Wrong snapping of train stations

[Carryonnaire]

I put a train station onto rails and build inseters to fill the train. However when I want to automate this and build a station there, the game often snaps this station shifted by one grid square and thus some inserters appear to be between two carts.
Is there an easy fix and should it be expected anytime soon?

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1425612806

[KatherineOfSky]

You should build the station/stop item first, and then put down inserters, etc. (Or, if blueprinting, blueprint the station with the chests, etc.)

This isn't broken -- it happens because train tracks fall on a 2x2 grid instead of a 1x1.

[Warlord]

Originally posted by KatherineOfSky:

You should build the station/stop item first, and then put down inserters, etc. (Or, if blueprinting, blueprint the station with the chests, etc.)

This isn't broken -- it happens because train tracks fall on a 2x2 grid instead of a 1x1.

Yep. Hard to tell, since the station itself is 2 tiles wide, but looks like one.

Pretty much anything related to rails and stations can be a pain to blueprint. Need to build the rails first, THEN build based off the rails.

[Carryonnaire]

Originally posted by KatherineOfSky:

You should build the station/stop item first, and then put down inserters, etc. (Or, if blueprinting, blueprint the station with the chests, etc.)

This isn't broken -- it happens because train tracks fall on a 2x2 grid instead of a 1x1.

Building station first makes no sense since first trains can run before stations are even researched.

This misjunction in grid sizes causes more troubles than it does help. It is definetly not ok, and, in my opinion, should be reconsidered.

[KatherineOfSky]

Originally posted by Carryonnaire:

Building station first makes no sense since first trains can run before stations are even researched.

This misjunction in grid sizes causes more troubles than it does help. It is definetly not ok, and, in my opinion, should be reconsidered.

Trains can't run automatically unless stations are researched.

Also, you might want to get used to this function of the game. It is definitely "ok", and has been in the game for several years now. It's part of how the game works: get used it to and you'll find trains much easier to work with :-)

[Carryonnaire]

Originally posted by KatherineOfSky:

Trains can't run automatically unless stations are researched.

Also, you might want to get used to this function of the game. It is definitely "ok", and has been in the game for several years now. It's part of how the game works: get used it to and you'll find trains much easier to work with :-)

Trains can be ran manually, for this they does not require stations. This is why I build trains first and drive them myself while stations are only being researched. Waiting for research to end to only start using what was available long before is illogical. Why would such a logic-oriented game force me to act irrationally?

[KatherineOfSky]

Originally posted by Carryonnaire:

Trains can be ran manually, for this they does not require stations. This is why I build trains first and drive them myself while stations are only being researched. Waiting for research to end to only start using what was available long before is illogical. Why would such a logic-oriented game force me to act irrationally?

I specified "automatic" for a reason. The train research is so cheap and fast to do, TBH, I've never heard of anyone driving a train manually for the purpose of trying to park at a grouping of chests with no station. (Normally one would finish all this research before placing a single rail). That is generally the logical thing to do :-)

If research is taking "long", consider adding more labs and more production of science flasks.

[Warlord]

Originally posted by KatherineOfSky:

Originally posted by Carryonnaire:

Trains can be ran manually, for this they does not require stations. This is why I build trains first and drive them myself while stations are only being researched. Waiting for research to end to only start using what was available long before is illogical. Why would such a logic-oriented game force me to act irrationally?

I specified "automatic" for a reason. The train research is so cheap and fast to do, TBH, I've never heard of anyone driving a train manually for the purpose of trying to park at a grouping of chests with no station. (Normally one would finish all this research before placing a single rail). That is generally the logical thing to do :-)

If research is taking "long", consider adding more labs and more production of science flasks.

I don't think it's fair to say it is "normal" to only use trains after all researches are done. While I agree that I don't use rails until I have them all done, it doesn't mean we should immediately discount someone's opinions.

Sure, it is really unlikely that someone will only research rails and not the rest, since manually using trains is inefficient and the research for the rest is the same science requirements. But it is a mechanic of the game to be able to make rails with no stations. If someone wants to drive a train, make a rail line 2 miles long, and manually run that to take ore from a distant mine site, it's their call.

However, OP, it's just a mechanic of automation in trains. 2x1 Stations have to snap to the same grid that 2x2 rails use. This game is full of "oh, it's better to do something THIS way" lessons.

[KatherineOfSky]

@Warlord -- I didn't mean to discount anyone's play style. I meant that I had never seen anyone do it that way. (I have seen a LOT of people play, and 100% of my observed people would constitute a "normal" or "common" method of play. I didn't mean anything derogatory.) To me, it is very logical to research train stations and signals before trying to build a train system.

I suspect the reason rails are available first are so that people can start manurfacturing the large numbers of rails needed, and start placement while they are waiting for stations to be researched.