Factorio Forums

TL;DR

The 'L'-Screen with all logistic networks is great - the possibility to give names to each network would make it even greater

What ?

As stated in the TL;DR, I'd like to give names to my logistic Networks, so I can see (not just guess by size and contents) which is which.

Why ?

Because it would improve the screen, make the information provided by it more useful. Now, with dozens of networks only represented by some number, it's ok-ish, but only half as helpful as it could be.

Devils advocate:
What happens when two networks are merged?

Better: What happens if you give two networks the same name? Would it work similar to giving two train stops the same name?

RE:
* Merging -> let the "bigger*" network "win" and keep only this name
(bigger: more roboports, more items, more robots, whatever you like)
* Same Name -> Act as _one_ network. For example: All networks called "iron-ore-outpost" have 1 million iron ore in their chests.

Like the idea. I think the names should be just cosmetic and not have different gameplay aspects.

Merging: When you place a roboport that connects to 2+ other networks, you get a popup asking to name it, showing the names of the other networks that are being merged. This is the only time you'd get a popup, and maybe you could "always" dismiss it on a per-save or game-wide instance. Alternatively, the new network could be named like some married couples do it, by just listing each name one by one (in order of creation, say) with a dash.

Splitting: The names of each split-off network either stay the same or are split into name-1, name-2, name-3, etc. I prefer the former.

Same Names: Don't do anything special, but allow 2 networks of the same name. This would not affect gameplay and - more importantly - wouldn't cause even more questions about why robots wander all over the map getting killed by biters

5thHorseman wrote:Splitting: The names of each split-off network either stay the same or are split into name-1, name-2, name-3, etc. I prefer the former.

I think the concept of splitting networks makes the most sense, rather than merging them. Then you don't have to worry about roboport placement at all, just put down a logistics network boundary, however that may be executed. The only rules could be that a network has to have at least 1 roboport in it, and boundaries cannot be directly over a roboport.