Factorio Forums Forum

I am a contributor on a few mods owned by other authors. I need to change the license on one. I have created a custom license in the portal. However, when I go to edit the info of the mod, my custom license doesn't appear on the list of options. I suspect I'm seeing the list of the author's custom licenses.

*sigh* Yes, you can do it with the current circuit options. I did eventually get it working (modulo it sometimes buffering a couple more U235 than strictly needed) myself. I'm sure all you Very Smart People would have instantly seen this correct setup, and not gone through a couple iterations that didn't work like I did. You know what? Never mind. "There are some recipes which both input and output the same item. It would be nice if the circuit network had some way to actually tell the difference." That is the only thing that matters to my actual proposal . Explain to me like i'm dumb then ok ? You say it would be "nice", but this whole discussion lead me to believe that it would not be much usable, rather the other suggestion to read on different wire is more thought out by those you call "very smart people" this is why i asked you to describe how you would use the feature if it was in-game, because to me when i try to think of it , i don't see it. And i'm asking "in practice" like which wire , to which inserter, which conditions, because the details matter very much here, if the details are sligthly different, then maybe it's another suggestion that would proove more usable / useful in game, which is what i believe. It's not a trap to proove you are wrong, again it's because i may have missed it. I saw you participated in the other discussion too, the suggestion to be able to select the wire color for each tickbox separately, i think it would be the better option because i

Put yourself in my shoes, and perhaps you'll better appreciate that I wasn't being defensive, but trying to course-correct those mistaken assumptions. Trying to correct mistaken assumption appears to be what people have been trying to do with your claims that no module or productivity was always better than quality module, and that beacons are expensive compared to more of the same non-beaconned setup. ( or quality) It would not have been a good rule of thumb for anyone so it's better than those are corrected. Similarly : Mixed-quality items being moved on belts can and will break factories in general. See the thread's title. Fortunatly the discussion went beyond just the title though, and if you read carefully, you would see that there are in fact several ways to avoid breaking your factory when using quality. But you repeated that as if it was a fact, and not a perception from players that have not yet managed yet to find ways to handle the additionnal challenge offered by the quality mechanic. And you did so even after other players attempted to explain why you may have reached this conclusion from incorrect assumptions , seemingly dismissing the help i would have expected a player struggling to make a factory that uses quality to take. To me this appeared to be a very defensive position, you start with incorrect assumptions, you don't listen to rationnal demonstrations that those assumptions are incorrect, but you state again the conclusion you reached from those mistaken

+1, encountered this with Fill barrel on 2.1.17. Interestingly, Empty barrel works fine and parametrization substitutes the recipe as expected, but Fill barrel substitutes the actual item instead of the chosen recipe.

Oh wow, that's an incredibly thorough breakdown of the math as to why this happens. Thank you for explaining that in such detail, that makes way more sense to me now. I'm still a bit surprised I hadn't noticed this in previous playthroughs, but it's likely it was happening all along and I just never noticed for any of the variety of reasons you listed. As for the inserters and the seemingly disconnected underground in the picture, that's because this playthrough is using Bob's Mods overhaul, so those are actually bulk inserters and the underground is connected (the undergrounds have much greater lengths in Bobs). I updated my current blueprints to use additional circuit logic to make each inserter only swing when they are above or below the average of all the chests contents depending on whether it is a requester or provider station. Thanks again for the breakdown of the math on why this occurs. That honestly makes me a lot less annoyed at the game now that I understand why it is happening.

Earlier we considered your idea about nutrients and to the extent that "If it is calculated in a different way the conclusion is the same." Your reaction to that idea was extremely defensive. I'd need specific examples of my defensive behavior, because I don't feel like I was being defensive when I reacted. What you quoted is self-evident, and I shouldn't have to say it as a counterpoint, because it was obvious I was in the mid-game and didn't have enough surplus resources to craft beacons. I would craft beacons later, when more resources are available, and doing it in reverse order might have had unintended negative consequences in both the early and mid-game. I tend to notice details other people don't. quineotio and Tertius are both using similar technologies. I see beacons and turbo belts in that city block set. So from my point of view I'm getting a similar, extremely defensive reaction. I use beacons when it makes sense, and when it doesn't, I don't. That is true of all tools that are available to Factorio players. Tertius mistakenly assumed I refuse to use beacons. I don't know where that came from, because that wasn't what I meant or implied. From my perspective, Tertius seemed defensive without meaning to and wanted me to take inspiration, learn how to use beacons properly, or whatever you want to call it. As if I never knew how to use beacons in the first place, despite having used and worked with beacons and other technologies for many years. That didn't make me fe

