Factorio Forums

Steps to Reproduce

1. Deploy requester of buffer chest
2. Configure its requests
3. Drag an upgrade planner that transforms it into a active provider chests
   • Sidenote: Upgrading into any non-requester chest might result in the same behaviour
   • Upgrade planner BP:
     0eNq9lM1ugzAMgF+l8hmmDUE1uPYxpqpKwbBIwU4Tw1Yh3n3JplY7TB2nnOKf2P6SOF5gsoNTHZ6sUUTooFnAo4imwUd5VNaiC+LbAr3jMdrkahEaQBItV8iA1Bh1h5cJvaDL2/ewwpqB8IP9qhU9Y24dz7q7R2UwcjcZPBk9aoHm+W7whiWCHENiTR1+Buea/Yv1wdwhpWN62cDkhZ0aMB1UuQFKO054TdUGovPU9ynb6XXT0yGadEj1BiSrvP+jTopeL9ZjUFqmnwnh9UDKxJoPa/z+LN/ZBMP5bqMov42iDIw6Y0gHxdPuECN3B4OKJhtcc5hKmik00r6oy7quqn1ZV2Wxrl8CEabH
     Copy blueprint
4. Wait until upgrade is done
5. Undo the last action

Expected:

• Requester chest back to normal
• Requests in the requester chest are restored

Actual:

• Requester chest back to normal
• Requests in the requester chest are discarded
• Other settings are discarded too

See Also

• 123480: [2.0.23] Upgrading assembler clears module slot requests
• 124387: [Lou][2.0.25] Super-force upgrading into a storage chest can make it lose its filters
• 126798: [2.0.34] Super-force upgrading into logistical chest loses its control behaviour

For Devs

There's many, many reports to the chests (force) upgrade, and many reports to undo/redo functionality, many of them related to the chests. Even though you (Wube team) told us in the past that the current implementation of upgrade task does not have proxy for settings (like ghosts do) and thus applying all is not possible in all cases, I can suggest workaround that works for chests. All you need to do is to add internal property in the base class of all chests, or at least for all logistical chests, which holds both control behaviour, requests, and requests settings, and the child class only "enabled" these fields. Alternatively, it can be stored in the tag-like field which exists only within the running game and not persisted between saves and "helps" undo/redo and upgrade planners to apply settings.

Thanks for the report however I do not believe we will be doing anything about this.

Rseding91 wrote: Mon Apr 21, 2025 11:04 pm Thanks for the report however I do not believe we will be doing anything about this.

Is there any chances we would get extra internal properties in 2.1?

Hares wrote: Mon Apr 21, 2025 11:41 pm Is there any chances we would get extra internal properties in 2.1?

Not likely. Class size is always a concern and extra properties like that make the memory usage larger even when mods are not being used - which has historically meant “no”.