They expect implementing it to cost too much developer time, RAM for additional state and UPS impact.SilentWarrior wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 6:38 pmBut I already know its impossible, currently in the game ... well.. since I cant do it
Thats why its a feature request
Set chain signals to red via circuit network
Moderator: ickputzdirwech
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
-
5thHorseman
- Smart Inserter
- Posts: 1193
- Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 11:21 pm
- Contact:
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
Yes but to a developer, "That's impossible" doesn't just mean in the game.SilentWarrior wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 6:38 pmMakes sense.
But I already know its impossible, currently in the game ... well.. since I cant do it
Thats why its a feature request
Essentially he said "no" to your request.
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
I asked rseding about it in chat a while back and he basically said they "didn't think it would encourage creative gameplay" and so wasn't worth working on. Obviously, I disagree.
Took a break from 0.12.29 to 0.17.79, and then to ... oh god now it's 1.something. I never know what's happening.
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
But that's exactly my former argument... 
Cool suggestion: Eatable MOUSE-pointers.
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
Just because I want to control a signal with combinators, doesn't mean I don't want it to also be a chain signal. They are not mutually exclusive.
I will give an example where I need to control a chain signal with circuits. I have a 4 lane unloading station, that needs to allow 2 simultaneous paths into and out of the stacker, and into and out of the stops. I want the signals to do what they are supposed to do, which is, to enable the full, theoretical capabilities and throughput of the rail design. This requires the two stackers to fill and empty evenly, using lane changes. I need each stacker to supply a simultaneous train, when two stations simultaneously "ask" for trains. I can read the rail signals going into each stacker lane to see which has more trains in it, and direct the next train to the other one, same for outgoing. (Belt balancing with a splitter, but for rails.) I can put a chain signal before the first split into the stackers, so the train can use the first slot that empties instead of committing to an occupied one. Ideally, the stacker will never fill up completely. But if it does, that signal needs to be a chain signal, not a regular one. It's a little silly to have to bet on the stacker never being completely full, the stacker lanes are there for trains to use them, not to cause improper behavior when the last one is full. But, I can't close this chain signal with a circuit (to keep the two stackers evenly loaded), because chain signals anomalously have the "Close signal" option missing.
I can make these signals behave as desired with circuits, but it requires more combinator complexity, connecting more signals, and controlling more signals, to emulate the behavior of chain signals. It becomes significantly more complex than it needs to be. I want to use chain signals for their usual chain signal behavior, but I also want to close certain paths with circuits. Why have both features in the game but only allow us to use one or the other?
There are several extremely workable solutions for this problem as-is, but none are as straightforward as putting a circuit on the chain signals.
Encouraging creativity is good, but not when it "feels" like you are merely trying to work around a flaw or oversight in the game design or implementation. Someone might wonder, is this a bug? Is it a missing research? Is it just bad design? What is the purpose of this annoying oddity, which prevents me from doing what I expected? It comes off as arbitrary.
Edit: I tried doing this without combinators, but the result was strange, inconsistent behavior, trains would sit at blue signals randomly, sometimes for several seconds after all other train movement ceased, and they refused to use both paths at the same time. Might be a race condition bug.
I will give an example where I need to control a chain signal with circuits. I have a 4 lane unloading station, that needs to allow 2 simultaneous paths into and out of the stacker, and into and out of the stops. I want the signals to do what they are supposed to do, which is, to enable the full, theoretical capabilities and throughput of the rail design. This requires the two stackers to fill and empty evenly, using lane changes. I need each stacker to supply a simultaneous train, when two stations simultaneously "ask" for trains. I can read the rail signals going into each stacker lane to see which has more trains in it, and direct the next train to the other one, same for outgoing. (Belt balancing with a splitter, but for rails.) I can put a chain signal before the first split into the stackers, so the train can use the first slot that empties instead of committing to an occupied one. Ideally, the stacker will never fill up completely. But if it does, that signal needs to be a chain signal, not a regular one. It's a little silly to have to bet on the stacker never being completely full, the stacker lanes are there for trains to use them, not to cause improper behavior when the last one is full. But, I can't close this chain signal with a circuit (to keep the two stackers evenly loaded), because chain signals anomalously have the "Close signal" option missing.
