Factorio Forums

I love belts, but working with them always leaves my inventory messy.

Whenever I remove belts or replace them with a splitter or underground belt, the items on the belt is automatically picked up.
This is way better than leaving them on the ground, but unless I explicitly grab items from a belt, I do not want them; ever.

Auto-trash is a solution for this, but configuring it for every item is tedious and boring. Especially when using mods where the number of items can sometimes get a bit ridiculous.

I would love a toggle to make auto-picked-up items just go straight into the trash.
This would make working with belts a carefree experience!

Why don’t you use ghosts and let your construction bots do that?

From gameplay-perspective this doubles an already existing mechanism, the personal requests. So Me as a developer would not add this. Maybe I would make the interface simpler so I can click into the inventory and add a new request slot for that item with a zero request.

Auto-trash is a solution for this

Have you tried the auto-trash mod?

ssilk wrote: ↑Sun Dec 19, 2021 10:36 am Why don’t you use ghosts and let your construction bots do that?

From gameplay-perspective this doubles an already existing mechanism, the personal requests. So Me as a developer would not add this. Maybe I would make the interface simpler so I can click into the inventory and add a new request slot for that item with a zero request.

Auto-trash is a solution for this

Have you tried the auto-trash mod?

Bots will return any deconstructed items as well, so that wouldn't help much.
Also if you have 150 bots and lay out 155 ghosts you have to wait for the 5 other construction bots from across the map.
I was going to submit a feature request for "use my bots only when laying blueprints", but I suspect it probably has been made a 100 times over already

I did find an interesting option in the auto-trash mod: "trash unrequested items". Maybe it will do what I need.

I still stand by my request though

There's already a feature that allows me to request items I do want. And also a feature that lets me explicitly pick up items from a belt.
The notion of "don't give me stuff I didn't tell you to give me" just seems like good UX to me.

waitofaiorur wrote: ↑Sun Dec 19, 2021 12:23 pm Bots will return any deconstructed items as well, so that wouldn't help much.

If you turn off your personal roboport and use the pure power of construction bots located in the roboports of your base, then they pick it up and put it directly into storage chests or wherever things are needed.

This is the preferable way to do mass-construction. It takes a bit longer, but you don’t need to hassle around with your inventory.

Also if you have 150 bots and lay out 155 ghosts you have to wait for the 5 other construction bots from across the map.

Depends on your playstyle. I don’t wait and continue construction.

Maybe I add some more bots. Ahh, no, the base adds more bots, because I automate to add more bots - of course .

Factorio is about automation. Find ways to do things with less effort. If you think you can construct faster by only using your personal roboport, then look at YouTube: there are players using mainly spiders for construction!

In my opinion the personal robots are only useable for fast construction of small but urgent blueprints. Walls, rails, forest, turrets… not for picking up hundreds of items from belts. When I do that I try for example to let the belt run empty before.

I was going to submit a feature request for "use my bots only when laying blueprints", but I suspect it probably has been made a 100 times over already

No, because it makes totally no sense. there is just no need for this, if you don’t insists on using personal roboport.

I did find an interesting option in the auto-trash mod: "trash unrequested items". Maybe it will do what I need.

Yes. Nice. Auto-trash mod is a must have. Should be part of vanilla.

I still stand by my request though

I’m not. I’m walking away…

There's already a feature that allows me to request items I do want. And also a feature that lets me explicitly pick up items from a belt.
The notion of "don't give me stuff I didn't tell you to give me" just seems like good UX to me.

The next one will come and ask: “why do the stupid bots put the items from a construction belt into my trash? They should put it directly into the storage chests!”
Another one will come: “they should not put only items from deconstructed entities in the trash, but also items from ground.”
Next one: “but when I deconstruct assemblies, the items should not be put into trash, because I have for the higher tier-items no mechanism in my base to re-use them”.

And so forth.

I think about moving this to won’t implement. There is already this good mechanism in your inventory. The rest is how relaxed you want to play and it has nothing to do with good ux, if you implement a second way to do similar things.

Yeah, I gotta agree with sslik here. This feels less like a "good ux" issue and more of a "I want an option for this niche use case" which easily turns into other people wanting options for their niche use cases, and before you know it, you've got 50-100+ options for niche use cases. The original request can already be handled by the in game trash options, though maybe there could be ways to improve that and make it easier to use (never used the Auto Trash mod, but maybe if there was some way to save and load predefined trash settings?). And I certainly don't think we need more options for "only use my personal roboport for blueprints", or even the opposite! (Just making the point right there....) Frankly, I feel like these types of niche use cases are mod territory.

Personally, if I don't want items off a belt, I handle it the same way as I would pre-bots: I rotate a belt segment prior to the area I'll be working in and let it clear out, then do my work and once done, rotate the belt back. Or in cases where I can't let the flow stop, I'll run a temp bypass. Assuming I even feel like it's that big of a deal in the first place.

