Suggestion:20070723 Radio Interference

From The Urban Dead Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Stop hand.png Closed
This suggestion has finished voting and has been moved to Peer Reviewed.

20070722 Radio Interference

. . . swiers BigEYEwitnessLOGO.png 02:11, 23 July 2007 (BST)

Suggestion type
item damage change, communcations change

Suggestion scope
Radios Transmitters that are damaged or take damage

Suggestion description

  • destroying a powered radio should create radio interference.


  1. A powered radio transmitter, when destroyed, creates interference on its own set channel and nearby frequencies. Nearby is defined as frequencies that start with the same 3 digit number sequence. For example, a powered transmitter set to 26.66MHz would, when destroyed, cause interference on the (26.60 - 26.69)MHz range. (The same would go for a transmitter tuned to 26.60MHz- but hey, this is Malton, physics are a bit different than in the real world.)
  2. Interference would be expressed as an actual broadcast made that shows up as normal on ALL the affected frequencies (see section 1). The exact content doesn't matter, but it should contain characters not allowed in player-created broadcast messages, and should be shown in bold (making them obvious, unusual, and "loud") so that people can't fake such transmissions (because you know they otherwise would). This transmission would show up on the screen as a message along the lines of 26.66MHz:"BPGHRRBPGHRB;::::;GHR###**"""""......"(1 hour ago) note- Quotes, colons, hashes and so on are (afaik) not allowed inside normal transmissions, but Kevan would know what a player can't do better than I. Broadcasts are not normally in bold text, so that makes it extra clear this is a special event.
  3. Any transmission made by any transmitter on the affected frequencies (as covered in section 1 above) for the next five minutes would be mangled, replaced by a transmission identical to the "interference" broadcast described above. This is to simulate the massive amount of radio noise the transmitter creates before going dead in a shower of sparks.


  • Radios are sort of hard to destroy, and wrecking the generator shuts them down anyhow, so zombies generally ignore them unless hungry for XP. This creates a small incentive to destroy the radio first.
  • Its fun. Zombies can't make radio transmissions, but they COULD cause Radio Interference when they attack a Transmitter.
  • It adds some realism and variety to the nonstop stream of radio chatter.
  • Doesn't create spam because you can already ignore radio broadcasts. Kevan could also offer an option to listen to / ignore all "interference" broadcasts, separate from other radio messages.

Voting Section

Voting Rules
Votes must be numbered, justified, signed, and timestamped.
# justification ~~~~

Votes that do not conform to the above may be struck by any user.

The only valid votes are Keep, Kill, Spam or Dupe. If you wish to abstain from voting, do not vote.

Keep Votes

  1. Brnahraruaj$@agj* - Nice, amusing, interesting, and actually makes loss of radios matter and how or when you use or set up radios something to think about, mabey next someone will come up with something that will make Phone masts an important location like they should be.--Karekmaps?! 04:12, 23 July 2007 (BST)
  2. Keep - Flavorful and you know if your comrads are in dangers. Nice. --Heavy DDR 05:03, 23 July 2007 (BST)
  3. Keep - I like it. It just makes sense and would make radios a more attractive target, offering those who destroy radios/generators a choice between what effect they would like to have: Shut off the power or cause radio havok. Perhaps someone will offer a suggestion that makes individual radios garbled just for being damaged, depending on the degree of damage.--Sara M 05:13, 23 July 2007 (BST)
  4. Keep Authors vote. . . . swiers BigEYEwitnessLOGO.png 05:23, 23 July 2007 (BST)
  5. Keep - Sure, why not?-- dǝǝɥs ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 05:47, 23 July 2007 (BST)
  6. Technically, last time this was suggested, it was SPAMINATED because it basically act as "Surivivors, we're in trouble! Save us...." call. But since this is spam that is littered on nearby radio tranmissions as well, I think it's okay.--ShadowScope 06:48, 23 July 2007 (BST)
  7. Keep - Its just more spam, sure, But its a way to have an unsure distress call... Totally balanced flavor.--Wooty 06:55, 23 July 2007 (BST)
  8. Keepzors! - I like it! Kaylee Hans 07:57, 23 July 2007 (BST)
  9. Keep - Sounds good. And in a big fight, 5 minutes could be a while. Sometimes I burn up 15-20 AP in 5 minutes. EDIT: Whoops, I put this in the wrong section. My bad. --Obsidian 14:09, 23 July 2007 (BST)
  10. Keep - With a seperate ignore option, preferrably. --Vault 16:43, 23 July 2007 (BST)
  11. Keep - Useful flavour :) --Midianian 17:49, 23 July 2007 (BST)
  12. Keep I like this.--Seventythree 18:35, 23 July 2007 (BST)
  13. Keep Wouldn't a generator-less radio simply shut down and cause no interferance? --Secruss 02:45, 24 July 2007 (BST)
    • Yep, that's why the interference only happens if the radio transmitter is hooked to a running generator. . . . swiers BigEYEwitnessLOGO.png 03:29, 24 July 2007 (BST)
  14. Keep Yes. --Druuuuu 02:20, 25 July 2007 (BST)
  15. Keep - Sounds fun. the one, the only, sushiknight (talk contribs HARD E.N.D.) 02:28, 25 July 2007 (BST)
  16. Keep - can't wait!--'BPTmz 09:02, 29 July 2007 (BST)
    Keep - I thought about it, and 5 minutes is hardly any time at all. Although if this gets added I suspect it'd be without the 5 minutes thing. 'arm. 13:24, 29 July 2007 (BST)
    Without the five minute blockage of other broadcasts, the interference broadcast is pointless; players could just use the setting to ignore interference messages. Even if there were no such option, the effect would by much less than the annoyance caused by your typical radio spammer. ΔΔΔ  Swiers BigEYEwitnessLOGO.png 22:34, 30 July 2007 (BST)
    Good point. In that case I abstain again. 'arm. 03:32, 31 July 2007 (BST)
  17. Keep - Good flavor. I like it. (Also leads to the tactic of people changing the frequency on radios prior to destroying them in order to generate noise on channels they want to squelch. Hm.) --Animi 22:58, 2 August 2007 (BST)
  18. Keep - Hmm, zombies get something else for smashing a radio, if they can get to it, neat! MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 16:01, 3 August 2007 (BST)
  19. Keep - Cool idea. My zombie is waiting just to hit the radio! --Savant 11:37, 7 August 2007 (BST)
  20. Keep - I like the idea. I actually think hearing a ton (think about 5-7) radios going dead while hiding in/near a mall when you know a horde is rumored to be on its way would kinda add to a creepy ominous feeling. You'd get the same sort of gut twist when that happened for no reason at all (PK group on the way?). Sure it might be kinda like an early warning system but not only would the attackers specifically have to give the early warning (choosing to destroy the radios) but you have no idea where the warning is coming from and for all you know it could be fake. I can easily imagine a few players setting up radios on the frequency of group/mall X and then destroying them all to send a wave of paranoia and put the target survors on edge. --Dipcup 20:07, 7 August 2007 (BST)