I can make these signals behave as desired with circuits, but it requires more combinator complexity, connecting more signals, and controlling more signals, to emulate the behavior of chain signals. It becomes significantly more complex than it needs to be. I want to use chain signals for their usual chain signal behavior, but I also want to close certain paths with circuits. Why have both features in the game but only allow us to use one or the other?
There are several extremely workable solutions for this problem as-is, but none are as straightforward as putting a circuit on the chain signals.
Encouraging creativity is good, but not when it "feels" like you are merely trying to work around a flaw or oversight in the game design or implementation. Someone might wonder, is this a bug? Is it a missing research? Is it just bad design? What is the purpose of this annoying oddity, which prevents me from doing what I expected? It comes off as arbitrary.
Edit: I tried doing this without combinators, but the result was strange, inconsistent behavior, trains would sit at blue signals randomly, sometimes for several seconds after all other train movement ceased, and they refused to use both paths at the same time. Might be a race condition bug.
Designs: v0.16 | Automated nuclear | Centrifuge ratios | Solar + Accumulator
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
Sorry, tried to paint a picture of what you described in my head, but have not enough color to complete it. 
more serious: how long are your trains? How is that connected? How long are the rails? I ask, because I use currently LCC trains and I have made a 6-lane station with about 5-10 seconds hold that is feed by only one rail, and a 3-lane stacker.
With longer trains this is not possible of course. But it depends on the length. And the length of the tracks, how many curves and much more. A screenshot would be useful.
BTW lately I came into a situation where I thought: now such a chain signal would be really useful, but then I found a better solution; I had to rebuild parts of the rails.
Not saying that there is no real need for that or there is always a way to build around this problem, but game-play value .vs. added complexity is really bad for this feature.
Besides that: if you think it’s a bug, then ask (here or user help board), or create a bug report.
more serious: how long are your trains? How is that connected? How long are the rails? I ask, because I use currently LCC trains and I have made a 6-lane station with about 5-10 seconds hold that is feed by only one rail, and a 3-lane stacker.With longer trains this is not possible of course. But it depends on the length. And the length of the tracks, how many curves and much more. A screenshot would be useful.
BTW lately I came into a situation where I thought: now such a chain signal would be really useful, but then I found a better solution; I had to rebuild parts of the rails.
Not saying that there is no real need for that or there is always a way to build around this problem, but game-play value .vs. added complexity is really bad for this feature.
Besides that: if you think it’s a bug, then ask (here or user help board), or create a bug report.
Cool suggestion: Eatable MOUSE-pointers.
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
It's for 1-8-1 trains. The trains coming in at the top left all have the occupied stop set as destination. The signals are wired to block the stacker with more trains in it. In the second image, the left stacker is green (except for the occupied lane), and the right one is red. The trains have all come to a stop, waiting at blue chain signals, and will stay that way sometimes for several seconds before one of them moves. There are never two trains going into stackers at the same time. I load the save in the first image repeatedly, and switch the two trains in front to automatic, the result is different every time, with different pauses and behavior.
The third image shows how the left signals are configured. The right ones have A and B swapped. The signals all seem to show the correct color at all times.
The third image shows how the left signals are configured. The right ones have A and B swapped. The signals all seem to show the correct color at all times.
images
Designs: v0.16 | Automated nuclear | Centrifuge ratios | Solar + Accumulator
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
Hm. Strange on first view. Do you have also a blueprint of this? Spares rebuilding me that by hand.
Cool suggestion: Eatable MOUSE-pointers.
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
This is the one in the post.
This one has the rail piece at the bottom removed, it's not needed, and for some reason this enables two trains to come in at once (they should do it regardless). But, they will still sometimes stall at the initial chain signals.
Edit: Looks like it's because the signals are changed by the circuit network, and the trains sometimes take a long time to find a new path. In this image where only the last one is stalled, it has pathed into a red signal.
