Humorous Suggestions/Misc

From The Urban Dead Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Suggestion Navigation
Suggestion Portal
Current SuggestionsSuggestions up for VotingClothes Suggestions
Cycling SuggestionsPeer ReviewedUndecidedPeer RejectedHumorous
Suggestion AdviceTopics to Avoid and WhyHelp, Developing and Editing


Feel free to continue voting, because the old ones are the best


Funneh Ha Ha

No More Nerfs!

Type: Satire
Tally: +2

Nerfing things is bad. For the most part, we can all agree on this simple statement. Countless suggestions have fallen short of peer reviewed because the voters labeled it as a nerf to something.

Now, for the purposes of this suggestion we will ignore the fact that the actual definition states that a nerf must minimalize or eliminate (rather than simply reduce) the benefits of something in order to be a nerf. Instead, we will think of the word "nerf" in the way that most wiki users do: a word for something that makes something in the game less powerful or less essential by any amount. Of course, this means that even a suggestion that balances something in the game can be considered a nerf because whatever was previously unbalanced is no longer as powerful (or if it was underpowered, the alternative is comparatively no longer as powerful as it was before). Furthermore, anything that offers an alternative method for doing something is a nerf because the original method is no longer as important (even if it is a better method).

Now, keeping this definition in mind, let's take a look at peer-reviewed, the realm of suggestions that have been deemed "good" by the community. They are the ideas we would like to see put into the game. But, there is one problem; All of them violate the unwritten rule of the suggestions page: No Nerfs.

I mean, just look at some of the nerfs in peer-reviewed!

FAK Find Rate nerfs malls (even if malls are too powerful, anything making them less powerful is still a nerf, and nerfs are evil).

Beer/Wine Used Like FAK nerfs first aid kits (they may not be as effective, but they make them less essential and are thus a nerf).

Less Inventory Space For Radios nerfs all other forms of communication because it makes radios more portable.

Syringe Reworking nerfs revives (and by extension, survivors).

Knives In More Places nerfs zombies (because with it newbies could more effectively clear them from buildings) as well as any building that had them already (Oh noes!1 Now they aren't as important!!1!!one!).

Fences: New Rules nerfs any zombie without the included "Rend Metal" skill (and even if they have Rend Metal it nerfs them, because the fence acts as a one-level barricade).

Zerg-Flag Disallows Cading nerfs zergers (I'm sure 99.9% of us consider this a good thing, but it is a nerf all the same, and nerfs are without exception "teh ebil").

Zombie Can Break Down Door nerfs survivors and Memories of Life (with this suggestion, a newbie zombie could enter a building and attack survivors without the need of MOL).

Pubs: Beer Production #1 nerfs zombies because it gives survivors another way to heal themselves (in the event a survivor finds himself with low health, no FAKs, and a lot of booze, he will be able to try out the same home remedies employed by so many alcoholic families).

Two Free Speeches Per Day nerfs anyone who never speaks (because those who do would now have 2 extra AP).

Doctors Start With Diagnosis nerfs everyone except the doctors because doctors now have a better ability to gather XP than they did before, making the other classes no longer as useful relative to the doctors as they were before.

Self-Immolation nerfs jumping off of buildings (move over gravity, there's a new suicide method in town...).

Zombie Reduces Search Chance nerfs searches (God forbid survivors actually having to deal with the flesh-eating zombies before they finish their shopping).

Search X Times V1 nerfs zombies because in a real-time combat situation survivors will be able to find ammo/FAKs faster and kill the zombie before the zombie kills them (no matter how rare it comes up, a nerf is a nerf).

Tips For Newbie Zombies nerfs survivors because it makes newbie zombies more dangerous (since they'll actually have a clue what they're doing).

Display 50 Most Wounded nerfs zombies because it lets scientists heal more effectively (and possibly nerfs most survivors, since it would be a great skill for PKers).

>=20HP Required For Free Running nerfs survivors (especially those without Body Building, as they're more likely to be below 20HP).

Brain Rot Gives +5% Attack nerfs anyone who doesn't have brain rot (Wah! That guy with brain rot got stronger and I didn't!).

Flailing Gestures With Speech nerfs survivors because it saves zombies an IP hit (a single claw swipe can mean the difference between remaining an "azzgrabbar" and becoming a "banana rammarh").

Infection Related XP Gains nerf other XP-gathering methods (remember, any viable alternative to doing a particular task is a nerf!)

Report Barricade Attacks nerfs griefers (almost as big a "no-no" as "no nerfs". Hey, that almost rhymed!).

Any Of These New Class Suggestions nerf everyone else, because the existing classes are no longer as useful/unique.

Any Of These New Weapon Suggestions nerf all the other weapons in the game, because they are no longer as important.

Any of the Suggestions here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, or here nerf whoever doesn't have the given skill.

Wow...There sure are a lot of successful suggestions that involve nerfs, aren't there? And these are just a few examples (there are many more to be found). It's almost as though anything can be considered a nerf. Heck, even flavor changes can be considered nerfs if you think about it, since changing the text (whether adding, subtracting, or just changing the letters) changes the speed at which a player reads through it (and thus how quickly they can perform actions and respond to events occuring in the game).

Well, I for one think that it's about time we stopped putting nerfs into peer-reviewed. I propose that we get rid of the suggestions system once and for all. It's the only way to ensure that there are no more nerfs, since every change is bound to nerf something.

