Wires on belt don't stop the belt

AngledLuffa · Post by **AngledLuffa** » Sun Mar 03, 2019 7:56 pm

TL;DR

Please make it so that installing a wire on a belt doesn't stop it by default.

What ?

When installing a new circuit wire on a belt, the belt temporarily stops. This is an unnecessary disruption.

Why ?

If reading the belt is the desired function, the belt will have temporarily stopped and caused a "service disruption" further down the belt. Switching the default to "read" instead of "enable/disable" will allow wires to be placed on belts without changing the current operation of the factory.

ikarikeiji · Post by **ikarikeiji** » Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:46 pm

bobucles · Post by **bobucles** » Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:52 pm

If you want a belt to never stop, don't put a wire on the belt? The whole purpose of wiring a belt is to establish conditions for it to stop.

mrvn · Post by **mrvn** » Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:57 pm

bobucles wrote: Mon Mar 04, 2019 12:52 pm If you want a belt to never stop, don't put a wire on the belt? The whole purpose of wiring a belt is to establish conditions for it to stop.

Except for when you want to read the belt contents instead, as stated.

Sometimes I even connect a wire with a belt simply as a stepping stone to somewhere further away. Saves me a power pole. Configure the belt to neither enable nor read and you're golden.

Trebor · Post by **Trebor** » Tue Mar 05, 2019 6:49 pm

I agree, the default should be read not enable.

Ranakastrasz · Post by **Ranakastrasz** » Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:08 pm

I approve of this. Especially since after smart splitters, I haven't needed to stop a belt, but HAVE needed to read a belt to control inserters.
edit: Can't recall if inserters lock the same way, but if they do, they shouldn't. Same for everything else. Just adding a wire shouldn't lock it, I think.

Skeletpiece · Post by **Skeletpiece** » Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:43 pm

invisus · Post by **invisus** » Tue Mar 05, 2019 9:19 pm

I think this is a good suggestion, but am wondering about any actual downsides to defaulting to "read."

The positive effect is pretty clear (no impact to belt when wiring it up), but can anyone think of why this would be a negative impact if it was default?

Ranakastrasz · Post by **Ranakastrasz** » Tue Mar 05, 2019 9:40 pm

invisus wrote: Tue Mar 05, 2019 9:19 pm I think this is a good suggestion, but am wondering about any actual downsides to defaulting to "read."

The positive effect is pretty clear (no impact to belt when wiring it up), but can anyone think of why this would be a negative impact if it was default?

Well, its an argument between "Most common usage" and "Least disruptive usage"

Do people use read or disable more, and Do people find the disruption more annoying than the reduction of changes required.

I don't really know what other people think. I haven't wired belts for a while, so I don't have a valid option.

Post by **Koub** » Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:35 pm

I agree with OP : the least disruptive behaviour should always be preferred.
When I connect a wire to a working device (belt, inserter, ...), I don't want the game to assume I want to disable it until I tell otherwise. I want the default mode to be "keep on doing what you're doing", unless explicitely required to.
"Mode of operation" should be "none" for inserters, and "enable/disable" should be unchecked for belts.

To be honest, I wouldn't even default to read mode, just "the belt/inserter/device works as if it hadn't been connected to circuit network, until explicit request for change".

BenSeidel · Post by **BenSeidel** » Wed Mar 06, 2019 12:13 am

Koub wrote: Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:35 pm To be honest, I wouldn't even default to read mode, just "the belt/inserter/device works as if it hadn't been connected to circuit network, until explicit request for change".

Perfect. What more is there to say?

Factorio Forums