Blueprint positioning unnecessarily in 2-tile increments

Post your ideas and suggestions how to improve the game.

Moderator: ickputzdirwech

Post Reply
Hottemax
Burner Inserter
Burner Inserter
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 10:27 am
Contact:

Blueprint positioning unnecessarily in 2-tile increments

Post by Hottemax »

Not sure if this goes in bug reports or here, but it relates to the issue described here:
viewtopic.php?f=25&t=48383

In my case, even the smallest blueprints involving rails only move in 2-grid/tile increments when I try to place them, which is infuriating when designing stations etc. Any way to get an update on this.
I just put this here because it was buried in Modding Suggestions, but pertains to vanilla as well...

posila
Factorio Staff
Factorio Staff
Posts: 5201
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 1:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Blueprint positioning unnecessarily in 2-tile increments

Post by posila »

Rails themselves are aligned to 2 tile grid and this won't change, because rail is 2x2 entity and if was aligned to 1-tile grid, it would be possible to build two rails which you could never connect.
So any blueprint containing rails will be also aligned to 2 tile grid.

nuhll
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 922
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2016 9:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Blueprint positioning unnecessarily in 2-tile increments

Post by nuhll »

Solution: remove rails from your BP.

Hottemax
Burner Inserter
Burner Inserter
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2017 10:27 am
Contact:

Re: Blueprint positioning unnecessarily in 2-tile increments

Post by Hottemax »

posila wrote:Rails themselves are aligned to 2 tile grid and this won't change, because rail is 2x2 entity and if was aligned to 1-tile grid, it would be possible to build two rails which you could never connect.
So any blueprint containing rails will be also aligned to 2 tile grid.
Oh I see, ok.

User avatar
5thHorseman
Smart Inserter
Smart Inserter
Posts: 1193
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Blueprint positioning unnecessarily in 2-tile increments

Post by 5thHorseman »

nuhll wrote:Solution: remove rails from your BP.
This. Note you can still have a station and signals in your BP, so you can lay down station designs complete with signals over an existing track.

I do this all the time for my station blueprints.

JasonC
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 448
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 3:05 am
Contact:

Allow shift-click to break track alignment when placing bp/paste

Post by JasonC »

Currently, when pasting / placing bp's that contain train tracks, they are locked to the train track 2-block grid.

It would be very handy if I could place such bp's at odd-numbered locations when I know they are going to be fine. In particular, this would let me place a bp / paste where straight tracks on the ground completely overlap straight tracks in the bp.

I think a good way to allow this would be to let shift-click break the train grid alignment, and simply not place ghosts for items in the paste that require that alignment (tracks, stations, etc).

This comes up frequently when placing train load/unload setups (via bp or copy/paste). Since every other train car is not train grid aligned, single-car setups can't readily be placed along every car because every other one will not line up. The current workaround for copy + paste is to instead create a bp, then remove all straight tracks from the bp to allow arbitrary placement, then delete the bp when finished. For example, a typical scenario:


This shows copying some setup for a single car to three other cars, as well as the current workaround.

If I could break the alignment by e.g. holding shift, then I could paste that without having to create the workaround bp. The straight tracks in my paste would not be placed, but that is fine in this case because I can see that existing track already covers the area and the end result is what I want.

As a bonus side effect, this would also allow signals in copy/paste/bp to be offset by 1 if the player so desires.
Last edited by JasonC on Fri Oct 21, 2022 7:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Took a break from 0.12.29 to 0.17.79, and then to ... oh god now it's 1.something. I never know what's happening.

Koub
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 7199
Joined: Fri May 30, 2014 8:54 am
Contact:

Re: Blueprint positioning unnecessarily in 2-tile increments

Post by Koub »

[Koub] Merged into older thread with same suggestion.
Koub - Please consider English is not my native language.

JasonC
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 448
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 3:05 am
Contact:

Re: Blueprint positioning unnecessarily in 2-tile increments

Post by JasonC »

Koub wrote:
Sat Oct 22, 2022 11:36 am
[Koub] Merged into older thread with same suggestion.
Thanks, Koub. I do think the shift-click suggestion is significant and am slightly sad that it is not in this title; but I can't think of anything to do about that, so... 🤷‍♂️
Took a break from 0.12.29 to 0.17.79, and then to ... oh god now it's 1.something. I never know what's happening.

User avatar
ssilk
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 12888
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 10:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Blueprint positioning unnecessarily in 2-tile increments

Post by ssilk »

I think the Shift-key is already overused… what I want is some kind of circle menu, which I can use to change the paste parameters while placing the bp.
Cool suggestion: Eatable MOUSE-pointers.
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...

JasonC
Filter Inserter
Filter Inserter
Posts: 448
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2016 3:05 am
Contact:

Re: Blueprint positioning unnecessarily in 2-tile increments

Post by JasonC »

ssilk wrote:
Mon Oct 24, 2022 6:00 am
I think the Shift-key is already overused… what I want is some kind of circle menu, which I can use to change the paste parameters while placing the bp.
I'd like that too, or anything really.

The reason "shift" seems intuitive (to me anyways) is because when you use it while placing ghosts now it will force the ghost to be placed even if there are conflicts, and this kind of feels the same (there's a conflict with grid alignment, so force it to be placed anyways).
Took a break from 0.12.29 to 0.17.79, and then to ... oh god now it's 1.something. I never know what's happening.

Post Reply

Return to “Ideas and Suggestions”