Link pattern providers with memory card

[Technici4n]

Describe the feature

Allow linking multiple pattern providers so they share their blocking list. This would be useful for setups where multiple pattern providers are used for the same machine, e.g. to overcome the 9 pattern slot limitation.

Another thing to consider would be to link them so that they share their output machine, for example you could have two pattern providers on two macerators in blocking mode, and link them, and each pattern provider would be able to push to any of the macerators while respecting blocking mode per macerator. This might be too OP though... copy/pasting patterns to various pattern providers would also be a good alternative. (This is already supported, but duplicating patterns might be a bit annoying currently).

Reasons why it should be considered

This will make autocrafting a lot easier when dealing with large amounts of crafts that need to be performed in the same machines, but it might be too OP.

Additional details

No response

[l-ricardo]

Regarding this discord discussion:

I like more the linking way. The global one seems like will cause more problems than solve. Unless its a diferent mode, but will not prevent confused people.
But for the linking I think that a "Provider Entangler Card" can be more intuitive (you link it to how many Providers you want and it creates an one way link, now a provider with the configured upgrade card and blocking mode active will consider its own blocking list plus the linked providers ones). The memory cards are (respectifully speaking) awfull and really confusing. Shove in more interactions may not help.
I feel like it is more balanced that way and less difficult to set up.

Another thing to consider would be to link them so that they share their output machine, for example you could have two pattern providers on two macerators in blocking mode, and link them, and each pattern provider would be able to push to any of the macerators while respecting blocking mode per macerator. This might be too OP though... copy/pasting patterns to various pattern providers would also be a good alternative. (This is already supported, but duplicating patterns might be a bit annoying currently).

About this I don't find annoying at all. And also can be solved with subnetworking for speed if you dont want to duplicate paterns.
The only problem that exists is the Provider considering only its own blocking mode as there is no other solution currentlly.

[Sarioah]

Do providers "see" only what's in the 9 physical slots of an interface? If so, what if they were changed to "see" that entire subnet's items, much like putting a storage bus on an interface lets the storage bus "see" the child network's items...

Could then have a subnet consisting of (potentially multiple) storage bus' on a machine, then multiple providers facing interfaces could conceivably block based on the presence of items in the downstream machine(s).

[cplir-c]

I believe that's how it's supposed to work at the moment