[2.1.9] Parameterization of Logistic Network Enable Condition not Recognized
Posted: Sun Jul 05, 2026 3:58 pm
by NotTheWaffle
What did you do?
Place any assembling machine (anything that takes in a recipe)
Set a logistic network condition of Parameter 0 < 250, or anything involving a parameter
Create a blueprint of this and attempt to parameterize it.
What happened?
The parameterization screen only recognized other uses of the parameter 0. When pasting the blueprint the logistic network enable condition is empty.
What did you expect to happen instead?
Parameterization screen to recognize and allow control of the parameter used in the logistic network enable condition.
Does it happen always, once, or sometimes?
Sometimes it doesn't recognize the parameter and sometimes it does. It doesn't seem fully random, but chaotic, stuff that seems like shouldn't impact it do
Parameter not being Recognized
Screenshot 2026-07-05 104630.png (224.31 KiB) Viewed 494 times
Design which the blueprint is created from
Screenshot 2026-07-05 104621.png (112.48 KiB) Viewed 494 times
Re: [2.1.9] Parameterization of Logistic Network Enable Condition not Recognized
Posted: Sun Jul 05, 2026 6:06 pm
by Rseding91
Thanks for the report however I am not able to reproduce any such issue when I test. Can you show a video of the steps you're doing? I think there's something missing that I'm not doing.
Re: [2.1.9] Parameterization of Logistic Network Enable Condition not Recognized
Posted: Sun Jul 05, 2026 8:15 pm
by NotTheWaffle
Of course. Attached is a video of me showcasing the bug.
Re: [2.1.9] Parameterization of Logistic Network Enable Condition not Recognized
Posted: Sun Jul 05, 2026 10:25 pm
by Rseding91
I see. You’re placing the recipe parameter 0 in the item-condition. Since the logistic condition only works with items it ignores the recipe parameter.
The intended way is to make a blueprint and in the GUI you enable parameter for both the condition and recipe - separately.
The GUI probably shouldn’t let you place the recipe parameter in the condition.
Re: [2.1.9] Parameterization of Logistic Network Enable Condition not Recognized
Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2026 12:21 am
by NotTheWaffle
Oh, that explains why it would work sometimes and not others.
Thank you for clearing up my confusion.
Re: [2.1.9] Parameterization of Logistic Network Enable Condition not Recognized
Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2026 7:26 pm
by k1ngjulien
Rseding91 wrote: Sun Jul 05, 2026 10:25 pm
I see. You’re placing the recipe parameter 0 in the item-condition. Since the logistic condition only works with items it ignores the recipe parameter.
The intended way is to make a blueprint and in the GUI you enable parameter for both the condition and recipe - separately.
The GUI probably shouldn’t let you place the recipe parameter in the condition.
This still works when the (0) is set in "Enable If" with Circuits, and has worked in previous version with the logistic connection.
I just stumbled across this because my logi bot mall assembler blueprint seems to have broken in 2.1! I can share the blueprints if you'd like
Re: [2.1.9] Parameterization of Logistic Network Enable Condition not Recognized
Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2026 7:49 pm
by k1ngjulien
ok its much stranger, i recreated the blueprint and now it works again...
Yea, I think that 2.0 probably in some capacity supported logistic network conditions by recipes, which seems to have been removed. IMO a good change.
I would love some more standardization of what types of virtual signals can be placed where. Like limiting which signals are choosable for a parameter based on its usage (currently you can make fluid level conditions on trains with non fluids)
I think that the circuit system in Factorio is both amazing and terrifying. I would really love a way to say "this parameter is a recipe" or "this parameter is a fluid" in the parameterization screen. Additionally, changing which fields (like the currently available p0_i0, p0_i1, p0_t) are accessible based on the parameter type would be nice. Maybe a mod idea but it seems a bit more integral to the engine rather than something implementable with a mod.