Version 0.17.56

[FactorioBot]

Minor Features

• Added option to enable Steam Cloud Sync for blueprint library to Other Settings GUI. Please backup your blueprint-storage.dat if you chose to enable it. The option is available in Steam version of the game and Cloud Sync needs to be enabled in Steam for the library to be actually synchronized.

Bugfixes

• Fixed that the blueprint library GUI sometimes wouldn't update until the mouse was moved. (72624)
• Fixed that deconstructing tiles in the map editors instant-deconstruction mode didn't work. (73060)
• Fixed setting FireFlamePrototype::spread_delay_deviation to 0 or 1 would crash the game. (73053)
• Fixed logistics system tutorial after game script migration. (73066)
• Fixed that the game would freeze when using LuaLogisticNetwork::remove_item() if the item was only in the players cursor. (72988)
• Fixed yet another case of rails not merging blocks as expected. (73016)
• Fixed occasional crash when dragging train wait conditions with brackets. (72899)
• Removed the focusability of buttons, as we don't support it graphically and the functionality was just half-functional. (72932)
• Fixed that copy-paste for assembling machines would ignore fixed_recipe. (73115)
• Fixed that failing to join multiplayer games through --join-game-by-id would fail to show the error and show an empty background. (72991)
• Fixed inserting items into underground belts with inserters could put items onto the belt leading into the underground belt. (70749)
• Fixed rail signal internal consistency for some cases of rail cycle with one signal. (72916)
• Fixed that electric energy interface stopped accumulators from working. (73078)
• Fixed high CRC time related to large amounts of electric networks in multiplayer games. (73100)
• Fixed that multiple map settings prototypes could be defined.

Modding

• Removed label style want_ellipsis as it will be used automatically everywhere as with button.
• All rail bounding boxes are now hardcoded/not moddable. This is to avoid unexpected collision/rail block merging behaviour.

Use the automatic updater if you can (check experimental updates in other settings) or download full installation at http://www.factorio.com/download/experimental.

[raiguard]

Minor Features

• Added option to enable Steam Cloud Sync for blueprint library to Other Settings GUI. Please backup your blueprint-storage.dat if you chose to enable it. The option is available in Steam version of the game and Cloud Sync needs to be enabled in Steam for the library to be actually synchronized.

[Jon8RFC]

Auto-updater download is 404ing for me.

[Omnifarious]

All rail bounding boxes are now hardcoded/not moddable. This is to avoid unexpected collision/rail block merging behaviour.

I bet that means that the Rail Bridge mod doesn't work anymore.

[Mernom]

Why would this impact the rail bridge mod? Doesn't it only mess with collision mask settings?
Edit: ohh right, this version of the bridge mod exists. Thought it was about the water bridge rails.

[Schallfalke]

All rail bounding boxes are now hardcoded/not moddable. This is to avoid unexpected collision/rail block merging behaviour.

I bet that means that the Rail Bridge mod doesn't work anymore.

I can confirm it's not working anymore, sadly...
(Colliding at those bridges.)

[goober114]

Just FYI, the URL (see below) for latest experimental is downloading a different build version than what is being distributed on steam. This results in a version mismatch error when attempting to join the headless server from the steam client.

Code: Select all

   0.000 2019-07-11 16:13:06; Factorio 0.17.56 (build 46132, linux64, headless)

Current steam client is 0.17.56 (build 46133, win64, steam)

Download URL: https://www.factorio.com/get-download/l ... ss/linux64

The exact error message is:

Notice >>>>
Version mismatch detected!
You are running version 0.17.56 (build 46133, win64, steam)
Server is running version 0.17.56 (build 46132, win64, steam)
>>>>Confirm

[DaveMcW]

Auto-updater download is 404ing for me.

Confirmed.

Code: Select all

Info HttpSharedState.cpp:145: Downloading https://updater.factorio.com/updater/get-download?package=core-linux64&from=0.17.55&to=0.17.56&isTarget=true&username=DaveMcW&token=<private>&apiVersion=2
Info HttpSharedState.cpp:146: Status code: 404

[Adamo]

Came to report the same.

Just FYI, the URL (see below) for latest experimental is downloading a different build version than what is being distributed on steam. This results in a version mismatch error when attempting to join the headless server from the steam client.

Code: Select all

   0.000 2019-07-11 16:13:06; Factorio 0.17.56 (build 46132, linux64, headless)

Current steam client is 0.17.56 (build 46133, win64, steam)

Download URL: https://www.factorio.com/get-download/l ... ss/linux64

The exact error message is:

Notice >>>>
Version mismatch detected!
You are running version 0.17.56 (build 46133, win64, steam)
Server is running version 0.17.56 (build 46132, win64, steam)
>>>>Confirm

[vanatteveldt]

All rail bounding boxes are now hardcoded/not moddable. This is to avoid unexpected collision/rail block merging behaviour.

