Snap to grid should default to relative again
Moderator: ickputzdirwech
Snap to grid should default to relative again
With the new interface, the absolute position is now the default for snap to grid.
Was this change intended? Relative snapping seems to be the much more common method to use it. Actually i don't think I personally used the absolute snapping ever while I use the relative one every few minutes. I'd recommend to change the default to relative again.
Was this change intended? Relative snapping seems to be the much more common method to use it. Actually i don't think I personally used the absolute snapping ever while I use the relative one every few minutes. I'd recommend to change the default to relative again.
Last edited by AntiElitz on Thu Nov 26, 2020 12:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Snap to grid should default to relative again
+10
if I could
if I could
Re: Snap to grid should default to relative again
Relative, please!
- NotRexButCaesar
- Smart Inserter
- Posts: 1124
- Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:47 am
- Contact:
Re: Snap to grid should default to relative again
^5 (so 250k now)
Ⅲ—Crevez, chiens, si vous n'étes pas contents!
- SupplyDepoo
- Filter Inserter
- Posts: 286
- Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2016 8:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Snap to grid should default to relative again
I agree. Absolute snapping seems to be applicable to modular rail networks / city block megabase construction and not much else.
Relative snapping is useful for many things, maybe even more than non-snapping, which makes me thing that maybe relative snapping should be the default for all blueprints (including copy & paste)?
Relative snapping is useful for many things, maybe even more than non-snapping, which makes me thing that maybe relative snapping should be the default for all blueprints (including copy & paste)?
Re: Snap to grid should default to relative again
+1
Myself, I use relative all the time.
I never use absolute. I can imagine it being useful for cityblocks, or substation grids, but it's very specialize compared to relative which is useful in so many places.
Myself, I use relative all the time.
I never use absolute. I can imagine it being useful for cityblocks, or substation grids, but it's very specialize compared to relative which is useful in so many places.
Re: Snap to grid should default to relative again
No. this would break my workflow.
Last edited by steinio on Mon Dec 07, 2020 12:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Snap to grid should default to relative again
I find myself using relative snapping an awful lot more than absolute, yeah.
Re: Snap to grid should default to relative again
This. Relative snapping should be the default configuration even over "no snapping". Can't think of very many situations where I want to place two copies of a blueprint 1-tile offset from each other.SupplyDepoo wrote: ↑Thu Nov 26, 2020 11:46 pmI agree. Absolute snapping seems to be applicable to modular rail networks / city block megabase construction and not much else.
Relative snapping is useful for many things, maybe even more than non-snapping, which makes me thing that maybe relative snapping should be the default for all blueprints (including copy & paste)?
- NotRexButCaesar
- Smart Inserter
- Posts: 1124
- Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:47 am
- Contact:
Re: Snap to grid should default to relative again
Ⅲ—Crevez, chiens, si vous n'étes pas contents!
- NotRexButCaesar
- Smart Inserter
- Posts: 1124
- Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:47 am
- Contact:
Re: Snap to grid should default to relative again
At the risk of being redundant, *bump*
Ⅲ—Crevez, chiens, si vous n'étes pas contents!
Re: Snap to grid should default to relative again
Still no need for double postings, AmericanPatriot!
Cool suggestion: Eatable MOUSE-pointers.
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...
Re: Snap to grid should default to relative again
Alternate idea:
Instead of a checkbox followed by 2 options, Snap to grid could simply have 3 options:
- None
- Relative
- Absolute
It would default to "None". Then either Relative or Absolute is a single click, and the standard grid-less behavior requires zero clicks as it currently does.
Edited to clarify.
Instead of a checkbox followed by 2 options, Snap to grid could simply have 3 options:
- None
- Relative
- Absolute
It would default to "None". Then either Relative or Absolute is a single click, and the standard grid-less behavior requires zero clicks as it currently does.
Edited to clarify.
Last edited by brevven on Mon Jan 04, 2021 10:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Filter Inserter
- Posts: 665
- Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:45 pm
- Contact:
Re: Snap to grid should default to relative again
I'm curious as to why this was changed. I assume there must have been a reason?
+1 for relative. I can't think of a scenario where I'd use None. maybe blueprint as paintbrush?
Absolute is very useful, but only required in rare circumstances.
+1 for relative. I can't think of a scenario where I'd use None. maybe blueprint as paintbrush?
Absolute is very useful, but only required in rare circumstances.
OptimaUPS Mod, pm for info.
Re: Snap to grid should default to relative again
In my suggestion "None" is the current default blueprint behavior: no grid at all. It's what you use when you copy-paste or just blueprint without clicking the current checkbox to use a grid.
My suggestion simply removes the checkbox and therefore removes the need for devs to choose between "Relative" and "Absolute" as a default grid option, as either would require one click instead of two.
Re: Snap to grid should default to relative again
So what you're saying is to take out a level? Something like this?
Currently
[x] Use grid
(*) Absolute
( ) Relative
Proposed
(*) No grid
( ) Grid, snap absolute
( ) Grid, snap relative
-
- Filter Inserter
- Posts: 665
- Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2020 12:45 pm
- Contact:
Re: Snap to grid should default to relative again
I think currently, he is saying that snap to grid is unchecked.
I can't think of a scenario that I've been happy that was true. I'm curious how folks use default none.
Snap to Grid - Relative should ideally be default, IMHO. Ajedi above also makes the same point.
Another proposal is to default to whatever the user's last decision was. I find this sort of thing useful though does make UX a bit more complicated. I really wish something like that existed for E / inventory / crafting and the window would go back to whatever state I left it when I dismissed it.
I can't think of a scenario that I've been happy that was true. I'm curious how folks use default none.
Snap to Grid - Relative should ideally be default, IMHO. Ajedi above also makes the same point.
Another proposal is to default to whatever the user's last decision was. I find this sort of thing useful though does make UX a bit more complicated. I really wish something like that existed for E / inventory / crafting and the window would go back to whatever state I left it when I dismissed it.
OptimaUPS Mod, pm for info.
Re: Snap to grid should default to relative again
Exactly what I'm suggesting! Thank you for sketching it out like that, Kyralessa.