Kill Votes

  1. Kill - i don't really like more spam... even if it ignorable --Duke GarlandTLCD SSZ 09:36, 23 July 2007 (BST)
  2. Kill - Five minutes wouldn't really make much of a difference in communication for this sort of game, so it would just serve to annoy people rather than offer some tactical advantage. Making this interference time longer would just make communication more difficult in a game where it is already difficult, and would only affect those who don't metagame. I see no need to get yet another help call on the radio, especially one that limits my actions for the next five minutes. The only benefit of this is that it makes a little more fun for zombies, but they can't even listen to the static that they're creating.--Pdeq 09:52, 23 July 2007 (BST)
    • Zombies can indeed listen to the static; radios carried by zombies continue to function as normal. Zombies can't change the settings, but they hear the broadcasts just fine.
    • Its not much of a help call, because (given that it broadcasts city wide on 10 channels) its pretty damn hard to guess which radio / location got attacked.
    • Its not meant to be tactical. Its meant to add some extra depth, enrichment, and verisimilitude to the "radio experience."
    . . . swiers BigEYEwitnessLOGO.png 15:22, 23 July 2007 (BST)
    In that case, I would just suggest eliminating the whole 5 minutes of interference and simply send out the static message. Thanks for clarifying on the other points.--Pdeq 00:15, 24 July 2007 (BST)
  3. Kill - I think this would get old, real quick. There are a lot of radio that go south every day -- boxy T Nuts block it! DA 14:01, 25 July 2007 (BST)
    Are there? How do we know that? We don;t, and that is in fact information this suggestion might help provide.
    Anyhow, there are 30 "ranges" interference would happen on. 30 x 24 = 720. So if 720 POWERED radios are killed in a day, that's an average of one interference message an hour on any given frequency- and 720 seems like a LOT of dead radios, seeing as there's only maybe 2000-3000 survivors killed each day (number of reviving bodies = number killed, assuming zombie vs survivor % stats stay constant). I'm betting it would be more like 1 interference message every 3-4 hours. . . . swiers BigEYEwitnessLOGO.png 17:01, 25 July 2007 (BST)
    You may have a point if the radio destruction was spread evenly over the frequency, but when a given suburb/mall is under heavy attack, then multiple radios, all set to the same frequency, will get killed in a day, all heard by the same people. So most of the time you'll hear the occasional radio going south, but then when a horde, or a group of RKers come to town, you get totally spammed with interference as all the radios in the suburb get killed as the horde progresses, and you can't use the radio for 5 minutes each time, and that's going to be really annoying, given that you can play your days AP out in 5 minutes -- boxy T Nuts block it! DA 07:18, 29 July 2007 (BST)
    Well, yes. In a siege, especially a suburb-wide one, it would cause annoyance. Which is rather the POINT, isn't it? It seems rather absurd that during a siege, survivors make more annoying noises than the zombies do! __Swiers__BigEYEwitnessLOGO.png_ 16:57, 29 July 2007 (BST)
  4. Kill - It seems rather absurd that during a siege, survivors make more annoying noises than the zombies do. In that case you should focus on limiting the annoying noises survivors make instead of increasing the annoying spam input of zombies. We're playing a game here, the less pointless annoyance the better.-- Vista  +1  22:06, 30 July 2007 (BST)
  5. Above. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 05:05, 7 August 2007 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes

Personal tools