PC Underground Threats & More

[caatalyst]

I'm surprised that the sentry and breadcrumbs points didn't get more love. Those a long with squeezing worms and environmental challenges are the best in my opinion as none of them should cause swiss cheese hell but will still make underground game play so much more interesting.

 

[A Nice Cup of Tea]

Having established my position, and with the awareness that my "none of the above" preference isn't viable - but it does mean that my thinking is along the lines of "which of these is least objectionable" rather than "which of these is most fun"...

• A1 (Digger Z) - If the wandering hordes didn't come at night, this wouldn't be too bad; since it would only really affect blood moon nights (and you can spend them away from your base). With the wandering hordes as they are now, it's a terrible idea because every single night your base will get trashed and need rebuilding.
  
• A2 (Digger Non-Z) - Less bad than A1, since it will only be the dog hordes that trash your base, so it won't happen every night. Still pretty annoying when it starts raining dogs on you though.
  
• A3 (Filler) - In the absence of diggers, this wouldn't be an issue at all.
  
• A4 (Sleeper) - This is a bit all-or-nothing. Put your base in the right place (not near any hidden underground sleepers) and you're fine. Put it in the wrong place and you'll have to put it somewhere else instead because they'll keep respawning. Not terrible, I don't suppose, but still annoying when it happens.
  
• A5 (Sentry) - Of all the 'A' options, this is the least bad. In fact this is the only one that I think would be a net positive for the game.
  
• A6 (Gate Crashers) - Isn't that already the case? I thought zombies already attacked hatches.
  
• A7 (Worms) - From a genre point of view it gets a big no; but from a gameplay point of view it's less bad than diggers because they can't be followed by the rest of the horde.
  
• A8 (Bread Crumbs) - Would have to be combined with one or more other options, and would amplify the effect of the other option for good or ill (mostly ill).

• B1 (Ventilation) - Providing you've enough air to go down to your bunker at dusk and come back up at dawn, not a problem. If you don't get that much air, it would be terrible.
  
• B2 (Flooding) - This would depend heavily on how it was implemented. It could range from a good thing (giving you a free water source) to terrible (makling underground unplayable).
  
• B3 (Localised Hazards) - Like A4 this would be all-or-nothing. Go too close to a hazard and you have to put your base somewhere else. Don't go too close, and you're fine. Again, annoying but something I could live with.
  
• B4 (Cumulative Hazards) - Like B1, if they're mild enough you can stay underground for the night and emerge in the morning it's fine. If they're strong enough that you can't it's terrible.
  
• B5 (Farming) - A very minor inconvenience at the most.

• C1 (Bedrock) - Assuming topsoil is still diggable, this is fine. Resources would need to be re-balanced for the lack of mining, but I'd see this as net positive because mining is boring (pun totally intended).
  
• C2 (Content) - I'm pretty neutral about this. SI problems from unseen underground caves could be an issue.
  
• C3 (Buyout) - Hate, hate, hate. You're supposed to be the protagonist. The NPCs should be coming to you for safety, not the other way around.
  
• C4 (Undetectable) - Would be an interesting addition and a net positive to the game. I don't see the connection to underground bases, though.
  
• C5 (Suppression) - if it stops night-time wandering hordes, I'm all for it.
  
• C6 (Foundation) - If the base is above ground, presumably the zombies wouldn't be digging under it anyway. If the base is below ground, they'll be digging down, not up. I don't understant what effect this one will have.

• D1 (Zombies can be avoided in other ways) - Agreed, but it's nice to have the "realistic" option of a bunker.
  
• D2 (People will circumvent intended gameplay) - The key here is "intended gameplay" - what is the intent? That you can't avoid horde nights? That you can't spend any night hidden in a bunker? That you can't have any kind of permanent base? That needs to be clarified before features are decided on, because otherwise everyone's aiming for different experiences.
  
• D3 (It's fine how it is) - That's my preference, but we've been told it's a no-go.
  
• D4 (Can't defend against diggers) - Yes, that's a huge problem.
  
• D5 (You get less XP underground) - Again, this comes down to the "intended gameplay". Are you supposed to be actively fighting zombies for XP, or are you supposed to be only fighting them to avoid dying. The game is really incoherent about this point at the moment, wanting to be both a survival game and an RPG.
  
