Factorio Forums

Passive provider to requester does deconstruct isntead of upgrade plan when force printing with set requests
https://youtu.be/Z8OPzEM6qnA

I am not considering this to be a bug. Since requester has non trivial settings (item requests), if the passive provider was only ordered to be upgraded then it would not be able to store requests because passive provider has no requests leading to a behavior that would require restamping blueprint after upgrade and this would be worst behavior.

In general a deconstruct+ghost will never be classified as a bug because it is the only option where it is guaranteed that entity will have all settings from blueprint and if we see some upgrade requests failing to keep some settings, it will be added to exceptions and handled using deconstruct+ghost. Super force building in its design is required to correctly put all settings to avoid restamping and it would be perfectly valid to handle everything through deconstruct+ghost. Using upgrade orders in some cases is just an "optimization" but it is not required to happen.

I am only slightly suspicious about second chest not deconstructing since it has control behavior with set request.

-- edit:

Ref 116130

I see, I get the point with the request space even though it feels a bit inconsistent to me overall. I will just work around this using set requests for my use case then. I think both bahaviors are totally valid, just felt like an oversight at first as the non requesting chest just upgrade plan.