Also, whether you intended it that way or not, saying that including something like that is just "good ux" is implying that the current ux isn't good, and thus is an insult towards the devs (from my pov).

First of all, let me thank you for your thorough answers. I really appreciate that you took the time to evaluate my suggestions and post thoughtful replies. I'm sure the list of suggestions aren't short and this is awesome

If you turn off your personal roboport and use the pure power of construction bots located in the roboports of your base, then they pick it up and put it directly into storage chests or wherever things are needed.

This is the preferable way to do mass-construction. It takes a bit longer, but you don’t need to hassle around with your inventory.

My base is huge. We are literally talking five minutes of waiting for items already in my inventory.

Depends on your playstyle. I don’t wait and continue construction.

The difference of five items was contrived to make the wait seem more meaningless. Often it's more items than makes sense to place manually.

No, because it makes totally no sense. there is just no need for this, if you don’t insists on using personal roboport.

One of the devs (I believe Kovarex) mentioned this was a problem he really wanted to fix, but it was too complex and time-consuming to make a general fix. My suggestion of simple toggle would be a workaround for a generic construction-bot request-distribution.

Yes. Nice. Auto-trash mod is a must have. Should be part of vanilla.

So the one mod containing my small quality of life fix should be part of vanilla, but my request should not?

The next one will come and ask: “why do the stupid bots put the items from a construction belt into my trash? They should put it directly into the storage chests!”

Where do trash go?

Another one will come: “they should not put only items from deconstructed entities in the trash, but also items from ground.”

Items from the ground are few and far between. The existing functionality will deal with this quite nicely.

This feels less like a "good ux" issue and more of a "I want an option for this niche use case" which easily turns into other people wanting options for their niche use cases, and before you know it, you've got 50-100+ options for niche use cases.

I hardly think right-clicking on a belt to remove it is "niche". To keep the very limited inventory clean, you are required to make a logistic setup for every single item in the game. Add even a single overhaul mod and this becomes rather painful.

And I certainly don't think we need more options for "only use my personal roboport for blueprints", or even the opposite! (Just making the point right there....) Frankly, I feel like these types of niche use cases are mod territory.

Like I said, I never submitted the suggestion. However, it is literally on the top of Kovarex's "if I had time" list. This alone should make it worth considering.

Personally, if I don't want items off a belt, I handle it the same way as I would pre-bots: I rotate a belt segment prior to the area I'll be working in and let it clear out, then do my work and once done, rotate the belt back. Or in cases where I can't let the flow stop, I'll run a temp bypass. Assuming I even feel like it's that big of a deal in the first place.

What if there is no consumption of the items? The belts simply aren't moving? Or they are consumed slowly, so it would be too long to wait?

Also, whether you intended it that way or not, saying that including something like that is just "good ux" is implying that the current ux isn't good, and thus is an insult towards the devs (from my pov).

The UX of Factorio is the best I have ever seen. Anywhere. In any game, application or otherwise. Period.
It is also the reason my expectations are unreasonably high and why I bothered to submit this suggestion in the first place.
The dedication of the devs are exceptional.

I just wish I could work with belts, using every action available to me, without ending up with a inventory full of junk :-/

waitofaiorur wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 2:20 am My base is huge. We are literally talking five minutes of waiting for items already in my inventory.

A clear sign of splitting your base into several construction zones to avoid exactly that long delivery.

Depends on your playstyle. I don’t wait and continue construction.

The difference of five items was contrived to make the wait seem more meaningless. Often it's more items than makes sense to place manually.

It doesn’t matter. I do do my planning by placing ghosts and let my base bots do the hard work. I don’t need to wait for items. I place items only, when time is a real issue, or when I need only less than a handful.

One of the devs (I believe Kovarex) mentioned this was a problem he really wanted to fix, but it was too complex and time-consuming to make a general fix. My suggestion of simple toggle would be a workaround for a generic construction-bot request-distribution.

Do you have a link to that? One of the FFF-posts?

Yes. Nice. Auto-trash mod is a must have. Should be part of vanilla.

So the one mod containing my small quality of life fix should be part of vanilla, but my request should not?

Because auto-trash does it in the “right way”: it extends an already existing mechanism. Your idea adds a parallel way to fill the trash. Which doesn’t feel right to me.

Where do trash go?

Either to requesting chests (requester, supply) or into storage chest.

Like I said, I never submitted the suggestion. However, it is literally on the top of Kovarex's "if I had time" list. This alone should make it worth considering.

Reference?

What if there is no consumption of the items? The belts simply aren't moving? Or they are consumed slowly, so it would be too long to wait?

