Key combo for request group for ingredients

[wozek]

TL;DR

Add a key combo to create a request group for ingredients for a single craft from an item in the crafting menu.

What?

Ever needed to make a single assembler or energy shield or personal laser defense and either don't have a hub setup or have it on the hub at all? Did you have to hunt for each place you are creating those mats and collect them all? Did you have to reference the craft 3 times to hunt and peck your way through the menu to add those specific ingredients?

What if there was an easier way!?

Add ctrl-left click to auto create a logistic group requesting the materials for a single craft.

Why?

Low effort - nice QoL. A tad niche of a use case.

[redrahk]

TL;DR

When holding an item and clicking the "Add Section" button for logistics, auto-fill the request slots with the items needed for the recipe, similar to how holding a blueprint and clicking will auto-fill with the items needed for the blueprint.

What?

Basically the TLDR. Clicking the add section with an item will fill in the request slots with the ingredients and the quantity needed to make that item.
Potentially could be used in combination with a modifier key and clicking on the add section button.

Not too familiar with the forums and mods so if something like this already exists that would be nice to know.

Why?

I've been finding myself setting up new logistic groups for crafting specific items and manually requesting all the ingredients. With the functionality already existing for holding a blueprint and clicking the add section button, I think this would also be a good addition to reduce clicks needed for setting a new logistic request.

[mrvn]

TL;DR

Droping an item on "add section" to add a request for ingredients.

What?

Clicking "add section" with a blueprint in hand adds the contents of the blueprint as requests. Make clicking with an item in hand add the ingredients for the recipe for the item as requests.

Why?

I can't count the number of times I've wanted to request the ingredients for some recipe. One can copy&paste from an assembler to a requester chest to add them. But then you get some more or less unpredictable multiple of the recipe added as requests (either way too little or way to much from experience). Most times the copy&paste result needs to be edited and if the request is way too much all the items will be on the way already. Also it removes any other requests so it only works for one recipe, not a requester chest used by 2 or more assemblers.

So dropping the item on "add section" would allow requesting multiple recipes as multiple groups. The multiplier can be set easily and the default of 1 means nearly every time you don't start with way too much. Maybe per default the new group should be disabled (for blueprints too) to allow for editing before it goes life.

[mmmPI]

I think this look simple on paper but is overlooking many details. Like it wouldn't work obviously for fluids. And there are several item in vanilla factorio that can be made from mutiple recipe. Like the low density structure or even plastic for which the proposition wouldn't yield a consistent and intuitve system.

[mrvn]

I think this look simple on paper but is overlooking many details. Like it wouldn't work obviously for fluids. And there are several item in vanilla factorio that can be made from mutiple recipe. Like the low density structure or even plastic for which the proposition wouldn't yield a consistent and intuitve system.

There is no reason you couldn't have a ghost of fluids in your hand. And the "set recipe" option in assemblers already needs a way to specify one of multiple recipes. In older mods there where specific recipe signals for alternative recipes. This is basically a solved problem. Both are corner cases and the default could be planet specific. The bioplastic recipe only makes sense on Gleba for example and the normal recipe does not.

Worse case you have to enter the recipe manually for the few exceptions that don't work.

[mmmPI]

Maybe there is some misunderstanding, i am simply refering to the fact that you can't request a fluid in a space platform hub in a way that would make sense and as such for every recipe that need fluid the proposition is going to yield inconsistent result, should it require only the ingredient that make sense ? or also create a dummy request for fluid ?

I don't think it make sense that the request be "per planet", like the bioplastic over gleba is non-sense, why would the platform suddenly have biochambers and try to do bioplastic ? and when the platform is over Vulcanus it request coal instead ?

I don't believe it's possible to have a ghost of fluid in your hand. i'm not sure what your point is there.

[mrvn]

Maybe there is some misunderstanding, i am simply refering to the fact that you can't request a fluid in a space platform hub in a way that would make sense and as such for every recipe that need fluid the proposition is going to yield inconsistent result, should it require only the ingredient that make sense ? or also create a dummy request for fluid ?

I don't think it make sense that the request be "per planet", like the bioplastic over gleba is non-sense, why would the platform suddenly have biochambers and try to do bioplastic ? and when the platform is over Vulcanus it request coal instead ?

I don't believe it's possible to have a ghost of fluid in your hand. i'm not sure what your point is there.