• D6 (The zombies don't play fair) - I'd prefer a more classic Romero-style zombie population and fewer "special" ones, but that's not the way the game's going (c.f. "boss" zombies - urgh!)
  
• D7 (Everything should be optional) - To an extent, yes; but psychologically there's a big difference between turning something on for extra challenge and turning something off to make the game easier. The default for pretty much any option should be the easier setting for that reason.
  
• D8 (Zombies have already got into underground bases) - Yes, that's occasionally happened to me, due to A5.
  
• D9 (Players can avoid underground) - This has been I've brought up before. If underground is "safe" and above ground is "dangerous", then players who prefer either type of environment have somewhere to put their base. If underground is made "dangerous" to match above ground, then players who like it like that have two types of environment to put their base and players who preferred it "safe" have nowhere to put theirs.
  
• D10 (Sometimes you want a break from the zombies) - It's less about wanting a break from them in terms of danger, and more about not wanting to have to constantly rebuild defenses and repair walls. Let us rebuild/repair/upgrade our blood moon horde night strucure once per week and not have to keep rebuilding our bunker every day.
  
• D11 (Changes could affect playstyle) - Some of them would certainly affect mine, possibly to the extent of me no longer playing the game because the fun-to-work level is too low.
  
• D12 (Players want a safe place for their stuff) - Yes, but it's more about the building itself than the contents. I want to be able to go out during the day to face danger and scavenge/loot, and then dash back to the safety of a bunker by nightfall. I want my bunker (and its contents) to be safe, so I don't have to spend all my time repairing/rebuilding it.

 

[Blazer777]

im sorry crater but i didnt fill out the poll as i found it to be unrelative to the game as non of it really belongs it is a game after not real life games are for fun and relaxation not stress if some of us wanna break stuff in game who cares what others think

 

[Crater Creator]

im sorry crater but i didnt fill out the poll as i found it to be unrelative to the game as non of it really belongs it is a game after not real life games are for fun and relaxation not stress if some of us wanna break stuff in game who cares what others think

It's a poll for you as much as it's a poll for me or anyone else.

No, really. The last question asks respondents to rate how much they agree or disagree with a series of statements. And based on your post history, I'd expect you to agree or strongly agree with statements like "I am satisfied with the current underground gameplay" and "It is sufficient that players can avoid going underground if they dislike the gameplay there."

Having a poll is cool in my view, because it's another way to learn things about each other. For instance, I'm already surprised that people largely disagree with the statement "I dislike having to adapt my preferred playstyle to new changes." I figured we had a large contingent of people who live underground and didn't like the idea of their 'way of life' being threatened by, well, underground threats. But it seems far more people are okay with adapting.

Now, the answers are open to interpretation, and points about bias or statistical significance may be valid. But clearly I wouldn't start a poll unless I did care what others think. People in these threads often ask what difference it makes what other people do, which really means "leave me alone, how I play isn't bothering you, don't impose on me." But the poll is asking what you want, and I've never known people to be put off when someone asks what they want.

TL;DR: hopefully we all care what each other thinks. If not, why are you here reading this?

 

[Menace312]

While I do view Blazers comment as a bit harsh, we can nitpick at this point.

It is hard to stay completely unbias on subjects you yourself care about.

Any reader of this thread can get the impression that OP is bias...

I dont believe Creater was biased in any direction when this poll was made. I actually think he did a very good job at keeping it open for all...

But to stay the comments and fears from others, maybe state your own preference in the first post. Then explain you are open minded and can be shifted.

Yes yes I know... Nitpicking... But I'm not wrong

 

[The Batman]

t".
Just so you understand my problem, I haven't heard anyone here in the forum say that he likes switching between leather poncho and puffer coat as a fun or fullfilling or interesting activity. Isn't it universally hated? Now, changing into radiation gear every time you go deeper than -10 sounds like exactly the same. Is there anything appealing about that idea that the weather system is missing?

You are correct. It's not. And to be honest, I don't want underground stuff to be added. I still think that it's a choice people have to go underground as Mr. A nice cup of Tea explained earlier. Most people who do it. Don't complain but simply build underground because it's less repairs etc. But what I would like is more complex gameplay. That is always very welcome!

