Crops Broken?

[iamahh]

noticing more +0 crops now, farming skill higher

[Beezer12Washingbeard]

if each carrot had a different Q I would have some 41 some 31,

Crop sorting was one of the biggest beefs with legacy farming. If only someone could come up with an elegant solution to it....

Kinda has some weird results though, like my flax is WAY faster than my hemp, at almost a 2:1 harvest ratio it seems.

Upside: It should be easier to catch the crop at bud stage.

Great point! Yeah, it is actually. My hemp seems to stay at the bud stage for a day or two now (haven't specifically timed it yet but it's a long time)

[Whisper]

Aren't crop tiles supposed to be randomized individually now? I just harvested my weed and got only Q30 seeds and fibers from a 5x5 field, which coincidentally is the same quality I got from the last harvest, so I'll start doubting the claim about crop quality nodes being no less than q50 if this happens again.

[Glorthan]

Aren't crop tiles supposed to be randomized individually now? I just harvested my weed and got only Q30 seeds and fibers from a 5x5 field, which coincidentally is the same quality I got from the last harvest, so I'll start doubting the claim about crop quality nodes being no less than q50 if this happens again.

They reverted this change. Crop nodes only influence time to grow now as well.

All harvests should be -2 to +5. If you keep replanting the same crops even on negative rolls you should see a 1.5Q increase per harvest in the long term. If you keep your old seeds to mitigate poor harvests you can get up to about 1.9Q average increase per generation.

Doing timespaced plants to min-max the quality growth, whilst requiring a lot more time investment, will net a slightly higher average quality growth. If you are on a good plant growth node, you may consider doing this to allow your fastest crops to be marketable for a good price.

[DYefimov]

Aren't crop tiles supposed to be randomized individually now? I just harvested my weed and got only Q30 seeds and fibers from a 5x5 field, which coincidentally is the same quality I got from the last harvest, so I'll start doubting the claim about crop quality nodes being no less than q50 if this happens again.

They reverted this change. Crop nodes only influence time to grow now as well.

All harvests should be -2 to +5. If you keep replanting the same crops even on negative rolls you should see a 1.5Q increase per harvest in the long term. If you keep your old seeds to mitigate poor harvests you can get up to about 1.9Q average increase per generation.

Doing timespaced plants to min-max the quality growth, whilst requiring a lot more time investment, will net a slightly higher average quality growth. If you are on a good plant growth node, you may consider doing this to allow your fastest crops to be marketable for a good price.

While your statement being true.
Your average is "dumb luck average".
As it can deviate from your value for quite a lot.
Even so you don't have enough seeds to mitigate bad rolls.

For it to become reliable you need 100+ harvests.

Don quixote against windmills...

[DYefimov]

if each carrot had a different Q I would have some 41 some 31,

Crop sorting was one of the biggest beefs with legacy farming. If only someone could come up with an elegant solution to it....

Ok.

I'm not quite sure if it was legacy or not - I was playing for a bit about year and half ago.
And haven't experienced any quirks with seed stacking that time.

My opinion is that reliability is much more horrible issue than any seed stacking problem we can encounter.

May be I just don't get it?
Please, explain it in more detail.

As I can see it now:
- let's assume every crop q is randomized individually at harvest in [-5:+5]
- we have 50 tiles field = 150 seeds to harvest
- we planted q50 seeds of same type
- we harvesting q45-q55 seeds (11 variations) of same type
- seeds of same quality are stacking up to 10
- we have enough space in invernoty to harvest 24 stacks
- it is much likely we can harvest 50 tiles of same crop, even if some of q variations will yield more than 10 seeds, thus occupying more than 1 slot

I'm sure we can come up with some elegant solution.
Never give up!

[Whisper]

Aren't crop tiles supposed to be randomized individually now? I just harvested my weed and got only Q30 seeds and fibers from a 5x5 field, which coincidentally is the same quality I got from the last harvest, so I'll start doubting the claim about crop quality nodes being no less than q50 if this happens again.

They reverted this change. Crop nodes only influence time to grow now as well.

All harvests should be -2 to +5. If you keep replanting the same crops even on negative rolls you should see a 1.5Q increase per harvest in the long term. If you keep your old seeds to mitigate poor harvests you can get up to about 1.9Q average increase per generation.

Doing timespaced plants to min-max the quality growth, whilst requiring a lot more time investment, will net a slightly higher average quality growth. If you are on a good plant growth node, you may consider doing this to allow your fastest crops to be marketable for a good price.

While your statement being true.
Your average is "dumb luck average".
As it can deviate from your value for quite a lot.
Even so you don't have enough seeds to mitigate bad rolls.

For it to become reliable you need 100+ harvests.

Don quixote against windmills...

No, you have enough seeds to mitigate 2 bad rolls. Unless you are getting hurt a lot by bad RNG, you shouldn't have quality going down as far as I understand.

[DYefimov]

Incorrect.

While probability of [-2:0] outcome 3 times in a row = 3/8 * 3/8 * 3/8 = 5.2734375% seems quite low,
Estimating deviation on sample size of 3 harvests is considered bad.

In practice such outcome will happen much more often than 5%, i.e. dispersion is big!

You have to have sample size of 30+ harvests to give a good estimate for standard deviation.
Thus meaning 5% in theory will be 5% in practice.

[Aethyr]

Incorrect.

While probability of [-2:0] outcome 3 times in a row = 3/8 * 3/8 * 3/8 = 5.2734375% seems quite low,
Estimating deviation on sample size of 3 harvests is considered bad.

In practice such outcome will happen much more often than 5%, i.e. dispersion is big!

You have to have sample size of 30+ harvests to give a good estimate for standard deviation.
Thus meaning 5% in theory will be 5% in practice.

It is actually (2/8)^3=1,5% for bad outcomes

[DYefimov]

Zero three times in a row = "raise fail"
=> 3/8 ^ 3