Arrays of pattern providers over 8 bug out
tsbreuer opened this issue · 2 comments
Describe the bug
When making Pattern Provider towers, as shown in picture, if you have more than 8 pattern providers connected it will bug out.
There's pattern provider assembler towers that go 4 pattern providers tall, so the seccond group of 8 should be connecting to the back smart cable. However, the back ones aren't connecting.
The Pattern providers still show up online, and the patterns in them are available to the network to autocraft, either directly or in recipes, however when attempting by a player or automation to autocraft, the crafting processor will get stuck on scheduled and do nothing for the problematic patterns.
If you disconnect the back cables, they will still show up as device online, even though they should show up as device missing channel:
If you make the towers stop touching, it will go back to working fine, but its still not how it should work.
Short video:
https://youtu.be/8ZjY28tTVXg
How to reproduce the bug
Placing 2 groups of 8 Pattern Providers in a way they are connected to eachother due to their molecular assemblers touching.
Expected behavior
AE2 should be splitting the channels properly into each fluix cable, but its trying to send it all into one for some reason .
Additional details
Version: appliedenergistics2-11.1.7
This seems to only happen with my setup of vertical towers with 4 pattern providers each on them, i have an identical setup that is only 2 tall instead and its splitting the channels just fine:
This is on ATM7 To the Sky 1.0.7 modpack.
Which minecraft version are you using?
1.18
On which mod loaders does it happen?
Forge
Crash log
because channels can route through molecular assemblers (and they can only handle 8 channels) you're running into channel routing issues I think. It does not go by smartly allocating channels to cables and paths that can accept them, it goes by distance, so your current layout makes it route all the channels through the assemblers and not the cables.
Exactly what @Sea-Kerman said. You could use a p2p tunnel on your "main cable" to shorten that path.