So with that in mind, you can see why I'm trying I'm trying to give solutions to their problems.

<> If you would add a permanent slot for lets say: astronaut suit. Which would allow you to breathe underground and null any temperature changes etc., that you could wear underneath your "armor".

That way building underground is gated behind certain skills.

IMO: The above ground combat and systems are far from being perfect. And I'd rather have the devs fix those first. But it's always a good thing to think about what could be possible for below ground.

EDIT: Thank you for the poll. It's very elaborate! +1

Batman,

 

[Tin]

I don't see any confrontation. I asked, you answered. In very general terms though.
If you think you would like to play "Building lower than -10 would require radiation gear + large rooms would require air vents", why? Concretely. I can explain why I would like sleeper zombies underground, should you ask. I can tell you the situations I assume will happen and what the "fun" is in these situations. Such reasoning should be possible for you or The Batman too. I probably will not share the sentiment but still "get it".

Just so you understand my problem, I haven't heard anyone here in the forum say that he likes switching between leather poncho and puffer coat as a fun or fullfilling or interesting activity. Isn't it universally hated? Now, changing into radiation gear every time you go deeper than -10 sounds like exactly the same. Is there anything appealing about that idea that the weather system is missing?

Oh no, I completely understand about the current weather system with the mini dress up game and how it would be off putting to add another need for a gear change on top of that.. but! Having it set at -10m or deeper would be a known gear change and not a sporadic gear change.

With the radiation (or insert other means), the only time you would need it, is for long term use. I personally don't like the radiation angle but more of toxic/noxious fumes. So in my world you would just have the need for a gas mask instead of a full suit. In the end it works out the same just a different name and different clothing choice.

My preferred late game would be a vent system for underground.

Once you get everything set up and have a working vent system, you can remove the mask (unless the vent system broke down or something).

For the Radiation: I would like, every once in a while, a radiation storm to roll in and either give us the need to find/make a suitable shelter topside or build an underground shelter to wait it out. Give us a reason to use up all that food and water we pack ratted away or find all the pieces of the rad suit for those times we don't want to just sit and wait it out.

*Just want to highly stress that the rad storm or any major weather event (imo) should be a slow build up, days. Giving the player enough time to prepare and advanced warning that the change is coming.

I also wouldn't mind days long cold snaps or heatwaves in certain biome as well. Randomize the major weather events, maybe it's a Rad storm or a heatwave or a cold snap.

This will Give us a reason to travel to those snow biomes/deserts to either stay in them for a couple days or find the clothing you'll need to combat the weather events in the biome your main fort is in.

I also think TFP will eventually revisit the weather system and tighten it up in someway that'll make the dress up mini game more bearable.

Read further if you want beyond this.. Kinda off topic.

I also think the first 7 days should still be the zombie horde but thereafter every 7 days should randomize events every 7days.

• Zombie blood moon horde.
  
• Bandit raid.
  
• Major weather event (Rad/Heatwave/Cold snap).
  

Still 7 days to die but not always the zombie mega horde. I mean still have zombies attack you via wandering hordes or what not Since zombies are the main theme and should be. imo I think the zombie threat every 7 days, on top of the mostly daily wandering hordes is a touch over played.

Just my opinion and I know it won't be every ones ideal..

 

[Roland]

I like switching between puffer coat and poncho....

 

[meganoth]

I like switching between puffer coat and poncho....

Roland, stand in that corner over there and think deeply about what you just said. Everyone else, here's ice cream

 

[meganoth]

I'm surprised that the sentry and breadcrumbs points didn't get more love. Those a long with squeezing worms and environmental challenges are the best in my opinion as none of them should cause swiss cheese hell but will still make underground game play so much more interesting.

I can tell you why I at least rated them low. Breadcrumbs is actually an excellent idea (for above and below ground) and I put it somewhere in the middle, but without some zombie that digs down it won't have any real impact for below ground and be like the sentry idea.

And the sentry idea I really put last. Why? Because at the moment (yes, this could change eventually) you can shoot them from below on the ladder without them being able to hit you. Or you can run out of the hole surrounded by all the zombies and as long as you are running they won't be able to hit you. After that it is just the usual above ground shooting gallery or run and hide.

