The issue: it is possible to mine a landfill tiles that have ore resources on top of them.

What I would expect to happen: it should not be possible to mine landfill tiles with ore on top of them, just like it happens when trying to mine a tile with buildings on top of it.

Docs say by default ...

+1, when dragging parallel belts it often deletes and disconnects sections of the belt if I accidentally keep the cursor pressed or if I'm not super precise with motion. Preferred previous versions without this feature.

Entities "Loader" and "Fast loader" should have field "next_upgrade" in prototypes set to the next tier, respectively "fast-loader" and "express-loader".

Source: https://github.com/wube/factorio-data/blob/2c2abc2b1d4cc4e8e9cac6d8e6351308004a406b/base/prototypes/entity/transport-belts.lua#L1047-L1158

Goodmorning,

woke up to one of our server crashing.
Only 1 player was online at the time, they said they could have been "crafting loaders, putting some express loaders in the chest", but that's not guaranteed to be the issue. I'm attaching the log & a save pre-crash to this issue.

LMK if further ...

I'm uploading a second save that got corrupted by inconsistent transport groups

Hello,

I would like to request if additional info could be provided regarding the subfolders of Mod Structure https://lua-api.factorio.com/latest/auxiliary/mod-structure.html , in particular:

1. structure of "scenarios"
2. structure of "campaigns"

---

1. Scenario structure
Scenario already has ...

These two entities may be the ones causing the inconsistency, if I am reading the report correctly.
Dunno why or if this is the result of some bad code on mods part. if so, please let me know, thanks!

I dont know if it's hardware related, but I was not the only user locked out of the save.
Anyways, I've attached the log file to this issue, and updated the original post with more data

Failing to connect to a hosted MP server and getting the error "Cannot load downloaded map: transport line groups are not consistent"

The issue
when trying to connect to a server with this map, users (me or other) get an inconsistency error upon joining.

Steps to reproduce
try loading the ...

Hello,

I have a question about how techs are rendered in the thechnology tree UI.

From what I've gathered from the other topics (https://forums.factorio.com/viewtopic.php?p=589068&hilit=technology+order#p589068), this is roughly how techs are sorted:

- ordering by the required science packs (most ...

I'm sorry but Petra's request of recipe-specific tracking was not part of the original post (craft already has count field). Does it mean Mine/Send/Build cannot have a count field as well?

Hello,

I would like to request if it would be possible to add field `count` (optional, default to 1) to prototypes of TechnologyTrigger::MineEntityTechnologyTrigger and TechnologyTrigger::SendItemToOrbitTechnologyTrigger, and TechnologyTrigger::BuildEntityTechnologyTrigger ...

Thanks a lot

Hello,

I would like to report a crash to desktop when undoing a marking for deconstruction of a cargo wagon while in map view. This happened in multiplayer but I tested & reproduced it perfectly in single player as well.

Steps to reproduce it
0. Open the provided save " Wagon_Crash " provided in ...

Forwarding a reply by Rseding just FYI on this topic: the engine skips charting if a force has no players, which explains why on my single player tests all those entities didnt chart any:

The chunks are still marked as to-be-charted but the actual chart is not scanned if there are no players on ...

I'm attaching a save of Factorio v2.0.35 with the test example of this, as well as a screenshot: https://imgur.com/a/pQaTfqd

Hello, I have a few questions about shared charts and built-in radar behaviors in 2.0.

My issue is: when dealing with multiple forces, that have LuaForce::share_chart set to true, some entities share their charting area, while others dont. Here's my tests.

Case A : same force.

- These entities ...

One possible improvement would be adding a build_check_type to create_entity which would allow you to merge the can_place_entity and create_entity calls. This would roughly half the cost because can_place_entity internally does *almost* the same thing as create_entity, but it then throws it all ...

Alright, thanks for taking the time to check and profile it

Like I could check for can_place before adding the new entity data to the array, and then just pass the array to the API.