Allow circuit network conditions from 0 up

[sillyfly]

(I first wanted to post it in "Bug reports", but I figured - there are probably more pressing issues to be dealt with . Also - there are tons of threads about the circuit network, but this is a very simple suggestion, which I believe is just something the developers overlooked. I haven't seen a thread mentioning this explicitly, but as there are a lot of them I may have missed something, and if I did - I'm sorry )

Currently the minimum setting for a smart inserter on a circuit network is 1. This is fine most of the time, and you can even get away with it if you want the inserter to only operate if a certain resource has 0 quantity (with "item < 1" condition). But there is no way to make the inserter only operate if a certain resource has non-zero quantity. This is sometimes useful when making logical conditions with the circuit network, but currently it's impossible.
I can't see any reason not to allow the condition to go down to 0. Do you?

Thank you!

[tralala]

>1 means a ressource has a non-zero quantity.
<1 means a ressource has a zero quantity.

Negative quantities are not possible so I don't see your point.

[therapist]

>1 means a resource has a non-zero quantity.
<1 means a resource has a zero quantity.

Negative quantities are not possible so I don't see your point.

I think what he means is that x>1 means the value of x is 2 or higher.
While x=1 means exactly one item in the chest.
While x<1 could only mean a value of zero.

What would you use to detect if a chest had one item or more in it? You can't.

x>0 is what you would use to detect if a chest has ANY of an item within it.

Am i understanding you correctly sillyfly?

[sillyfly]

Yes, exactly.

As I said - it is not a big deal, but it would be nice to have, and I would assume it would be very easy to implement.

[therapist]

Yes, exactly.

As I said - it is not a big deal, but it would be nice to have, and I would assume it would be very easy to implement.

Supposedly, an update that will introduce logic-gates will come soon. My big gripe about was that they did not include the number 6144 in the slider. This number tells you when a chest is FULL, and could be used to create giant, super efficient storage depots.

[sillyfly]

My big gripe about was that they did not include the number 6144 in the slider. This number tells you when a chest is FULL, and could be used to create giant, super efficient storage depots.

Presumably you would need different numbers according to the different stack sizes of objects (Barrels stack up to 8 so you would need 384, while Alien artifacts stack up to 500 so you would need 24000). But I see your point

Allowing such freedom would probably mean having a text box and not just a slider, to allow you to "hit" the right number.

[therapist]

My big gripe about was that they did not include the number 6144 in the slider. This number tells you when a chest is FULL, and could be used to create giant, super efficient storage depots.

Presumably you would need different numbers according to the different stack sizes of objects (Barrels stack up to 8 so you would need 384, while Alien artifacts stack up to 500 so you would need 24000). But I see your point

Allowing such freedom would probably mean having a text box and not just a slider, to allow you to "hit" the right number.

I dont want every number, but it just seems illogical not to let me detect if a chest is full or not. Kind of makes the red wire and green wire conditions useless for storage purposes.

[ssilk]

First some links, then some comment.

This is the oldest about this problem:
https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... ?f=6&t=974

I think this post is still valid:
https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... rter#p7936


Here I show the first time, that the equal is more or less useless:
https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... =23&t=2926

Here something about good stack sizes and that the ruler should depend on the context:
https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... f=6&t=2209

Here, that we have a problem with the stacksize-bonus, which makes the EQUAL-operator only usable in very special situations:
https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... f=7&t=2413
See also this: https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... f=7&t=2117 -> point #2: " when requesting one Roboport I get two"


And now my opinion:
The theme is a complex of different things: Inserters and logistic system, stack sizes, plusminus-one-problems, the inserter- and logistic-stack-size, inserters and bots filling something at the same time, using the right dimensions in the right context, interface design, and per sure a handfull of other side-effects.

So I cannot just change a small thing, I need to change a lot.

#1 Remove the equal-operator and eventually replace < and > with <= and >= (or add them). Because the equal operator will definitely fail, when you based some trick on that and then research stacksize bonus.

#2 The selection of the number should have 5 levels:
-- simple: Items 0-99, type in number, or press two buttons (calculator), or drag mouse...
-- More items: the scale how it is about yet, but I would prefer buttons and that it is based on the stack-size of the selected item-type
-- Stack-context: X stacks of the selected items-type.
-- chest context: X (logistic) chests full of this item type.
-- any number, a special/hidden mode of the first.

#3 Some clever handling of the overloading. I made that suggestion, but is it usable?

#4 What does an inserter/bot do with stuff, he cannot deploy? This question is complex.

[therapist]

First some links, then some comment.

This is the oldest about this problem:
https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... ?f=6&t=974

I think this post is still valid:
https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... rter#p7936


Here I show the first time, that the equal is more or less useless:
https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... =23&t=2926

Here something about good stack sizes and that the ruler should depend on the context:
https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... f=6&t=2209

Here, that we have a problem with the stacksize-bonus, which makes the EQUAL-operator only usable in very special situations:
https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... f=7&t=2413
See also this: https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... f=7&t=2117 -> point #2: " when requesting one Roboport I get two"


And now my opinion:
The theme is a complex of different things: Inserters and logistic system, stack sizes, plusminus-one-problems, the inserter- and logistic-stack-size, inserters and bots filling something at the same time, using the right dimensions in the right context, interface design, and per sure a handfull of other side-effects.

So I cannot just change a small thing, I need to change a lot.

#1 Remove the equal-operator and eventually replace < and > with <= and >= (or add them). Because the equal operator will definitely fail, when you based some trick on that and then research stacksize bonus.

#2 The selection of the number should have 5 levels:
-- simple: Items 0-99, type in number, or press two buttons (calculator), or drag mouse...
-- More items: the scale how it is about yet, but I would prefer buttons and that it is based on the stack-size of the selected item-type
-- Stack-context: X stacks of the selected items-type.
-- chest context: X (logistic) chests full of this item type.
-- any number, a special/hidden mode of the first.

#3 Some clever handling of the overloading. I made that suggestion, but is it usable?

#4 What does an inserter/bot do with stuff, he cannot deploy? This question is complex.

You made it really really complex by including alot of other issues, can we just get a 0 please? I think thats all we are looking for here, the rest, ehhhhhhh, fuck it.

Kovarex changed stack size, so my complaint about the chest might have changed, I have to build a new base and see how it all plays out before I update my complaints.

[GewaltSam]

before I update my complaints.

I had to laugh when I read that phrase

[ssilk]

You made it really really complex by including alot of other issues, can we just get a 0 please? I think thats all we are looking for here, the rest, ehhhhhhh, fuck it.

I must excuse. I should have pressed the "save draft" button. I was indeed a bit tired yesterday. Nothing good comes along, when I'm in that mood.

To defend it: the removal of the equal is as important in my eyes, cause it misleads too much.

Kovarex changed stack size, so my complaint about the chest might have changed, I have to build a new base and see how it all plays out before I update my complaints.

Right, I want to begin a new game, too, clause of that.

[mrvn]

Why is this still a suggestion?

From what I can tell the slider now starts at 0 and one can enter any number in the text field next to the slider now, including negative numbers.

[MeduSalem]

Why is this still a suggestion?

From what I can tell the slider now starts at 0 and one can enter any number in the text field next to the slider now, including negative numbers.

Because nobody moved it to the "already implemented" sub section ever since the last post 2.5 years ago.

[ssilk]

It's really not possible to keep track of all the suggestions. About 4000 suggestions from nearly 5 years. If someone sees an old suggestion he needs just to click on the "report"-button.