As if that wasn't enough, there's the ultimate devastatingly easy cop out: Make two entrances, always enter by one and exit by the other, problem solved.

Even if all above weren't the case, I don't feel like it adds any fun dangers or things to do or things to avoid to the underground, it doesn't make the underground interesting if something just waits above. It would be more like a penalty for going underground.

 

[meganoth]

You are correct. It's not. And to be honest, I don't want underground stuff to be added. I still think that it's a choice people have to go underground as Mr. A nice cup of Tea explained earlier. Most people who do it. Don't complain but simply build underground because it's less repairs etc. But what I would like is more complex gameplay. That is always very welcome!
So with that in mind, you can see why I'm trying I'm trying to give solutions to their problems.

<> If you would add a permanent slot for lets say: astronaut suit. Which would allow you to breathe underground and null any temperature changes etc., that you could wear underneath your "armor".

That way building underground is gated behind certain skills.

The permanent slot is a good idea, TFP could just use the shirt slot for that, that is already underneath the chest armor.

So your motive is partly to promote underground dangers that practically keep everything mostly the same for you, i.e. keep your low-maintenance underground base viable. Fair enough.

Your proposed solution though is therefore not something you really want. If that solution is also not really desired by the faction that wants underground dangers it is the worst kind of compromise solutions, one that doesn't really help anyone. I obviously can't speak for that faction, but am part of it and at least for me there is no improvement. The problem is not preventing people from building underground, the problem is making the underground interesting, alive, not boring.

I can see the appeal in building an air vent now, but gating the deeper underground just so another item (the radiation suit) needs to be found or bought from the trader? That doesn't bring anything to the underground, it is just a venture/quest done above ground.

If the decision was just between us, we would resolve this by adding digging zombies and make them an option in the menue. THAT would help us both.

Oh no, I completely understand about the current weather system with the mini dress up game and how it would be off putting to add another need for a gear change on top of that.. but! Having it set at -10m or deeper would be a known gear change and not a sporadic gear change.

With the radiation (or insert other means), the only time you would need it, is for long term use. I personally don't like the radiation angle but more of toxic/noxious fumes. So in my world you would just have the need for a gas mask instead of a full suit. In the end it works out the same just a different name and different clothing choice.

Exactly. And even the toxic fumes would degenerate to a "known gear change", you would just don the gas mask whenever you go underground and ignore the toxic fumes from that moment on.

For the Radiation: I would like, every once in a while, a radiation storm to roll in and either give us the need to find/make a suitable shelter topside or build an underground shelter to wait it out. Give us a reason to use up all that food and water we pack ratted away or find all the pieces of the rad suit for those times we don't want to just sit and wait it out.

I like the idea in general. Much better than the fixed radiation zones because they can be ignored by just not going there. But storms/fallout sound more like that should be a topside weather event.

[*]A4 (Sleeper) - This is a bit all-or-nothing. Put your base in the right place (not near any hidden underground sleepers) and you're fine. Put it in the wrong place and you'll have to put it somewhere else instead because they'll keep respawning. Not terrible, I don't suppose, but still annoying when it happens.

If underground sleepers work like POI sleepers now, yes. Doesn't need to be though. Sleepers in the underground could either be spawned dynamically when you actively dig into new areas. Or spawn only once. Clean an area once and that area is safe.

 

[eidobunny]

Having a poll is cool in my view, because it's another way to learn things about each other. For instance, I'm already surprised that people largely disagree with the statement "I dislike having to adapt my preferred playstyle to new changes." I figured we had a large contingent of people who live underground and didn't like the idea of their 'way of life' being threatened by, well, underground threats. But it seems far more people are okay with adapting.

Survival games literally depend on forcing the players to adapt to their world as the main gameplay element

The more we have to learn and adapt, the more interesting and fun the game is and continues to be.

 

[eidobunny]

(snip) The problem is not preventing people from building underground, the problem is making the underground interesting, alive, not boring.
I can see the appeal in building an air vent now, but gating the deeper underground just so another item (the radiation suit) needs to be found or bought from the trader? That doesn't bring anything to the underground, it is just a venture/quest done above ground. (snip)

That's the thing though, underground dangers are literally being suggested because living underground is too easy to establish total safety. Right now you could log in a server at 20:00 on day 7, build a stone axe and dig a hole capable of weathering the night in under 5 minutes.

