Factorio Forums

Like splitters, I should have a way to prioritize my resourse flux for different production blocks.

Earlier simple "if there is a lot of product in a system, stop" and "if there is too little of resourse in a system, stop (let it be used by other block of production) was enough for me. Even in the past, priority value of a blue chest would have been useful.

But now after implementing quality and recycling managing with logic become troublesome for me. For example, I don't want to stop production of intermediate when there is a lot of it, because I want to produce quality intermediate and recycle. But I don't want it to consume resourses I need for other productions, without recycling. To continue using an old method I'd have to think of many constants and tweak them, also need several conditions. Priority method - just make pririty value of recycle block less than others, that's all. (Obviously, let 'priority' parameter be controlled with logic.)

The difference in game that made it nececcary, I think - adding another one resourse sink other than science - recycling. Earlier every producion block that makes product that is not needed - it stocks some of it and stops. Now... it's not a case anymore.

p.s. I'm surprised I haven't found similar suggsetion on forum. I've always had this in mind like 'it would be nice to have it', thought if devs don't implement this, there must be a reason. But no, apparently noone suggested it. (searched forum with 'request' and 'priority' words)

One (mabye?) unintended consequence I can think of right away is that if you get bottlenecked on an ingredient, then only the single highest-priority requester chest will ever receive any of it.

Tinyboss wrote: Mon Dec 09, 2024 6:13 pm One (mabye?) unintended consequence I can think of right away is that if you get bottlenecked on an ingredient, then only the single highest-priority requester chest will ever receive any of it.

Only if you intent it to be that way.

I'd suggest that default level of 'priority' would be 5, for every built chest. If you change it to be one of it to be 6, yes, it would get everything of bottlenecked resourse. That's the whole idea. If you want it to be split between several important blocks, you set all of them 6.

It just sounds like it could become a nightmare to keep track of which priorities you have on which chests with which ingredients. What was my priority for blue circuit requesters again? Do I have them all set the same? Okay, it's 7, and I have Speed 1 modules set to 6. But I really want to have something in between those priorities. Do I have to go find all the 7s and bump them up to 8? What if I have 8s already, too?

You can effective already do this anyway by controlling the requests by checking against local need vs network availability.
What would seem more useful is if bots would divert on route and dump elsewhere if the request they were about to satisfy was cancelled.

Unless you means for non-circuit use in which case I can see the appeal for those who prefer to avoid circuits for whatever reasons.

Khazul wrote: Mon Dec 09, 2024 6:37 pm You can effective already do this anyway by controlling the requests by checking against local need vs network availability.
What would seem more useful is if bots would divert on route and dump elsewhere if the request they were about to satisfy was cancelled.

Unless you means for non-circuit use in which case I can see the appeal for those who prefer to avoid circuits for whatever reasons.

I tried to explain how I used to solve this with logic circuits in 1.1, now solving my problems with circuits would be nigtmare. Did you ignore this?

kitters wrote: Tue Dec 10, 2024 5:56 pm

Khazul wrote: Mon Dec 09, 2024 6:37 pm You can effective already do this anyway by controlling the requests by checking against local need vs network availability.
What would seem more useful is if bots would divert on route and dump elsewhere if the request they were about to satisfy was cancelled.

Unless you means for non-circuit use in which case I can see the appeal for those who prefer to avoid circuits for whatever reasons.

I tried to explain how I used to solve this with logic circuits in 1.1, now solving my problems with circuits would be nigtmare. Did you ignore this?

Evidently - it was cleverly disguised.

On closer inspection I see that you used the word 'logic' once. Not a word like 'combinators', 'circuits', 'signals' - just 'logic'. Logic might be taken to imply thought
process when thinking about solutions to these kinds of problems.

There definitely some area that could do with huge improvement in handling of quality in circuits, but I have a bunch of stuff on Fulgora that looks at the network storage via a roboport and dynamically sets up requests to deal with excess / prioritise, etc. The way I do this hasnt changed nor really has the complexity with the exception of manipulating quality (ie changing it and taking a current quality and deriving higher qualities for eg to set filters - doable but very clunky).

I cant say I ever thought it would be great to be able to not have to do this because in most cases the scenario is too complex to not use a circuit even if prioritization were available. I think prioritization could be useful however (as I said in what you quoted - did you not read it? ).