I bet that means that the Rail Bridge mod doesn't work anymore.

Any reason for removing this? I understand it was an unintended feature, but it also feels harmless after fixing the vanilla bounding boxes. Did it cause other (possible or actual) issues?

[Gergely]

Modding

• All rail bounding boxes are now hardcoded/not moddable. This is to avoid unexpected collision/rail block merging behaviour.

...

No.... man... what happens to this?

Is this just because of the 6 color algorithm?

[banstorm]

Me too!!

Just FYI, the URL (see below) for latest experimental is downloading a different build version than what is being distributed on steam. This results in a version mismatch error when attempting to join the headless server from the steam client.

Code: Select all

   0.000 2019-07-11 16:13:06; Factorio 0.17.56 (build 46132, linux64, headless)

Current steam client is 0.17.56 (build 46133, win64, steam)

Download URL: https://www.factorio.com/get-download/l ... ss/linux64

The exact error message is:

Notice >>>>
Version mismatch detected!
You are running version 0.17.56 (build 46133, win64, steam)
Server is running version 0.17.56 (build 46132, win64, steam)
>>>>Confirm

[waduk]

All rail bounding boxes are now hardcoded/not moddable. This is to avoid unexpected collision/rail block merging behaviour.

I bet that means that the Rail Bridge mod doesn't work anymore.

Any reason for removing this? I understand it was an unintended feature, but it also feels harmless after fixing the vanilla bounding boxes. Did it cause other (possible or actual) issues?

+1 for this question. I hope dev answer this.

[goober114]

Just FYI, the URL (see below) for latest experimental is downloading a different build version than what is being distributed on steam. This results in a version mismatch error when attempting to join the headless server from the steam client.

Just a follow up on this post. As of 2019-07-12 8:20 CDT, this issue appears to be fixed. Thank you!

Minor Features

• Added option to enable Steam Cloud Sync for blueprint library to Other Settings GUI. Please backup your blueprint-storage.dat if you chose to enable it. The option is available in Steam version of the game and Cloud Sync needs to be enabled in Steam for the library to be actually synchronized.

And THANK YOU for this!

[MasterBuilder]

All rail bounding boxes are now hardcoded/not moddable. This is to avoid unexpected collision/rail block merging behaviour.

You break my heart. Is there no compromise that keeps the Rail Bridge working?

[Zuzak]

All rail bounding boxes are now hardcoded/not moddable. This is to avoid unexpected collision/rail block merging behaviour.

This is the first time an update has made me hate an update.
Why is this necessary?
Do you hate bridges so much? Or is it simple desire to never see possibly of bug report caused by bad signal layouts with bridges?
I just found and implemented bridges and now they get reacted. I was so exited to play with them this weekend.
welp, updates disabled for now.

Don't get me wrong, you all are awesome, but... why.

[GISam]

All rail bounding boxes are now hardcoded/not moddable. This is to avoid unexpected collision/rail block merging behaviour.

You break my heart. Is there no compromise that keeps the Rail Bridge working?

A compromise would be great even if it only worked crossing at a right angle.

I just found the rail-bridge mod and it got me motivated to work on a larger factory and now its gone. Its going to take me a quite a few hours to remove all the bridges and redesign a couple unloading setups.

[slippycheeze]

All rail bounding boxes are now hardcoded/not moddable. This is to avoid unexpected collision/rail block merging behaviour.

This is the first time an update has made me hate an update.
Why is this necessary?
Do you hate bridges so much? Or is it simple desire to never see possibly of bug report caused by bad signal layouts with bridges?
I just found and implemented bridges and now they get reacted. I was so exited to play with them this weekend.
welp, updates disabled for now.

Don't get me wrong, you all are awesome, but... why.

I'm not a developer for this game, but I am one elsewhere, and I can tell you exactly why:

The first time something breaks because of one specific reason you sigh and fix the bug. The second time something else breaks for exactly the same reason you sigh, but this time because you know that you have a systematic problem. You are going to keep having issues triggering from this same root cause forever, one after another, until you fix the root cause.

So, you sit down with everyone and say: players have implemented a horrible hack to make a problem we specifically intended to be part of gameplay vanish entirely, using the root cause of this bug. we also have hard proof it is going to keep causing us pain. how much do we care about the players who want that hack to keep working, compared to the much larger body of players who want trains to, y'know, just work like we say they do?

Then you fix the root cause: no more adjusting rail bounding boxes, because if you ever do that you introduce these bugs again. You also systematically go through your rails and ensure their bounding boxes cause collision detection, knowing that this is the last time you ever need to do that because nobody can mess it up with mods or whatever.

You probably talked about alternatives, too, like changing how collision detection worked out when to run. Sadly, they all break the horrible hack as well, because it depends explicitly on the existence of this systematic bug to work: if, say, you don't depend on overlay of those boxes any more, bridges break because they depend on the fact that no overlap means no collision detection.