Unsure if this is possible, but it would open up several modding possibilities: I'd like to be able to selectively prevent inserters, loaders and belts from transferring their contents to specific 'other' inserters, loaders and belts. "no-automated-item-removal" and "no-automated-item-insertion" only work for splitters and inserters, and only act as binary flags rather than filters. Things this would enable: Belt variants that only accept certain product types, and do not allow transfer, merging, sideloading or insertion of invalid products. This means you could have mods that have 'U-shaped conveyors' for rough/loose products and keep the standard belts for refined products. You could have 'channel' conveyors that actually transport molten 'liquids' around. You could simulate 'grated undergrounds' (aka: belts that appear underground beneath grates, but dont allow sideloading/merging with above ground belts). I actually think the possibilities here are endless, and only my imagination is falling short at the moment. If this is impossible, an alternative that lets us place little walls that prevent the flow of items/transfer with inserters would be nice.

Ngl, I'm more interested in this part: As most Android are arm64s, makes sense to split the job into porting to architecture first and then shipping to Android.

The train-to-chest inserters load into 4 chests. To stay 100% balanced, all 4 inserters must either all swing or all not swing. You load iron plates, 4000 items per wagon, with fast inserters (hand size 4) into 4 chests per wagon so each inserter must swing 250 times. This will usually work, so it's not clear what the issue is for you on the screenshot. However if you use bulk inserters with stack size 12, it's different. 4000/12 is 333 full hands + 4. With 4 chests, its 333/4 = 83 + 1 swings. So every chest except one gets 83 swings, one chest gets 84 swings and one of these gets another swing with just 4 items. I don't remember exactly why, but one and the same chest seems to always get the additional swings so the chests at the unloading station are being filled unbalanced. Game engine update order or something like this. But they're being emptied balanced, so one chest continuously gets more items than the other chests in the long run - it's always the last swing causing this. The issue will not surface or not that fast if you overfill the chests, i. e. every chest gets completely full before the train gets empty. But if some chests never get full because items are unloaded as fast as being loaded, or you deliberately open the station only when more then a full train load is missing in the buffer chests, unbalancing will increase. If you want to avoid this, don't change the train limits dynamically - let station chests overfill. Or the hand size multiplied with the amount

I'm working on a mod to add Dune/Beetlejuice-style sandworms. I want them to burrow into the ground. For that animation to look good, I need them to disappear one segment at a time. I can't find any way to accomplish that. Assuming I haven't missed something, I posted viewtopic.php?t=136088 , but I'm here just in case I did miss something.

Currently, setting energy_source.buffer_capacity on a CraftingMachinePrototype does absolutely nothing. I ask that it instead do what it normally does in any other context. This is relevant, for example, on the Cyclotron from the mod Ultracube ( https://mods.factorio.com/mod/Ultracube ). The design of this building is: it consumes 120MW while crafting, from an internal battery of 240MJ, which charges at 3MW. Thus, it cannot run continuously; it produces its items in a quick burst, and then must be left alone to recharge. In order to implement this behavior, because the single parameter energy_source.buffer_capacity does not work as advertised, an entire separate ElectricEnergyInterfacePrototype must be added, alongside a small spiderweb of control scripting to hook the two entities together. This seems, to me, awfully inelegant. According to a discussion with Bilka on discord, the reason for this behavior is modules. Because the energy consumption of crafting machines can change, they must dynamically change their internal buffer capacity, so that, as they're typically used, they neither wastefully store more energy than they need, nor unintentionally starve themselves. Fusion generators also do this (I think). Loaders also calculate their buffer size dynamically, and use their calculated buffer size if it is larger than what is set in the prototype ( 105438 ). I think it would make sense if crafting machines worked similarly to loaders, if that's possible.

When copying something that has been scheduled for upgrade to a higher quality it shows the wrong quality in the little preview window. Here is how it looks: So the currently placed EM plants are uncommon but are scheduled to be rare, the preview window shows copying uncommon even tho the real copy is the actual rare EM plants that are supposed to be copied (and are copied): So the copying works as intended just the little preview doesn't and it could be confusing.