Inserter drop point inconsistency

[Koub]

I actually still prefer the way inserters used to work before the 0.12 optimizations on belts and inserters.
The wiki page on inserters still decribes the previous behaviour : https://wiki.factorio.com/Inserters#Ins ... nteraction
Now, to remember how it works, I always plonk :
- a chest with items,
- an inserter,
- a belt,

and I see where go the items, and then, I can plan my factory. And I hate this tedium

[Lav]

Tested this issue a bit.

Inserters do follow a strict set of rules. The discrepancy comes from the fact that when unloading onto a straight belt that moves directly from or to inserter, it will always drop onto right side of the belt, not inserter's right side.

So I retract my earlier statement. While current behavior's a bit unobvious and it would be nice if it was changed, it's still a stable set of rules and is rotation agnostic. Thus, not a bug.

[sparr]

and is rotation agnostic. Thus, not a bug.

Test again.

north inserter and east inserter onto the same north-facing belt, right lane full, left lane empty.

blueprint, rotate 180 degrees, plonk

south inserter and west inserter onto the same south-facing belt, both lanes half-full.

[Lav]

Not sure what you mean by "north" inserter (from the north? to the north?). So I tested two setups.

Both are consistent.

[gustaphe]

This is "consistent" insofar as it doesn't care about the direction of the setup.
But if you rotate only the belt in the lower left (for instance), you'll see that the inserters care about the direction of the belt, which is the problem.

[Lav]

This is "consistent" insofar as it doesn't care about the direction of the setup.
But if you rotate only the belt in the lower left (for instance), you'll see that the inserters care about the direction of the belt, which is the problem.

I'll tell you more: if you rotate an inserter 180 degrees, it suddenly stops inserting resources into your assembler.

Seriously though: if you rotate a part of the setup without regard for the rest of setup, setup is likely to malfunction. I don't see anything surprising here.

[PacifyerGrey]

As already said.
The problem is only with inserters facing the belts (from behind or in the face) that they put items on the right lane of the belt (and does not depend on inserter's position) and not the right lane from inserter's perspective.
This is consistent (as the 100% predictable rule exists) but is counterintuitive.
All other cases work as expected.

[gustaphe]

This is "consistent" insofar as it doesn't care about the direction of the setup.
But if you rotate only the belt in the lower left (for instance), you'll see that the inserters care about the direction of the belt, which is the problem.

I'll tell you more: if you rotate an inserter 180 degrees, it suddenly stops inserting resources into your assembler.

The important part is "if you rotate an inserter". If I rotate the assembler, I don't expect the inserter's behaviour to change.

[Lav]

The important part is "if you rotate an inserter". If I rotate the assembler, I don't expect the inserter's behaviour to change.

The important part is "without regard for the rest of setup", which you haven't quoted.

And sure, different parts of a setup have different tolerances to modifications of other parts. Again, nothing surprising.

[Deadly-Bagel]

Well the issue isn't so much rotating blueprints, it's clarity and intuitiveness. I notice the Wiki has now been updated to explain they always insert onto the right side from the belt's perspective which is what we were all missing, no doubt at some point we all checked the wiki for interaction mechanics and got an idea that was, in specific cases, incorrect. Now that the behaviour is explained correctly there shouldn't be a problem, at least with new players.

If the entire blueprint is rotated then there isn't an issue. If you're only rotating part of a blueprint you need to know how those two halves interact so there aren't any problems - eg if you do the same with pipes you know you need to ensure that two pipes don't accidentally touch. When a Chemical Plant or Oil Refinery is rotated, the inputs and outputs rotate instead of flipping. As long as the behaviour is simple, documented and consistent there isn't a problem.

[mrvn]

Surprisingly 1 million buyers have no problem with the current functionality.

Except they did and do. It's not the first complaint about this issue.

[Anson]

a never ending subject ...

... Well the issue ... is clarity and intuitiveness.
I notice the Wiki has now been updated to explain they always insert onto the right side from the belt's perspective ...
Now that the behaviour is explained correctly there shouldn't be a problem ...

just tested with the newest version 0.16.37 :

(marked cyan)
- when dropping items on a belt facing or opposing the inserter, they go to the right side from the belt's perspective
- when dropping items on an underground belt facing or opposing the inserter, they go to the right side from the underground belt's perspective
BUT:
(marked green)
- when dropping items on a splitter along the splitter, they go to the right side from the splitter's perspective,
and to be more exact to the "far right" corner from the inserter's perspective, thus not being split
- when dropping items on a splitter opposing the inserter, they go to the LEFT side from the splitter's perspective,
and to be more exact to the "far right" corner from the inserter's perspective, thus being split

