I think crafting should have a “fail” outcome between “Success” and “Minor fracture”.
“Failure” would add instability (so that your next attempt is even lower chance) but not fracture the item.
Perhaps a “Failure” would be if you come within 5% of the success chance.
The minor fracture is the “normal” failure.
See? 
So kinda like going from the max roll on the preceeding tier to the minimum roll on the next tier.
I’m not getting what you want to say. 
Like going from a max t4 health roll (30-38) and landing a minimum t5 roll 39-48) Just as a made up example. Not 100% sure how he’s comparing it, but I think I understand the ‘in-between’ space.
If you were being silly… I have lost lol. 
No, I mean:
You are at four T3 rolls (for example), and say 87% chance of success on any one of them. You try to upgrade one affix. You get within 5% of success, but miss it.
Item gets more instability, and remains exactly as-is. Still T3x4, still exactly where it was a second ago, literally no change to the stats, just more instability. If you want to try again, you will see a lower success (for example, now 79%).
Item is not yet fractured.
This thread makes me think of a different crafting system where normal failure reduces tier instead of increasing it. Items can’t be fractured anymore. Each try increases instability and instability increases the chance of normal failure. Wondering if this crafting system would be better than the current one.
OK but, what is the point? Just having a chance to increase instability?
Zaodon just wants a fail state that doesn’t preclude you from further attempts at crafting.
I believe he simply wants to add another possible outcome in the different fractures. One that does all the things a minor fracture does, save the bricking.
Edit: Yeah, what he said.
Hence my question: what for? Would that add to the game something good for the game?
IMO, no, but presumably he thinks it would. shrugs
I don’t understand your question. It’s self-explanatory. You don’t have a fractured item, so you can risk another try to improve it. Right now the game goes from Success to Brick. The idea is for there to be a state in between.
If you propose this, I assume you think it would be good for the game to have this feature.
When we propose new features - or modifications - it’s because we see a benefit for the game.
In this case, I don’t see the benefit. So I’m trying to understand: what would be the benefit of having such potential outcome when crafting?
Again, hard to understand your question, as the benefit is quite obvious. You have another try to improve the item, yet, with higher instability, means you can’t improve it as much as you would have otherwise. It makes for a smoother crafting curve, and allows players to craft on more items than if they get the 99% success Bricked item. The benefit seems pretty clear to me.
Depends how they balance it, they could easily tweak the numbers so that you don’t get any higher than you do at the moment, then you’re still left with the same outcome but with more fail states.
Yup, you got the idea. You can keep using the hundreds of shard in hope that it works, but at more and more tries, it gets harder and harder to get successful. At highest instability it is already akin to fractured. Smoother curve as you say which makes failure less demoralizing.
Indeed, that was not my question. English is not my language, I may not be clear.
Is it good for the game to have such a feature?
After thinking a while, I’d say no. I think it would just create a bit more frustration. An item with no enhancement and more instability will not be viewed positively by players.
My point of view, of course.
I’d say it create less frustation than current system.