1) Who said anything about a space platform hub? This is about logistic groups like in requester chests or even constant combinators. And you can certainly set fluids in logistic groups on constant combinators. You can use those to manage pumps that fill up tanks with the right ratios of fluids for recipes if you are so inclined.

2) On space platforms or logistic chests you can't add fluids to a logistic group. But you can add a logistic group that already has fluids:

space-fluids.png (140.72 KiB) Viewed 887 times

So really there is nothing in the game preventing fluid requests to get added to space platform. I assume the fluid simple gets ignored. At least I hope the wait for "All requests" condition ignores it.

And if you don't like fluids to be in the logistic group after dropping the recipe then just remove the fluids. It's still a benefit to get all the solid items added to the logistic group.

[mmmPI]

sorry i didn't realize the aim of the suggestion was to request the ingredient of a recipe for manual crating. I thought it was meant for platform hub.

Such request for an item that contain fluid in its ingredients makes no sense in the first place since those can't be handcrafted.

I don't think it's positive to add incentive for handfcrafting but i understand better the suggestion ( which still is inconsistent imo due to item having multiple recipes ).

[mrvn]

sorry i didn't realize the aim of the suggestion was to request the ingredient of a recipe for manual crating. I thought it was meant for platform hub.

Such request for an item that contain fluid in its ingredients makes no sense in the first place since those can't be handcrafted.

I don't think it's positive to add incentive for handfcrafting but i understand better the suggestion ( which still is inconsistent imo due to item having multiple recipes ).

Why would I handcraft? Seriously have you never played the game with logistic bots?

chemical-plant.png (43.69 KiB) Viewed 863 times

[mmmPI]

I usually just shift click the assembly, that request 30 second of craft from the machine. This makes sure there is no inconsistency about the recipe because it's the one from the machine whose ingredients are requested that prevent the inconsistencies that are present in the suggestion due to item having multiple recipe even in "vanilla" space age and the game would need to guess which one, in an arbitrary way.

I realize now maybe it was based on some confusion on your side because you said it was more or less unpredictable, but it's wrong, it's actually very much predictable.

Edit : If you want a tip : wire the assembly to the requester chest and set the request of the chest based on the assemblie's receipe, this way the chest require only 1 receipe's worth of item.

[mrvn]

I usually just shift click the assembly, that request 30 second of craft from the machine. This makes sure there is no inconsistency about the recipe because it's the one from the machine whose ingredients are requested that prevent the inconsistencies that are present in the suggestion due to item having multiple recipe even in "vanilla" space age and the game would need to guess which one, in an arbitrary way.

I realize now maybe it was based on some confusion on your side because you said it was more or less unpredictable, but it's wrong, it's actually very much predictable.

Edit : If you want a tip : wire the assembly to the requester chest and set the request of the chest based on the assemblie's receipe, this way the chest require only 1 receipe's worth of item.

It's very much deterministic, true. It's unpredictable in that you never can remember what 30 seconds of the recipe means for the amount you get. I don't want a requester chest requesting 900 processing units to build something I need only 2 or 3 of because the building is fast and the recipe, while stupidly expensive, takes hardly any time.

On the other hand for most recipes the amount requested will be far too low for the assembler to run constantly because the round trip time for the bots is simply too high. You have to request way more items ahead of time.

And you totally overlooked the fact that shift+click will destroy the chests existing requests. Only works with one assembler per chest.

[mmmPI]

As mentionned if you just need 2 or 3 things, you can easily read the assemblies content and wire it to a chest to request the ingredients from its recipe.

I think it makes no sense to claim the amount of request is "far too low", if you only need 2 or 3 things.

[mrvn]

As mentionned if you just need 2 or 3 things, you can easily read the assemblies content and wire it to a chest to request the ingredients from its recipe.

I think it makes no sense to claim the amount of request is "far too low", if you only need 2 or 3 things.

And again you misinterpret things. Do you do this on purpose? Please just stop reading my posts and stop replying. Your answers are just never helpful.

There are a million use cases for requests. ONE of them is requesting stuff when you need 2 or 3 things built. ANOTHER one is you need a million things build in a steady stream without pause. For both (and any other use case) there are plenty of cases where copy&paste gets the wrong amount. And it feels like it's wrong more often then right.

And all of that still ignores that copy&paste only works for one recipe per chest and is destructive to existing logistic groups set in the chest.

[mmmPI]

I'm just giving you a good tip : use the ability to wire the assembly to the chest and use the feature to request from the chest the ingredient from the recipe. it make much more sense than a broken sugestion where items have multiple recipe it make no sense to expect the game to pick the one you have in mind magically.