These changes are specifically being proposed to postpone "absolutely safety" to a later gamestage. Eventually, you want to have a place that feels 100% safe. That's the ultimate goal of a survival game, to survive and eventually mitigate any great danger to your life at any given time. So then the goal IS actually to prevent people from building underground, and furthermore it IS to make people do a venture quest above ground before they have the ability to dig a few blocks to absolute safety. The goal of underground dangers is to, in my opinion, approximately equate the time it takes to reach absolute safety above ground with the time it takes to reach absolute safety below ground. In other words, it needs to become harder to establish yourself underground, but not impossible. Gating this behind technology (ventilation) could potentially be roughly equivalent to gating above-ground safety through high-tier building materials (concrete, spikes, turrets).

 

[zackss]

A radiation threat could be handled in a lot of ways that doesn't just mean putting on rad gear whenever you go to your underground home. Radon could be seeping from raw rock, causing damage if not mitigated, but with a variety of options to lessen it. A rad suit could provide complete and portable protection, but a gas mask could lessen the damage by preventing inhalation of radioactive particles. You might wear protection while digging the base, but installing concrete walls could lessen the effect or blocks created with lead could create a full barrier.

All that said, this has to be paired with mechanics that distinguish between bases 2 blocks and 20 blocks below the surface. Better ores and zombie protection make sense, but that means zombies need to be able to break into shallow bases rather than just walk on top of them. Ideally the effort and materials needed to build a safe underground base is comparable to the above ground options, so that living above or below ground is just a question of which playstyle you prefer rather than one just being outright more efficient.

 

[Vomkat]

Eventually, you want to have a place that feels 100% safe. That's the ultimate goal of a survival game, to survive and eventually mitigate any great danger to your life at any given time.

I disagree. The goal of a survival game is to see how long you can survive, without ever being 100% safe. If the game allows you to be safe, its broken and needs to be made more challenging.

 

[meganoth]

That's the thing though, underground dangers are literally being suggested because living underground is too easy to establish total safety. Right now you could log in a server at 20:00 on day 7, build a stone axe and dig a hole capable of weathering the night in under 5 minutes.
These changes are specifically being proposed to postpone "absolutely safety" to a later gamestage. Eventually, you want to have a place that feels 100% safe. That's the ultimate goal of a survival game, to survive and eventually mitigate any great danger to your life at any given time. So then the goal IS actually to prevent people from building underground, and furthermore it IS to make people do a venture quest above ground before they have the ability to dig a few blocks to absolute safety.

Hah, consider what a game 7d2d were if TFP had applied the same "lazy" design goal to the surface? "Oh, it doesn't have to be fun, interesting, surprising. We don't need zombies, just make the air radioactive or toxic and the player slowly loses health. And we just need to provide the player with a better and better gas mask if he klicks the mouse button enough".

Would that be survival? Whats good for the underground must be good for the surface, right? There is also progress, with a better gas mask always in reach until the 100% gas mask gives you 100% safety, the goal of a survival game. And there is danger.

So what is missing? Well, decisions, tests of your intelligence and/or your reflexes, immersion, right? Now I can think of two defenses against my argument:

1) "All the fun is on the surface already". But ok, why have an underground at all if you don't want to have a game there?`If all the player needs is safety for his stuff, TFP could create a bank vault/hotel at the trader to store valuables and player. And then remove the underground. Development time just to change a mostly boring area to a mostly boring AND for some time unusable area is in my opinion wasted time. (I said mostly because digging and building can provide a minimum of fun activity and immersion)

3) "Underground dangers should be different than surface dangers". Yes, ideally you want a different game or at least different circumstances compared to the surface. But it is easier to change the rules of an existing game (like zombie fighting) somewhat in a different location than to make a game out of a non-game (like donning a gas mask whenever a light goes on). Ever heard of the toxic gas game? I haven't.

 

[OzHawkeye]

I like switching between puffer coat and poncho....

