the splitter...)

[arl85]

Please consider that I started playing in last days only, so I could be wrong, but I consider a lot more common using splitter as joiners than the cases where you have need an inserter right there.

Maybe "if tile next to splitter is source for an inserter then consider it connected" would solve both situations, but I understand that having a couple of items there it's just a minor issue

[ssilk]

Why make it so complicated? Say: "If the output is not connected with a belt, there should be no item is wasted on the belt remnant" and let the rest open.

The devs can then implement it how they like.

I will support this, because in the first hour of a game those remaining parts are sometimes important and you cannot avoid them.

[Bleda]

I think it's an unnecessary change and it also breaks some possibilities. for example now you can take items from the tile after the splitter and still use it to place a power pole or another inserter.

If you want to avoid expensive items to get stuck there, just put a few worthless things on the belt in the beginning.

[sillyfly]

Here is an example of how you could use it for making electronic circuits, for example.
Of course, you can do the same with a long-handed inserter, but the fast inserter is slightly faster (I think. correct me if I'm wrong ).
Adding another segment won't break anything here, but it would still have unused items, as the belt pushes the items into the next block...

This isn't a big deal, but so is missing the extra 2 items, at least for me.

[ssilk]

Hm. Indeed. Haven't thought about that...

[arl85]

Adding another segment won't break anything here, but it would still have unused items, as the belt pushes the items into the next block...

So in that case the proposal change will bring no benefit in terms of unused items and you only need one more belt than current setup you show us.

Still I think that your setup is not the most common one; in most cases there's a belt immediately after the splitter, except if it is used as a joiner.
In these cases (I think quite commons) you can have the advantage of saving those two items

[Colombo]

Here is an example of how you could use it for making electronic circuits, for example.
Of course, you can do the same with a long-handed inserter, but the fast inserter is slightly faster (I think. correct me if I'm wrong ).
Adding another segment won't break anything here, but it would still have unused items, as the belt pushes the items into the next block...

This isn't a big deal, but so is missing the extra 2 items, at least for me.

Great. That mean you can use long-hander inserter AND this trick to bring stuff 3 tiles away. In overcrowded belt-lines, this may be crucial.

The question is, if using different trick (two inserters..) wouldn't be better?