This one has the rail piece at the bottom removed, it's not needed, and for some reason this enables two trains to come in at once (they should do it regardless). But, they will still sometimes stall at the initial chain signals.
Edit: Looks like it's because the signals are changed by the circuit network, and the trains sometimes take a long time to find a new path. In this image where only the last one is stalled, it has pathed into a red signal.
image
Designs: v0.16 | Automated nuclear | Centrifuge ratios | Solar + Accumulator
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
I think i went through the whole topic and the only legitimate use case was the safe crossing on a bidirectional rail.
When having large intersection, disabling particular exit can be done with a regular signal, disabling particular entrance can be done with a regular signal followed by the chain signal without any wires. Closing chain signal would be only required when trying to disable particular rail relations within an intersection, like allowing trains to go straight while stopping them before the intersection when they want to turn left in RHD network. I am not sure if it would be possible to get more throughput by closing those particular rails unless there would be a huge intersection where there are like 8 trains going north (for example) when the rightmost one would want to turn left when all the others would want to go straight - but even in that case, circuit network would not be able to read out of signal states how many trains want to go which direction.
Are there any really good examples where closing chain signal would be essential, other than safe crossing?
When having large intersection, disabling particular exit can be done with a regular signal, disabling particular entrance can be done with a regular signal followed by the chain signal without any wires. Closing chain signal would be only required when trying to disable particular rail relations within an intersection, like allowing trains to go straight while stopping them before the intersection when they want to turn left in RHD network. I am not sure if it would be possible to get more throughput by closing those particular rails unless there would be a huge intersection where there are like 8 trains going north (for example) when the rightmost one would want to turn left when all the others would want to go straight - but even in that case, circuit network would not be able to read out of signal states how many trains want to go which direction.
Are there any really good examples where closing chain signal would be essential, other than safe crossing?
-
coppercoil
- Filter Inserter
- Posts: 487
- Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2018 10:14 am
- Contact:
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
I had made complex junctions containing several controlled (prioritized) waiting lanes. I enabled/disabled separate lanes (and some expensive local intersections) considering other waiting trains.
I solved it by closing first rail signal on the chain's top. That worked, but it was an unnatural workaround.
I think the question is not "is it essential", but "is it logical". Yes, it is logical to read/control both chain and rail signals, because player-wise they are the
OT thoughts why both signals are the same
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
So should I report the bug separately?
Designs: v0.16 | Automated nuclear | Centrifuge ratios | Solar + Accumulator
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
What coppercoil describes is not a bug.
it’s a suggestion.I see that currently so: the devs (or one of them, that has made something with signals) knows about it. That is already a success.
I will move this thread back to suggestions.
And what he asks was about a specific example besides this issue, where this is essential. This is a question about how important is it to fix/change it.
But when I go back in this thread there is until now no real evidence for that. There was always some workaround. Not nicely, but it was something which was useable. The reason why it was I n “won’t implement” is, that the gameplay value of this change (rare cases, where it might be useful) versus effort to implement it is really low.
I think if there is an example (in form of screenshot/blueprint) that shows another case of chain signal “fun”, that would be a sign to prioritize this higher.
I know this is difficult (because I have lot of experience but I have no idea for another case).
Cool suggestion: Eatable MOUSE-pointers.
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...
-
Sad_Brother
- Fast Inserter
- Posts: 209
- Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 4:54 pm
- Contact:
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
Yes, but if regular signal is open while chain is closed the train does step ahead and do not look more at the normal signal.
Even if chain signal has no state itself and so is a function, it does not mean that function cannot include (and so relay) logic input when needed.Rseding91 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2020 6:07 pmThat is impossible. Chain signals do not have any state themselves. They only relay the state from the signals ahead of them.ikarikeiji wrote: ↑Tue Mar 06, 2018 7:18 pmSuggestion: allow a connected chain signal to be set to red by a circuit network signal just like a regular signal can be set to red.
You have to set the signal ahead of them to red if you want this behavior. It literally can't be done with how chain signals work in the game now. It's not a matter of adding the circuit logic; it just doesn't exist as a thing.
