Circuit network connections for splitters

[Bilka]

The new splitter options that can be seen in https://factorio.com/blog/post/fff-225 currently cannot be controlled by the circuit network. I hereby request the ability to do that, because github apparently isnt this forum .

Setting the filter could work how the filters are set on filter inserters (only used when the output priority is activated), and the priority could work by giving a signal to enabled/disable the priority currently set in the gui. So for example I could set [x > 0] to enable the left output priority here:
.

[Caine]

I strongly agree. It also would fit the mindset from the FFF of increasing control in the late game:

This is why we decided to add a few options to splitter configuration. These might be perceived overpowered by some, but we believe, that these mainly solve problems in the later part of the game when belts compete with bots, and when the player needs more control over the belt logistics.

[studix2002]

How cool would it be being able to send the resources you need at the time you need it, I’m surprised the devs didn’t think of this feature as well and implement it at the same time as the configuration options, I hope they do

[Caine]

How cool would it be being able to send the resources you need at the time you need it, I’m surprised the devs didn’t think of this feature as well and implement it at the same time as the configuration options, I hope they do

That was what I was doing with the old splitters and a lot of circuit network conditions. It is doable but becomes rather complicated with the more complex recipes.

Essentially whenever I produced an item, I sent a signal back through the network to order ingredients for a new one. A balanced splitter network (equal number of splitter traversals) ensured that ingredients were deliverd round-robin to the factories. To compensate for ingredient travel time you setup a buffer which is just big enough to prevent it from draining during the delivery of the ingredients. Direct insertion at a distance

It more or less broke down with recipes involving multiple ingredients of the same type. I still had to find a nice fix for that.

[Tekky]

When I was reading the FFF, I had the same thought. I also consider it important to be able to control it by circuit network.

Here are some older threads about connecting the splitter to the circuit network:
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=23616 Smart Splitter (The Real One)
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=51051 Circuit controlled splitter

[provet]

This sounds useful and probably needed to compete with the bots

[dauphin]

I, too, would very much like to see this happen. Some really, really cool designs could come out of this. For one, it would be an interesting alternative for making sushi belts.

[mp0011]

I wish, however, new splitter functions will REQUIRE logic network, or it would be to easy.
Without connections, splitters should work as regular splitters.

[provet]

If only the same would be true for all robot chest-only logistic #ItsNotaNerfIfItsCombinators

[StonedXander]

Good idea.

One could set a condition on priority activation AND priority side.
For example, if the condition is true, then set input priority to left, else, to right.
Same for output priority.

[Impatient]

+1

3 signals: input prio, output prio and filter

[MeduSalem]

Could be interesting to have in some cases to reroute item flow more dynamically.

[NateMcCloud]

TL;DR

Connect signal wires to splitters to determine input and/or output priorities.

What ?

We should be able to connect signal wires to each side of a splitter to set the splitter's input and output priorities. Perhaps green wires control input, and red wires control output. Or vice-versa, it doesn't matter. Separate conditions can be set for each side, and for inputs and outputs.

If the condition is satisfied for one side, but not the other, the side with the satisfied condition is prioritized. If both or neither side's conditions are satisfied, neither side is prioritized.

Why ?

It would be an easy way to send our resources down an alternate path when we need to, e.g. when we have too many of one resource, and are lacking another resource that uses the same materials.

[Tekky]

This has already been suggested two months ago in the following thread:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=56520 Circuit network connections for splitters

@Mods: I suggest that the threads get merged.

[mp0011]

Honestly, I would separate "regular" splitters from "smart" splitters. And, possibly, make smart ones bigger, eg. 2x2.
They are to powerful right now, after 0.16 changes...

[NateMcCloud]

This has already been suggested two months ago in the following thread:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=56520 Circuit network connections for splitters

@Mods: I suggest that the threads get merged.

Oh...huh. I guess I didn't look back far enough. Thanks for the link!

Honestly, I would separate "regular" splitters from "smart" splitters. And, possibly, make smart ones bigger, eg. 2x2.
They are to powerful right now, after 0.16 changes...

While I disagree about them being too powerful, a 2x2 smart splitter would make controlling input and output priorities easier, since the color of the wire wouldn't matter.

[adam_bise]

This really is needed. Especially in the case of split logistics networks along a fortified resource bus, which itself is a workaround for not being able to control bot traffic. Those split networks still need robots, repair packs, walls, etc.. and drones cannot deliver them if the bus snakes through enemy territories over a long distance.

Having to set up train stops for each separate logistic network is currently the only simple option, but becomes bulky for many small network segments. Yea you can multiplex order requests along the bus but that is a pain to manage.

Being able to set splitter function via signals would be an obvious fit. You could send an outpost ID up the wire and have supplies flow down a shared supply belt, among other things.

Still, being able to control bot pathing is also needed. I posted an example on how to achieve bot pathing here: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=62033

[Engimage]

I strongly agree this will add much gameplay value

[Cadde]

It's been what's coming up on a year since this suggestion and nothing yet?

It really boggled my mind when i realized that splitters had no circuit network capability... It has a filter, surely it should have a circuit network condition to set said filter!
And to touch on the priority discussion, i would rather have a specific signal for that. "Left priority signal" and if it's high it going to set left lane priority. Same for right. And finally, a "neutral priority" signal which will set the splitter to no priority and no filter.

If neutral, left/right lane priority and filter signals are IGNORED.
If left AND right lane priority signals are high, it would default to neutral. Undefined state.

[morsk]

I suspect a programmable filter is useless. Compared to the filter inserter, a splitter guarantees its item will back up, instead of passing through. Letting an item back up on a mixed belt is almost never what you want, as it easily deadlocks. If an item is so toxic to the system ahead of it that it's better to have backup than let it through, it should be filtered 100% of the time, not programmably.

I would absolutely use programmable priority though, even in early-game so my mall passively draws gears, but takes "all the gears" if buffers get low. (I've faked it with multiple splitters, etc., but I'd do this kind of thing more often if it were easier.) No harm in the filter either; I just don't see the point.

If neutral, left/right lane priority and filter signals are IGNORED.
If left AND right lane priority signals are high, it would default to neutral. Undefined state.

There is input priority too, not just output. That's making a lot of signals. Why not just <0, 0, >0 for each?