Automatic Assembly Machine Recipe Changing w./ Combinators

[whizzball1]

The title says it all: Instead of manually changing the recipe in an assembly machine, certain signals could choose certain recipes; this is especially workable if items in the game already have unique circuit signals (I don't know whether this is true or not). This could be useful for, say, changing an assembly machine to construct logistics robots or construction robots depending on how many were in the system. Or it could be useful for a factory built to do multiple recipes with the same machines.

[Peter34]

The whole premise of Factorio is that each machine does one thing, and that only active player intervention, which is a very precious - expensive - resource (costing time), can cause a machine to change to doing another thing.

It follows from this that any alternative method of causing a machine to switch from one task to another must also be very, very expensive.

I'm thinking some kind of Control Computer, radiating a vaguely Beacon-like Control Effect of a certain range, only able to affect machines within this range, and with no way of extending the range of the Computer (i.e. you can't use wires), except of course to build additional Control Computers in other areas where you wish this Control Effect to occur. It should be very expensive to build.

[Neotix]

Expensive, only in range, late game....all that means boring and useless.
We have combinators and they sole purpose is controlling everything. From update to update we will be able to control more and more. Controlling assemblers and recipes is logical move.

It could be done by adding to assemblers slot for signal and few slots for recipes. Each assembler tiers could have more slots (just like for materials) and each slot with number.

For example we have Assembler Tier 1 and it have 2 slots for recipes.
Signal: "A"
Recipe 1: "Copper Cable"
Recipe 2: "Electronic Circuit"

Recipe 1 is default so if we don't connect wires, only that slot is available.

When signal A=0 or A>2 then assembler if Off. When A=1 then assembler will produce "Copper Cable", when A=2 then produce "Electronic Circuit".
Recipe switch should be able to do only when assembler is empty, so when assembler get signal to shift recipe, it should treat materials like product and inserter should remove them.

In that way we can get another level of gameplay deep.

[ssilk]

I'm missing a concrete usage case. Why should this be better than yet? Wouldn't the same game mechanics not be reached, if we build copper cable and circuits and transport only, if A=2?

[daniel34]

One thing that bothers me is what happens to the items still in then input/output of the assembler when changing the recipe.
When changing the recipe by hand, all these items go back into your inventory.

Imagine a factory that changes between logistic and construction robots and both are set to be at roughly the same number using combinators. The recipe will switch with almost every robot made but because one uses electric circuits and the other uses advanced circuits there are leftovers in the assembler, as they always input 2x the needed amount of an item.

[Neotix]

daniel34 if assembler receive signal to switch recipe, output inserter should remove items.
Something like that:
https://i.gyazo.com/a3a9579dcac4f76d60e ... 25b374.png

[whizzball1]

I'm missing a concrete usage case. Why should this be better than yet? Wouldn't the same game mechanics not be reached, if we build copper cable and circuits and transport only, if A=2?

I assume this to mean that there would be two assembly machines, one building copper cable and the other building circuits--but they would only be transported if there's a certain signal. This is viable, but it detracts from the purpose I stated; you'd have to build assembly for many different things, and that would be no better than just making a main bus. Rather, this could be useful for creating a factory that can do everything by changing the recipes in the assemblers and moving the items around in different ways.

One thing that bothers me is what happens to the items still in then input/output of the assembler when changing the recipe.
When changing the recipe by hand, all these items go back into your inventory.

Imagine a factory that changes between logistic and construction robots and both are set to be at roughly the same number using combinators. The recipe will switch with almost every robot made but because one uses electric circuits and the other uses advanced circuits there are leftovers in the assembler, as they always input 2x the needed amount of an item.

Previously I suggested placing an adjacent chest that would receive excess items, which could then be dumped back into conveyor belts or taken by the logistics network.

[ssilk]

I can now do me some work and argue, but in my mind I have already played some scenarios through. They make no sense.

So maybe you can find a better scenario than me? Mine where all useless afford to do things, which are already working.

Whizzball1: Please make a concrete example (take a piece of paper and draw it for us) that show us the advantages of such a system. I think it should be a bit more complex than creating circuits.

[whizzball1]

I can now do me some work and argue, but in my mind I have already played some scenarios through. They make no sense.

So maybe you can find a better scenario than me? Mine where all useless afford to do things, which are already working.