Bad Roland, bad. ;-)

Trying to disguise it with smaller text no less to.

 

[eidobunny]

I disagree. The goal of a survival game is to see how long you can survive, without ever being 100% safe. If the game allows you to be safe, its broken and needs to be made more challenging.

Yeah I mean I guess but unless they make some drastic changes to make the game way more difficult then I'm pretty much 100% safe as it is. The zombies are not that difficult to handle. I've played 100 hours in live PvP and gone with 0 deaths. Pretty much the only challenge right now is fighting other players who are also very good at the game, so I guess I agree with you but I have to point out that according to your definition, the game is already broken and needs to be made more challenging.

Hah, consider what a game 7d2d were if TFP had applied the same "lazy" design goal to the surface? "Oh, it doesn't have to be fun, interesting, surprising. We don't need zombies, just make the air radioactive or toxic and the player slowly loses health. And we just need to provide the player with a better and better gas mask if he klicks the mouse button enough".
Would that be survival? Whats good for the underground must be good for the surface, right? There is also progress, with a better gas mask always in reach until the 100% gas mask gives you 100% safety, the goal of a survival game. And there is danger.

So what is missing? Well, decisions, tests of your intelligence and/or your reflexes, immersion, right? Now I can think of two defenses against my argument:

1) "All the fun is on the surface already". But ok, why have an underground at all if you don't want to have a game there?`If all the player needs is safety for his stuff, TFP could create a bank vault/hotel at the trader to store valuables and player. And then remove the underground. Development time just to change a mostly boring area to a mostly boring AND for some time unusable area is in my opinion wasted time. (I said mostly because digging and building can provide a minimum of fun activity and immersion)

3) "Underground dangers should be different than surface dangers". Yes, ideally you want a different game or at least different circumstances compared to the surface. But it is easier to change the rules of an existing game (like zombie fighting) somewhat in a different location than to make a game out of a non-game (like donning a gas mask whenever a light goes on). Ever heard of the toxic gas game? I haven't.

Okay okay dial back the animosity first so we can discuss our ideas without being at each other's necks for no reason.

Now, I think ventilation is an extremely important key technological barrier to prevent people from building underground. In general, I'm not a fan of the realism angle, but in this case we could use it for an interesting difficulty barrier and solve the problem of basing underground being completely safe.

In general, you're not going to run out of oxygen just being in a cave that has direct access to the surface. If you packed a ton of people down there you might be at risk, but one person in a deep cave is probably not going to asphyxiate. Now, all of that changes when you start consuming oxygen through the use of fire (re: forges, chemistry stations, campfires). I think it would make sense to have these objects generate a volume of unsuitable air that needs to be expelled through an exhaust system (which could be as simple as a pipe to fresh air with some fans) and have oxygen recouped through a similar intake system. It would give players even more reason to head to cities to scavenge for parts and get involved with the new electronics systems in their quest to advance their level of technology to reach higher degrees of comfort.

Now I'm not sure you're understanding the problem/solution dynamic because your gas mask analogy didn't make a lot of sense to me in the context of this conversation. The problem is that right now, you can dig underground in a few seconds/minutes and be 100% safe as long as you want to sit in that cave. You can even continue digging to collect minerals and refine them and cook and everything else without ever putting yourself in danger. As Vomkat pointed out, if you can be 100% safe in a survival game, the design needs to be modified to present a situational challenge. In my head, ventilation is a great solution to this problem. If you want to sit underground and progress - ie. mine and forge materials and cook and everything else - then you need a system to pump in oxygen and expel exhaust. If you want to just store things in a little pit then you don't need such technology.

The ultimate goal here is to introduce a challenge to underground play. Out of all of the challenges proposed, ventilation is my favorite and I'm vouching for it (depending on implementation).

I don't think the underground dimension of the game should be removed since it's such a major fun factor for base building. It just needs to be rebalanced, and perhaps receive a content pass to bring more interesting gameplay to the "underground" biome in some manner. Look at how many interesting things there are underground for you in Minecraft for example. It would also add a whole new dynamic to PvP that doesn't exist in games like Rust and Ark.

