[dev1016] Discussion

[Blue79]

I agree with Jwang in that the basis of crafting needs to be looked at before adding any more layers to it. Having indicators for risk and destabilization are great, but what about having clarity or algorithms looked at for the rate of success and failure. It still seems so random. How is it that I can have a synth get up to 447 Quality and not get an hq item out of it? What about having a lightning element destabilize in a recipe that doesn't even use lightning crystals or shards? That's just random. There's no rhyme or reason behind it. Before moving on with any more changes, please fix the foundation because it seems unecessarily complicated. I don't mind any of the changes just so long as I can logically understand why I am failing a synth or succeeding with it.

totally agree here, i certainly don't mind an element of probability but please tell us the rules... i don't know how many times i've tried to HQ something and got NQ at 400+ quality and then the next day HQ1 some random synth i'm grinding on (or making lumber/shards/ect) with 20 or 30 quality

[Aeyis]

totally agree here, i certainly don't mind an element of probability but please tell us the rules... i don't know how many times i've tried to HQ something and got NQ at 400+ quality and then the next day HQ1 some random synth i'm grinding on (or making lumber/shards/ect) with 20 or 30 quality

Huh, always thought it was rather simply to figure out:

Quality at the end does not simply give you HQ, it increases your chances of getting HQ.

I mean its not like youve ever gotten a random HQ+3 while doing some mass producing with end value no higher then 30 quality, right?

Often, increasing the chances does not increasing them to 100%~ degozaru