By the way...
Great Thanks to all developers for your hard work!
Many Thanks to all mod developers for their work also!
Of course Thanks to all active Forum members!
You are all great!
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
As I described and showed in my posts, the trains never use both paths simultaneously, even though they are separately signalled, unless a bit of rail at the bottom is removed, which should have no effect. They also stall at the signals sometimes, for 1 or 2 seconds, even though the path is clear and no trains are moving, before they start to move. These are inconsistent oddities in train pathing that interfere with designs.
Designs: v0.16 | Automated nuclear | Centrifuge ratios | Solar + Accumulator
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
I haven't looked at the blueprints, but judging from your description of non-combinator attempts and what I see in this image, I strongly suspect you have encountered this mess.
-
Tesse11ation
- Fast Inserter
- Posts: 185
- Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 12:59 am
- Contact:
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
Calling your BS on this one. Plenty of reasons have been presented in this thread. It is a very simple addition to the game that will remove the headache from a lot of players, and closing the signal ahead of the chain signal is NOT a solution. In fact, in almost every use case, it defeats the purpose.ssilk wrote: ↑Mon Feb 03, 2020 9:04 pmThe reason why I'm still sceptical about this is, that there is no really good reason for that, and that the limitation of this signal can be seen as part of the game. Like that you cannot read and write at the same time from&to a block signal. Nothing which cannot be worked around, and workarounds ae part of the game.
I rest my case. Welcome to forum mod input on the suggestions thread - being contrarian for no reason while having ignorance of the utility.
System Specs
OS: Windows 10 Professional 64 Bit
CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 3600X (@~3.8 gHz)
GPU: Nvidia RTX 2080
RAM: 32GB DDR4 (2400)
DRIVES: 2x 1TB NVMe SSD, 1x 6TB HDD
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
doesn't look that way to me. headache? i love trains, have more than 5800h in game and i have never needed this.
-
Tesse11ation
- Fast Inserter
- Posts: 185
- Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 12:59 am
- Contact:
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
Ok, great. But now consider that how you play the game is probably a lot different from how other people play the game. You might never have needed this feature because you design your factory without needing to account for that particular limitation; however, someone else might be punching their monitor trying to find a workaround for something that amounts to a QoL feature.
This is what so many people on the suggestions thread fail to understand.
Also, a signal is a signal is a signal. It makes no sense for one type of signal to have a limitation that the other type of signal doesn't, unless it's a key part of the description (like how chain signals restrict trains from moving into the next block if the block(s) after that are closed). If you can close a rail signal, you should be able to close a chain signal too. Personally I've never really had to deal with this. Though, I can see where people are coming from, and it's very unintuitive.
System Specs
OS: Windows 10 Professional 64 Bit
CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 3600X (@~3.8 gHz)
GPU: Nvidia RTX 2080
RAM: 32GB DDR4 (2400)
DRIVES: 2x 1TB NVMe SSD, 1x 6TB HDD
Re: Set chain signals to red via circuit network
According to rseding it's not sooo simple.
QoL does not equal, that it's good for game. Im thinking of long reach or sqeak through, which add lot of QoL, but are not in vanilla.KoblerMan wrote: ↑Fri Nov 20, 2020 6:14 pm...
This is what so many people on the suggestions thread fail to understand.
Also, a signal is a signal is a signal. It makes no sense for one type of signal to have a limitation that the other type of signal doesn't, unless it's a key part of the description (like how chain signals restrict trains from moving into the next block if the block(s) after that are closed). If you can close a rail signal, you should be able to close a chain signal too. Personally I've never really had to deal with this. Though, I can see where people are coming from, and it's very unintuitive.
Also, I cannot follow this argumentation. "You should be able to close a chain signal too". Why even? I mean it's adding somewhat more options to game and i wont complain if they added it. But you should consider that more options is not always good according to KISS principle.
They rarely add a suggestion, because those must be not only very good, those also have to match the vision for the game. You guys should not feel bad, if a really good suggestion does not make it into the game now. Maybe it gets considered later or needs some adjustments...