SplitterDrop.PNG (299.06 KiB) Viewed 1719 times

in my opinion, there should be no different behavior of inserters depending on whether items are dropped on belts, undergrounds or splitters (or any other beltlike objects, assemblers or whatever).
thus i consider the current behavior to be a bug in any case, no matter whether people think the perspective should be that of the inserter (then belts and undergrounds are buggy) or that of the target (then splitters are buggy).

to have "clarity and intuitiveness", behavior of inserters should always be the same no matter what the target is, and IMHO most intuitive would be that robotic inserter arms always drop items from their own perspective without checking first what the target is.
this can IMHO best be achieved by specifying the drop location as "far right from the inserter's perspective" (just like it is now with splitters, marked with green dots in the screenshot), and this should even reduce the number of rules to a single rule for perpendicular as well as parallel inserters.

edit: new screenshot, and thus i discovered that for belts and underground belts, the drop location seems to be the entire right side (because the plates seem to fill the entire length of the tile and not only from one specific drop location to the end of the tile)

ps: for me, the drop location isn't a big problem since i am mostly using bob's adjustable inserters and thus can adjust that position however i need it for a specific setup. but i still would want to have a single simple rule as default so that i don't have to check for problems and adjust the drop locations as often as i have to do now.

[tzwaan]

I have absolutely no problem with the inserters putting it on the right side of the belt from the belt's perspective. As long as it's consistent.

In that regard I completely agree that the current splitter is not consistent with the rest. Inserters should be putting it on the right side from the splitters perspective, and either always put it before the split, or always put it after the split, but not have it one way but not the other. (I'd prefer the inserters always putting it in front of the split. So you could insert onto a splitter and have the resources go both ways)

[bobingabout]

Other topics about it:
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=59806
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=49059

There's actually a mod (though I highlight some issues with it in the topic, and the author states it's designed for base game only) in the mining drills topic that fixes this issue on both Drills and Inserters.
And I am changing my mind from the reply I posted earlier, it would be nice to see this in the base game. I might even include this in my mods in the future.

[mrvn]

Inserters should behave the same with or without belt present, as they do with splitters. It makes no sense that the presence of a belt (or underground belt) magically reprograms the inserter.

So +1 to changing inserters to behave like they do with splitters on all types of belts.

[Hedning1390]

Why should inserters not take belt direction into account? There are many benefits to having them always place on the right side. Many people like to use the ability to place on half a belt, using the other half for another product. Right now this is easy and doesn't require you to consider which side of the assembler you output from. If you want things on both sides then side loading is the easiest thing ever. Side loading has to be intentional, while outputting from the "wrong" side can be a mistake.

The splitter bug is what should change. I assume it hasn't been fixed because it requires a setup which is extremely unlikely to be built in an actual game.

[mrvn]

Because it is inconsistent with how they behave with belts going other ways.

And if you want items only on one side then side loading is just as effective there. That is no argument for or against the behaviour of inserters.

[Hedning1390]

Because it is inconsistent with how they behave with belts going other ways.

And if you want items only on one side then side loading is just as effective there. That is no argument for or against the behaviour of inserters.

You feel it is inconsistent, but it is not any more inconsistent. And yes you can side load, but the point is that you can't make a mistake with the current rules, but you could with your proposed change. I feel as if I have to repeat what i said in the other topic here:

Is it more consistent just because insterter direction is considered in both cases? Not really. Perpendicular and parallel are fundamentally different anyway so you still need two rules (also corners are treated as perpendicular).
From: Perpendicular = Far side (insterter). Parallel=right side (belt). Two rules
To: Perpendicular = Far side (insterter). Parallel=right side (inseter). Also two rules.

Right now all inserters placing on a belt going around will output on the same line, and all inserters placing on belts going underneath will also place on the same line. This is easy to understand and hard to mess up. If you mix which side (left right) the inserter is placing on depending on the inserter direction that means inserters outputting from the same machine may fill both sides of the belt. It means you have to be incredibly careful if you have 2 lanes with different items. I don't think it's a good idea, and it would also break every save file forcing people to either restart or spend a lot of time fixing their factory (though that's less of an issue considering its EA status).

[mrvn]

Because it is inconsistent with how they behave with belts going other ways.

From: Perpendicular = Far side (insterter). Parallel=right side (belt). Two rules
To: Perpendicular = Far side (insterter). Parallel=right side (inseter). Also two rules.

The issue issn't a difference between taking and dropping. It's with different relative belt directions. Belt going N-S:

From west: Perpendicular = far / left side (belt)
From east: Perpendicular = far / right side (belt)
From north: Parallel = right side (belt).
From south: Parallel = right side (belt).

See, three ways to put items on the right side and only one on the left. It's unbalanced.

[Hedning1390]

Yes, because of the right hand rule it is easier to place on the right hand side, but I also explained why I think this is better.