Also a small disadvantage of the poll: In the polls where you have to sort the options from most to least desirable, if you like no option or find just one option acceptable and don't like everything else, what do you do? I just put that one option as most desirable (even though I only was lukewarm about the idea) and set nothing for the rest. Which didn't do what I hoped.Yes; put the most desirable option at the top and the least desirable option at the bottom. It's a little confusing in retrospect when you see the results as a bar graph, since the shortest bar is better.
Could the results be tainted by "skipping" the longer ranking parts of the poll and submitting the initial order?Yes; put the most desirable option at the top and the least desirable option at the bottom. It's a little confusing in retrospect when you see the results as a bar graph, since the shortest bar is better.
It’s a pretty smart system. It recognizes if a question is skipped. Even partially completed answers are unlikely to skew the results in one direction more than others, because the answers are presented in a random order.Could the results be tainted by "skipping" the longer ranking parts of the poll and submitting the initial order?
Well, I’ll level with you... a free account has its limits, including a limit of 10 questions per survey. So this was designed the way it was in part to stuff a lot of ideas into a few questions.Also a small disadvantage of the poll: In the polls where you have to sort the options from most to least desirable, if you like no option or find just one option acceptable and don't like everything else, what do you do? I just put that one option as most desirable (even though I only was lukewarm about the idea) and set nothing for the rest. Which didn't do what I hoped.
Ok, I still don't get what the draw behind environmental dangers is. Could you explain where you see the fun in this? This really sounds like "bother", i.e. things to annoy the player, not to entertain him. What is your reason to want this?Have everything below -10 blocks from surface have radiated ground + bad air flow.
--> Building lower than -10 would require radiation gear + large rooms would require air vents.
In the end game you can think of other stuff to bother the player. But like Roland said. Once you build that bunker below ground. It should be pretty safe. However a giant base underground with crops and what not should face some difficulties.
Fair enough.Well, I’ll level with you... a free account has its limits, including a limit of 10 questions per survey. So this was designed the way it was in part to stuff a lot of ideas into a few questions.
IDK seems like a basic tenet in survival games..Ok, I still don't get what the draw behind environmental dangers is. Could you explain where you see the fun in this? This really sounds like "bother", i.e. things to annoy the player, not to entertain him. What is your reason to want this?
I don't see any confrontation. I asked, you answered. In very general terms though.IDK seems like a basic tenet in survival games.. Overcoming the odds even if they're in harsh conditions and are still able to thrive.
Much like some ppl think the diggers will be annoying, it's just preference on what they would like too see.
Entertainment/ Annoyance, Challenge/ Tedium, varies from person to person like with anything.
Probably the same reason ppl want to have the underground biomes = the above biomes in terms of a challenge to overcome.
Is it so different than ppl wanting to stay in the desert or snow biome or wasteland?
Edit: Not being confrontational. Just stating why I would like it as well and the reason why.