So ... you fix it, knowing some people will be unhappy. You don't really have any other choice here, since the alternative is "normal train use without abusing bugs is broken", and spending time fixing rail collision bugs for players who use trains as designed pretty every single month from now to forever.


If you, say, install a mod that depends on game behaviour that generates infinite energy by exploiting rounding errors in some components, expect the same thing. Your bug *may* live for an indefinite amount of time, so long as nothing else breaks, because stopping players cheating themselves isn't that high a priority really, but you don't exactly prioritise keeping it either - and if it starts to be a problem in more places, for players not cheating the system, then you fix it for sure.

...and yeah, they are cheating: like the fact that inserters are a fixed size, trains colliding on all track crossings is part of the designed logistical challenge of the game. we don't have to agree, but rail bridges, and the mods that adjust inserters to, eg, pick up from the side, are both cheating: removing part of the intended challenge.

Since we only cheat ourselves, you and I, if we use them ... it isn't a priority to block, unlike in eg an online PvP game where we would cheat others, but it also doesn't mean we are gonna get loved for it.


IMO, you are foolish to depend on anything that seems like a really clever hack. For bridges, I hoped they stuck around for y'all, but would not have used them myself. I'm OK with adjustable inserter directions in my game, but this train thing was a bridge too far for me...

I don't care if you used it, though, as long as it didn't break anything else. Sadly, it did, and predictably so.

[MashTrapper]

All rail bounding boxes are now hardcoded/not moddable. This is to avoid unexpected collision/rail block merging behaviour.

This is the first time an update has made me hate an update.
Why is this necessary?
Do you hate bridges so much? Or is it simple desire to never see possibly of bug report caused by bad signal layouts with bridges?
I just found and implemented bridges and now they get reacted. I was so exited to play with them this weekend.
welp, updates disabled for now.

Don't get me wrong, you all are awesome, but... why.

I'm not a developer for this game, but I am one elsewhere, and I can tell you exactly why:

The first time something breaks because of one specific reason you sigh and fix the bug. The second time something else breaks for exactly the same reason you sigh, but this time because you know that you have a systematic problem. You are going to keep having issues triggering from this same root cause forever, one after another, until you fix the root cause.

So, you sit down with everyone and say: players have implemented a horrible hack to make a problem we specifically intended to be part of gameplay vanish entirely, using the root cause of this bug. we also have hard proof it is going to keep causing us pain. how much do we care about the players who want that hack to keep working, compared to the much larger body of players who want trains to, y'know, just work like we say they do?

Then you fix the root cause: no more adjusting rail bounding boxes, because if you ever do that you introduce these bugs again. You also systematically go through your rails and ensure their bounding boxes cause collision detection, knowing that this is the last time you ever need to do that because nobody can mess it up with mods or whatever.

You probably talked about alternatives, too, like changing how collision detection worked out when to run. Sadly, they all break the horrible hack as well, because it depends explicitly on the existence of this systematic bug to work: if, say, you don't depend on overlay of those boxes any more, bridges break because they depend on the fact that no overlap means no collision detection.

So ... you fix it, knowing some people will be unhappy. You don't really have any other choice here, since the alternative is "normal train use without abusing bugs is broken", and spending time fixing rail collision bugs for players who use trains as designed pretty every single month from now to forever.


If you, say, install a mod that depends on game behaviour that generates infinite energy by exploiting rounding errors in some components, expect the same thing. Your bug *may* live for an indefinite amount of time, so long as nothing else breaks, because stopping players cheating themselves isn't that high a priority really, but you don't exactly prioritise keeping it either - and if it starts to be a problem in more places, for players not cheating the system, then you fix it for sure.

...and yeah, they are cheating: like the fact that inserters are a fixed size, trains colliding on all track crossings is part of the designed logistical challenge of the game. we don't have to agree, but rail bridges, and the mods that adjust inserters to, eg, pick up from the side, are both cheating: removing part of the intended challenge.

Since we only cheat ourselves, you and I, if we use them ... it isn't a priority to block, unlike in eg an online PvP game where we would cheat others, but it also doesn't mean we are gonna get loved for it.


IMO, you are foolish to depend on anything that seems like a really clever hack. For bridges, I hoped they stuck around for y'all, but would not have used them myself. I'm OK with adjustable inserter directions in my game, but this train thing was a bridge too far for me...

I don't care if you used it, though, as long as it didn't break anything else. Sadly, it did, and predictably so.

This is a nice explanation, but it seems to me like an excessive amount of words to say, "you're having fun wrong."

[Bilka]

This is a nice explanation, but it seems to me like an excessive amount of words to say, "you're having fun wrong."

Maybe the "official" reason explains it better: viewtopic.php?p=441948#p441948