Whizzball1: Please make a concrete example (take a piece of paper and draw it for us) that show us the advantages of such a system. I think it should be a bit more complex than creating circuits.

I do have an idea; I'll start working on it once I can use my computer correctly. I haven't forgotten.

[whizzball1]

I can now do me some work and argue, but in my mind I have already played some scenarios through. They make no sense.

So maybe you can find a better scenario than me? Mine where all useless afford to do things, which are already working.

Whizzball1: Please make a concrete example (take a piece of paper and draw it for us) that show us the advantages of such a system. I think it should be a bit more complex than creating circuits.

Here's the biggest advantage I've thought of so far: power saving. Say you're at the point in the game where you're prepared to create processing units. However, you're hurting for power and you really can't spare much. But you really can't spare the advanced circuits right now, so you'd need assembly machines for more advanced circuits and for the processing units--but that's more energy than you're willing to use up, and even if you stopped using the assembly machines for a time, they would still use electricity.

What if you used the same assembly machines for both instead? https://gyazo.com/15771435af864f546a6d7e36f7f4a189 is how it would look when producing advanced circuits, but then https://gyazo.com/350be7eef5f39d2d5724e530bc1238c9 is how it would look after 13 seconds, using the advanced circuits just produced to create processing units without using any extra power. It's slower, but worth it.

This situation is just one of many possible situations where it's more efficient to just use the same assembly machines.

[TuckJohn]

The whole Idea of factorio is to make factories out of modular items. Adding a "feature" that allowed you to have to build less is a disadvantage in my opinion. You could easily accomplish your logistics bot example with two different assemblers with smart inserter inputs.

[ssilk]

What if you used the same assembly machines for both instead? https://gyazo.com/15771435af864f546a6d7e36f7f4a189 is how it would look when producing advanced circuits, but then https://gyazo.com/350be7eef5f39d2d5724e530bc1238c9 is how it would look after 13 seconds, using the advanced circuits just produced to create processing units without using any extra power. It's slower, but worth it.

Quite special. I doubt, that the mass of players check how this can be used.

This situation is just one of many possible situations where it's more efficient to just use the same assembly machines.

I doubt both. The amount of power saving for your example is ... low. And can be achieved much easier with v0.13 in a simple way: I can just switch off what's not needed.

[Neotix]

You will save resources, space and have more fun with combinators.
Btw, CyberChest Mod is doing almost the same thing (switching recipes but don't require combinators) and for me it's one of the best mods.

[whizzball1]

What if you used the same assembly machines for both instead? https://gyazo.com/15771435af864f546a6d7e36f7f4a189 is how it would look when producing advanced circuits, but then https://gyazo.com/350be7eef5f39d2d5724e530bc1238c9 is how it would look after 13 seconds, using the advanced circuits just produced to create processing units without using any extra power. It's slower, but worth it.

Quite special. I doubt, that the mass of players check how this can be used.

This situation is just one of many possible situations where it's more efficient to just use the same assembly machines.

I doubt both. The amount of power saving for your example is ... low. And can be achieved much easier with v0.13 in a simple way: I can just switch off what's not needed.

I suppose you're right! It'd just be too much trouble for a few isolated cases. Thanks for the consideration.

You will save resources, space and have more fun with combinators.
Btw, CyberChest Mod is doing almost the same thing (switching recipes but don't require combinators) and for me it's one of the best mods.

Oh? I'll check it out.

[White Geared]

What if you used the same assembly machines for both instead? https://gyazo.com/15771435af864f546a6d7e36f7f4a189 is how it would look when producing advanced circuits, but then https://gyazo.com/350be7eef5f39d2d5724e530bc1238c9 is how it would look after 13 seconds, using the advanced circuits just produced to create processing units without using any extra power. It's slower, but worth it.

Quite special. I doubt, that the mass of players check how this can be used.

This situation is just one of many possible situations where it's more efficient to just use the same assembly machines.

I doubt both. The amount of power saving for your example is ... low. And can be achieved much easier with v0.13 in a simple way: I can just switch off what's not needed.

How about more stable production which is faster?
Rather than using different segments of machines, unite them as only one segment which produces only one recipe at a time.
It will save both space and time and also is mentally easier to fiddle with.

[Lubricus]

Check out the crafting combinator mod!
https://mods.factorio.com/mods/theRusty ... combinator