I'm extremely disappointed by this change and was really looking forward to this working as it was outlined in FFF #203
. I had the same use case in mind as mentioned in the bug thread
with being able to have storage self-regulating and organized and returning certain items to their original storage locations for suitable upgrade. I had pictured replacing a lot of passive provider chests with buffer chests once available within the factory so they would pull orphaned items from storage and make them available for upgrade where applicable. (As an example, have yellow belts put into a buffer chest instead of passive provider. Set the request amount to be slightly higher than the inserter (under circuit control) putting in belts from assembly. This would ensure storage is cleared out of yellow belts before more are made, especially if there's a demand on red or blue belts and you have too many yellow belts.)
I had also hoped to return raw resources to the main bus, but also have these same raw resources accessible to logistic requests, if needed.
I think the "silly situation" is buffers pulling in items a distance away, and then having requesters run dry that then pull from the buffers. Couldn't this be addressed by being able to select a particular requestors' pull priorities?
Klonan mentioned a general priority in the thread for FFF #203
MeduSalem wrote:How does the Active Provider Chest fit into that? Does it also provide items for the Buffer Chests?
Active providers just push out to everything, so they will push to buffers just the same way, to clarify, this is the current priority:
2. Construction orders
3. Buffer chests
4. Storage chests
I take this to mean that this is priority whenever items need to find a new home (i.e. they're in an active provider or being trashed etc.) or which entity gets an available item if everything is requesting. So a requester chest is on the top of the list, and then pulls from a buffer chest, which is the problem I believe. In many cases we'll want this to happen though; it's a buffer afterall. As I said above, if you could specify that requestors deep in the factory should pull from passive providers / storage / buffers (in that order), and then requestors on the perimeter pull from buffer / storage / passive or whatever combination works for the player's intent and setup. Generic rules aren't going to allow for all use cases we were looking forward to, so why not make overrides possible? This game is already so customize-able that I think this option fits in nicely.
As was said already, I don't see myself really using these anymore as implemented. Which is a shame since this was the big change I was waiting for.