Clearly we are not on the same page since you think that digging and building are not fun whereas I spend 95% of my time in 7 Days digging and building, but I just ask that we discuss our differences of opinion with some degree of respect. Different people play this game in different ways and for different reasons. From my perspective, there is a lot to be gained by modifying the underground gameplay dynamic as it currently is.

 

[meganoth]

Okay okay dial back the animosity first so we can discuss our ideas without being at each other's necks for no reason.

There is no animosity intended. I'm delighted to discuss this with you and that you have brought up a very good counter argument. What in my post do you see as unfriendly or agressive?

Now I'm not sure you're understanding the problem/solution dynamic because your gas mask analogy didn't make a lot of sense to me in the context of this conversation. The problem is that right now, you can dig underground in a few seconds/minutes and be 100% safe as long as you want to sit in that cave. You can even continue digging to collect minerals and refine them and cook and everything else without ever putting yourself in danger. As Vomkat pointed out, if you can be 100% safe in a survival game, the design needs to be modified to present a situational challenge. In my head, ventilation is a great solution to this problem. If you want to sit underground and progress - ie. mine and forge materials and cook and everything else - then you need a system to pump in oxygen and expel exhaust. If you want to just store things in a little pit then you don't need such technology.

The ultimate goal here is to introduce a challenge to underground play. Out of all of the challenges proposed, ventilation is my favorite and I'm vouching for it (depending on implementation).

I don't dispute that the biggest reason why TFP is thinking about adding underground dangers is that there are trivial survival strategies. And I understand the appeal of vent pipes as a solution for part of the players. It beats the gas mask by a mile, but remember the gas mask is the example that started the discussion and I was talking about it in the post you replied to.

Now as good as the air vent system (especially compared to the gas mask) is, it still has its shortcomings:

1) Like the minibike it basically is a (level or tech) gate. Before having it the underground is (or nearly is) a no-go area, once you have it the underground "problems" are more or less over and the underground is switched back to a safe place territory. Yes, there are ways to improve this with more development time and boring intermediate techs like .. gas masks, having their own problems.

2) It gives builders/miners something to play with for one or two hours, but for everyone else (who goes underground just to mine ore, a very sizable portion of the player population according to the poll) it doesn't make the underground more interesting or fun, in the worst case even just more annoying (for example if it means you have to place air vents every 100 blocks, or you need to go out and in again every 2 in-game hours).

3) It misses a dynamic component, unexpectedness, new situations, something often called emergent gameplay. Basically the air vent system is without random dangers if you don't also add the zombies that can go down that air vent system.

So I think while TFP wants to solve the problem of easy avoidance stategies they also don't want to waste development time for "anti-features" that are just there to block players from doing something. And we players should be interested in features that give us fun all the time and aren't just nuisances for many players. Zombies, animals or bandits in the underground have their problems too and must be balanced and reworked for the underground, but they provide a dynamic(!) hopefully unpredictable danger to the underground that works from day 1 until the end of the game.

I don't think the underground dimension of the game should be removed since it's such a major fun factor for base building. It just needs to be rebalanced, and perhaps receive a content pass to bring more interesting gameplay to the "underground" biome in some manner. Look at how many interesting things there are underground for you in Minecraft for example. It would also add a whole new dynamic to PvP that doesn't exist in games like Rust and Ark.

Exactly. The fun shouldn't be confined to miners though. I don't own minecraft, can't comment on that. Removing underground wasn't suggested as a serious solution but a solution that could solve the main problem TFP has and thereby showing that that can't be the only design criteria. At the moment the underground is better than no underground but just doesn't live up to the rest of the game (except water).

Clearly we are not on the same page since you think that digging and building are not fun whereas I spend 95% of my time in 7 Days digging and building, but I just ask that we discuss our differences of opinion with some degree of respect. Different people play this game in different ways and for different reasons. From my perspective, there is a lot to be gained by modifying the underground gameplay dynamic as it currently is.

I don't think digging and building are not fun. It just is a part of the game play that I spend less than 10% of my time with or leave completely to friends. Sorry if my post was perceived as without respect.

 

[Gamida]

I think that is one of the good qualities about playing MP Coop. You can have one person who likes building, one who likes mining, one who likes looting, one who like killing zombies and some who like combos. So you can enjoy your game and get the benefit of the other players.