Why aren't medium poles a drop in replacement for small ones

[Maharin]

I can take a complicated level 3 assembly machine and directly drop it on a level 2 one and all modules and other settings get replaced in an instant but I have to first remove and then add a power pole? Why? :p

[bobingabout]

Because, the way it works, you can also drop a MK1 assembling machine on top of a MK2. Therefor if you could drop medium poles on top of small poles, you could do the other way around too. Since medium poles have a longer range, that means plopping small poles on top could break the cables.

[Maharin]

Because, the way it works, you can also drop a MK1 assembling machine on top of a MK2. Therefor if you could drop medium poles on top of small poles, you could do the other way around too. Since medium poles have a longer range, that means plopping small poles on top could break the cables.

But you can "break" things by dropping a MK1 on a MK3 just as easily with too many modules or a recipe that takes too many components. Your logic doesn't stand. I'm just asking for the same behaviour with the electrical poles.

[garath]

Because, the way it works, you can also drop a MK1 assembling machine on top of a MK2. Therefor if you could drop medium poles on top of small poles, you could do the other way around too. Since medium poles have a longer range, that means plopping small poles on top could break the cables.

But you can "break" things by dropping a MK1 on a MK3 just as easily with too many modules or a recipe that takes too many components. Your logic doesn't stand. I'm just asking for the same behaviour with the electrical poles.

Interesting point. But I doubt blueprint logic is going to include any awareness of the recipe. So, that just leaves the module count. How does it work now if you replace a MKIII with a MK1? I assume it just zeroes out the modules when you replace the MKIII with the MK1? That's the easiest to program.

But how would you want to program the replacement of a shorter range power pole? You can't. Thus, they can't be interchangeable. For all intents and purposes, the small and medium electric pole are two *ABSOLUTELY* different items. Asking to allow a medium to be a drop in replacement for a small one is almost on par with asking that an underground belt be a drop in replacement for a power pole.

[Maharin]

Because, the way it works, you can also drop a MK1 assembling machine on top of a MK2. Therefor if you could drop medium poles on top of small poles, you could do the other way around too. Since medium poles have a longer range, that means plopping small poles on top could break the cables.

But you can "break" things by dropping a MK1 on a MK3 just as easily with too many modules or a recipe that takes too many components. Your logic doesn't stand. I'm just asking for the same behaviour with the electrical poles.

Interesting point. But I doubt blueprint logic is going to include any awareness of the recipe. So, that just leaves the module count. How does it work now if you replace a MKIII with a MK1? I assume it just zeroes out the modules when you replace the MKIII with the MK1? That's the easiest to program.

But how would you want to program the replacement of a shorter range power pole? You can't. Thus, they can't be interchangeable. For all intents and purposes, the small and medium electric pole are two *ABSOLUTELY* different items. Asking to allow a medium to be a drop in replacement for a small one is almost on par with asking that an underground belt be a drop in replacement for a power pole.

Or... just have the replace code simply remove the old one and add in the new one, without attempting any "upgrade" or "downgrade". What currently happens when you replace the middle of three poles by removing and adding a different pole in its place? That is all I want to happen now, nothing complicated or game changing/breaking.

[garath]

Or... just have the replace code simply remove the old one and add in the new one, without attempting any "upgrade" or "downgrade". What currently happens when you replace the middle of three poles by removing and adding a different pole in its place? That is all I want to happen now, nothing complicated or game changing/breaking.

In my opinion, the developers will always want to code things so as not to confuse the vast majority of players. If they made it so you could "break" the blueprint by replacing one item with another, in my opinion, most players would be confused and might consider it a bug. Then, this would create support tickets and such. Thus, they probably wouldn't want to make this change for the handful of advanced players like yourself who want the ability to replace any item in a blueprint with any other item.

[Maharin]

Where did blueprints come into this conversation? I was never talking about blueprints at all and yet it keeps getting brought up.

[Zeblote]

Does it even make sense to replace small poles with medium ones? You normally place them further apart.

[garath]

Where did blueprints come into this conversation? I was never talking about blueprints at all and yet it keeps getting brought up.

Oops! Sorry about that. I guess most of the Factorio posts I was reading this morning were about blueprints. Sorry!

[Maharin]

Does it even make sense to replace small poles with medium ones? You normally place them further apart.

Depends on your goals, of course, but the main question I was asking is why CAN'T you do it, not whether you should or not. So many things are drop in replacements for other things so it doesn't make sense to my mind as to why you can't with power poles.

[Kyralessa]

How does it work now if you replace a MKIII with a MK1? I assume it just zeroes out the modules when you replace the MKIII with the MK1? That's the easiest to program.

If you replace an Assembly machine 3 with an Assembly machine 1, it removes the modules and puts them back in your inventory. If the recipe had more than two ingredients, it cancels out the recipe and returns any unused ingredients or produced items to your inventory as well.

Obviously if you do this carelessly, it could break an existing setup.

There doesn't seem to be any reason the small and medium power poles couldn't work the same way, with the same caveat.

[Deadly-Bagel]

Yeah but... why? Medium power poles don't perform any better than small ones and if you've already got full coverage there's no reason to go in either direction. If you do, you're going to have to rework it anyway because of the different ranges.

Sure they could allow it, but it wouldn't serve any purpose other than to encourage players to be inefficient.

[bobingabout]

To be honest, if I did want to replace my power poles, I'd probably start by pulling all the existing ones down and starting over.

Even when I have access to medium power poles, I quite often continue using small power poles all the way up to end game, depending on application.
A small power pole next to an assembling machine to power a pickup and drop inserter to 2 logistic chests... Yeah, works fine, why waste a the materials of a medium pole.
By similar logic, if your aim is coverage, well, I typically go with a substation, and do total coverage.

[ssilk]

I added this to viewtopic.php?f=80&t=30575 Fast Upgrade (Belt->Splitters, Small Chests -> Bigger Chests... etc.)

And my opinion is similar to bobingabout.

And why should someone replace a wooden pole, if it isn't broken or it's coverage is really ugly? Doesn't happen in reality and makes no sense to be done in a game, too.