Funny votes: For a long time now I've been wanting to just scream "Every suggestion nerfs SOMETHING!" whenever someone says the word "nerf". Feels good to get that off my chest. Well, hopefully now people will stop throwing around that word like a frisbee. Thanks for trudging through it all.--Reaper with no name TJ! 18:31, 27 March 2007 (BST) Funny, but nerfs people w/ no sense of humor :p --Specialist290 19:25, 27 March 2007 (BST) People who don't want malls nerfed need to leave, and come back after they get through grade six.--Labine50 MH|ME|'07 00:52, 28 March 2007 (BST) Toejam 18:11, 28 March 2007 (BST) this suggestion nerfs peoples sense of humour!--Honestmistake 12:39, 5 April 2007 (BST)
Unfunny votes: Nerf. --SporeSore 13:46, 30 March 2007 (BST) It was funny until you put in one of my suggestion. If survivors get tips, so should the zombies! So shouldn't those survivor tips nerf zeds? Yes it does. Plus, that suggestion was implemented ages ago, so the survivors have been nerfed. Don't believe me, then start a new zombie character. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 14:43, 30 March 2007 (BST) Don't nerf nerfs! --Darth LumisT! A! E! FU! U 18:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)



Stuff That Won't Pass

Type: Stuff I Have No Confidence In
Tally: +6

Hey! Please read all of this before you make up your minds, because I know that, on the surface, with first impressions, everyone will vote Kill on this one. So, give it a fair go, first. Oh, and hey, I'm new on the wiki so please excuse any mistakes I make in editing or spelling or grammar, or logic, or originality, or gameplay, or roleplay. In fact, truth be told, I'm trying hard for the sympathy vote here. So, there it is. Whaddaya all think? (Heh - go gentle on the Spam votes - I'm saying that like I'm nervous but really I'm trying to appear confident, because I think my idea is actually quite good - but there's more chance of you voting Keep if I appear vulnerable. Did I do the sympathy thing already?) EDIT: I haven't changed anything, much, except for the whole concept, and most of the rules.

Funny votes: Ah, this summarizes the "nervous newbie" well. And the end part really gets ya. --Reaper with no name TJ! 19:10, 9 May 2007 (BST) It's the end part that's good.--Bluish wolf 06:03, 24 May 2007 (BST) But why is the suggestion gone? Kalir FTW! Z/S UD Potato Words 20:20, 18 June 2007 (BST) I smell something sneaky here. Vault 19:23, 4 July 2007 (BST) A very good parody. 'arm. 07:29, 22 July 2007 (BST) Dupe- I've seen this a lot.--Studoku 22:42, 13 March 2008 (UTC) Funny--CorndogheroT-S-Z 02:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Unfunny votes:




Politely Ignored

Anti-Spam

Type: New Vote Type on the Wiki
Tally: 0

Currently, the wiki has 4 types of votes. There's keep, kill, dupe, and spam. Now, to be perfectly honest, spam has become little more than a strong kill among the vast majority of the community. And even if you disagree with that, you can't argue that out of the four vote types, 2 of them lead suggestions to peer rejected and only 1 leads suggestions to peer reviewed. That's not very fair now, is it?

Therefore, there should be another type of vote, called "Anti-Spam". This anti-spam follows similiar rules to spam, but is opposite. If there are at least 7 anti-spam votes and they outnumber kills and spams by 3:2, then the suggestion automatically goes to peer reviewed. Also, mods can mod-anti-spaminate a suggestion if there are 3 or more anti-spams and they outnumber kills and spams. If neither of these two things happen, then anti-spam becomes the same as keep in terms of the final tally.

With this new vote, suggestions that are truly good can get into peer reviewed without having to wait for that pesky two-week period to end, much in the same way that bad suggestions can get into peer rejected without having to wait thanks to the magic of the spam vote. This also has the added benefit of reducing clutter on the suggestions pages, since it's such a huge problem according to the supporters of the spam vote.

I mean, if a suggestion manages to get that many anti-spam votes in such a short time, then clearly there is no chance of the kill and spam votes ever catching up. And even if they were going to catch up, it doesn't matter because those voters aren't important as long the first 7 or so voters can agree on how great the suggestion is. So really, there's no reason not to implement the anti-spam vote immediately, starting with this suggestion right here! So vote anti-spam, and help speed up the democratic process!

Funny votes: Author Anti-Spam - I think this is one of my better satires. --Reaper with no name TJ! 18:29, 28 November 2006 (UTC) Ummm, yeah, sounds good. I vote Anti-Spam on this one! Kaylee Hans 06:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)I want it put forward for voting as a policy.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 22:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Unfunny votes: Spam Spam - I like my spam ;( --MarieThe Grove 16:01, 29 November 2006 (UTC)not funny, its on the wrong page. sounds perfectly logical and fair to me if only to read Gage's response;-) --Honestmistake 00:16, 9 December 2006 (UTC) move this to the serious suggestions page! suggestions are unbalance in the favor of kill! yeah, this sounds perfectly logical to me. how come the first few voters can put a suggestion on peer rejected without paying attenytion to everyone else but they can't do the same for peer reviewed? also, when detirmining spam or not the spam votes should be spam votes minus anti-spam ones. --AlexanderRM 4:14 PM, 26 December 2006 (EST)



Tumbleweed

Personal tools
advertisements