[1.1.2] Upgrade Planner usability inconsistency

Bugs that are actually features.
GluAp
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 50
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 6:28 am
Contact:

[1.1.2] Upgrade Planner usability inconsistency

Post by GluAp »

Hi. Not quiet sure, if this would be classified as a bug, but anyway ..

When using the upgrade planner (holding planner in hand + left MSB) on some entities, it will mark them for upgrade. You can cancel this, by holding planner in hand + shift + left MSB.
Shouldn't it technically work, to use the downgrade functionality (same upgrade planner in hand + right MSB) on entities marked for upgrade, too?
Basically the same behaviour as canceling the upgrade by downgrading the previously 'upgrade marked' entities.

For me it feels quiet intuitive that this should work like this, too.
Loewchen
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 9342
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 5:53 pm
Contact:

Re: [1.1.2] Upgrade Planner usability inconsistency

Post by Loewchen »

That is not a bug. You can create a dedicated upgrade planner to do this by setting filters for it.
GluAp
Long Handed Inserter
Long Handed Inserter
Posts: 50
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 6:28 am
Contact:

Re: [1.1.2] Upgrade Planner usability inconsistency

Post by GluAp »

You misunderstand the problem I have here.

As an example: I have yellow belts and place an upgrade planner (filter: yellow -> blue) on it. Then the yellow belts will be marked for upgrade to blue belts. When I now use another upgrade planner (filter: blue -> yellow) on it, it won't do anything. The same goes for reversing the first upgrade planner.

Of cause it doesn't work, because the entities selected will still be the yellow belts. But that's my point - intuitively it should work.
Using a downgrade planner on to be placed ghost entities should work for "marked for upgrade"d entities, too.
Loewchen
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 9342
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 5:53 pm
Contact:

Re: [1.1.2] Upgrade Planner usability inconsistency

Post by Loewchen »

This does not sound intuitive to me at all, but that's not relevant. If you want this, make a feature request.
Locked

Return to “Not a bug”