Then you don’t need to replace them.

waitofaiorur wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 2:20 am

This feels less like a "good ux" issue and more of a "I want an option for this niche use case" which easily turns into other people wanting options for their niche use cases, and before you know it, you've got 50-100+ options for niche use cases.

I hardly think right-clicking on a belt to remove it is "niche". To keep the very limited inventory clean, you are required to make a logistic setup for every single item in the game. Add even a single overhaul mod and this becomes rather painful.

It’s niche because it’s not that common of an issue (or shouldn’t be. If you’re constantly ripping up and relaying sections of belt that have items moving on them, then you’re not planning it out right).

waitofaiorur wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 2:20 am

And I certainly don't think we need more options for "only use my personal roboport for blueprints", or even the opposite! (Just making the point right there....) Frankly, I feel like these types of niche use cases are mod territory.

Like I said, I never submitted the suggestion.

Has nothing to do with whether or not you submitted it. I was just pulling on it as an example of more “option for this” requests.

waitofaiorur wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 2:20 am

Personally, if I don't want items off a belt, I handle it the same way as I would pre-bots: I rotate a belt segment prior to the area I'll be working in and let it clear out, then do my work and once done, rotate the belt back. Or in cases where I can't let the flow stop, I'll run a temp bypass. Assuming I even feel like it's that big of a deal in the first place.

What if there is no consumption of the items? The belts simply aren't moving? Or they are consumed slowly, so it would be too long to wait?

Then just deal with it? It’s not that major of an issue.

Here's the link regarding bots: https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comme ... &context=3

Because auto-trash does it in the “right way”: it extends an already existing mechanism. Your idea adds a parallel way to fill the trash. Which doesn’t feel right to me.

I tested the auto-trash-mod and "trash unrequested items" matches my need perfectly. It's exactly what I would want in vanilla too. Forgive me if my request was poorly worded.

Then you don’t need to replace them.

The tip was to rotate a belt, and wait until all items where consumed to prevent them from being picked up on belt-deconstruction.
That doesn't work if the items aren't being consumed at a reasonable rate.

It’s niche because it’s not that common of an issue (or shouldn’t be. If you’re constantly ripping up and relaying sections of belt that have items moving on them, then you’re not planning it out right).

"Just play the game perfectly"... Yeah... because no one ever makes mistakes or reworks their designs...

Then just deal with it? It’s not that major of an issue.

This is true. It's nothing major, but neither is the fix. Just because it's a small thing is not a valid argument against fixing it.
The code is already written in an open-source repository. Integrating it should take close to no time at all.

waitofaiorur wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 10:47 pm

It’s niche because it’s not that common of an issue (or shouldn’t be. If you’re constantly ripping up and relaying sections of belt that have items moving on them, then you’re not planning it out right).

"Just play the game perfectly"... Yeah... because no one ever makes mistakes or reworks their designs...

Didn't say that.

waitofaiorur wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 10:47 pm

Then just deal with it? It’s not that major of an issue.

This is true. It's nothing major, but neither is the fix. Just because it's a small thing is not a valid argument against fixing it.
The code is already written in an open-source repository. Integrating it should take close to no time at all.

No, my argument against it isn't because it's small. It's because...

FuryoftheStars wrote: ↑Mon Dec 20, 2021 3:31 pm before you know it, you've got 50-100+ options for niche use cases.

waitofaiorur wrote: ↑Wed Dec 22, 2021 10:47 pm Here's the link regarding bots: https://www.reddit.com/r/factorio/comme ... &context=3

Kovarex did say 5 (!) years ago, that he tried to solve the issue, when you have some robots far away, that took minutes to come to work.

This is a very hard to solve optimization problem. It has nothing to do with this suggestion.

Because auto-trash does it in the “right way”: it extends an already existing mechanism. Your idea adds a parallel way to fill the trash. Which doesn’t feel right to me.

I tested the auto-trash-mod and "trash unrequested items" matches my need perfectly. It's exactly what I would want in vanilla too. Forgive me if my request was poorly worded.

So I’ll move this to not implemented.

Then you don’t need to replace them.

The tip was to rotate a belt, and wait until all items where consumed to prevent them from being picked up on belt-deconstruction.
That doesn't work if the items aren't being consumed at a reasonable rate.

You don’t need to replace belts, that don’t have a throughput problem.

"Just play the game perfectly"... Yeah... because no one ever makes mistakes or reworks their designs...

Nobody does play perfect, but if you play bad, it’s of course more work.

Then just deal with it? It’s not that major of an issue.

This is true. It's nothing major, but neither is the fix. Just because it's a small thing is not a valid argument against fixing it.
The code is already written in an open-source repository. Integrating it should take close to no time at all.

Na, auto-trash is a mod, written in lua. The game is written c++. It cannot be integrated like so .

So I’ll move this to not implemented.

Arright! Merry Christmas!

I guess this can be deleted or moved to implemented now. @ssilk