Your suggestion don't even make sense for something as basic as iron plate, where there are several recipe.


And your use case is ridiculous you state there are millions of reason yet you're unable to provide one that doesn't look like a user mistake to me.

[Brightwolf]

TL;DR

It should be possible to automatically request all the ingredients of an item in the logistics menu.

What?

It should be possible to automatically request all of an item's ingredients rather than the item itself if the item happens to be unavailable in the logistics network but its ingredients do happen to be available.

Why?

Currently if one lacks the supplies in their logistics network to request a specific item one must manually request each of the item's ingredients in order to craft the item. This convenience feature would expedite what would otherwise be a slow, manual process.

[mrvn]

I'm just giving you a good tip : use the ability to wire the assembly to the chest and use the feature to request from the chest the ingredient from the recipe. it make much more sense than a broken sugestion where items have multiple recipe it make no sense to expect the game to pick the one you have in mind magically.

Your suggestion don't even make sense for something as basic as iron plate, where there are several recipe.

As a side note: All items have a main recipe and altrernate recipes. You can see this in the Factoriopedia. My suggestion would just use the main recipe but it would also be easy to give a popup to select the recipe when multiple recipes are available. The alternate recipes are usually later in the game and for specialized buildings.

In the case of iron plates the chance that you copy the iron plate recipe onto a logistic group and actually want the molten iron recipe is slim to none. Both recipes for iron plates only have one ingredient so selecting that straight from the start is as simple as selecting the recipe. So this really does not make a good example for your case. Should have gone with low density structure. That even has 3 recipes.

What you can also see in the Factoriopedia is that each alternate recipe has an icon. If you want the alternate recipe then drop the alternate recipe unto the "Add section" button. I already told you that is how your multiple recipe problem was a none issue.

And your use case is ridiculous you state there are millions of reason yet you're unable to provide one that doesn't look like a user mistake to me.

Whatever argument I give it's always ridiculous, a user mistake, plain wrong because you do it different or you simply refuse to see it at all.

But against my better judgment here is your suggestion for the assemblers to produce more assemblers. Just the gears and AM2 in the screenshot but the same chest also does AM1 and AM3:

logistic-requests.png (722.03 KiB) Viewed 666 times

Lets hope you don't claim producing assembling machines is ridiculous or an user error. If I could easily set each recipe as separate logistic group then I could say I want 3 times the AM2 recipe and 30 times the gears. It would be quick and easy to scale the requests to what I think is right given demand and travel distances for bots. With both the copy&paste and the wire way I don't get the right amounts.

PS: Also since the AM1, AM2, AM3 assemblers are all right next to each other I always remove the AM1 and AM2 requests and take them directly from the previous assemblers output. Can't do that with wires without extra combinators.

[mmmPI]

Whatever argument I give it's always ridiculous, a user mistake, plain wrong because you do it different or you simply refuse to see it at all.

But against my better judgment here is your suggestion

I agree with the beginning, but i wouldn't do the setup you posted in picture, i quite don't understand your point, it look like you misunderstood my word, make a bad setup from them, and trying to use this to proove a point.

It sounds to me that what you are trying to achieve is this :

jinius.jpg (182.9 KiB) Viewed 655 times

[mrvn]

Whatever argument I give it's always ridiculous, a user mistake, plain wrong because you do it different or you simply refuse to see it at all.

But against my better judgment here is your suggestion

I agree with the beginning, but i wouldn't do the setup you posted in picture, i quite don't understand your point, it look like you misunderstood my word, make a bad setup from them, and trying to use this to proove a point.

It sounds to me that what you are trying to achieve is this :

jinius.jpg

I and many other do use setups like that. It's a nice pattern usable for anything with a progression, like belts, assemblers, boilers, all modules. Or simply just to save on the number of chests you need.

And yes, that combinator nearly does what I need except you need another one to mask out the AM1. My suggestion does with the click (or two) of a button though instead of having to wire everything up like that.

[mmmPI]

And yes, that combinator nearly does what I need except you need another one to mask out the AM1.

Why would you need to mask the AM1 ? that seem to make no sense

[mrvn]

And yes, that combinator nearly does what I need except you need another one to mask out the AM1.

Why would you need to mask the AM1 ? that seem to make no sense

As said when I build them next to each other I simply have an inserter pick up from the output of one assembler into the next. So the AM1/AM2 aren't transported by bots. Which mainly stems from early game when there weren't bots and the chests manually filled.