Suggestion:20070907 Ransack Change

	Closed
	This suggestion has finished voting and has been moved to Peer Rejected.

20070907 Ransack Change

Nalikill 03:46, 7 September 2007 (BST)

Suggestion type
Change to skill

Suggestion scope
Zombies with Ransack

Suggestion description
I know this will provoke a lot of emotion from both sides. Do me a favor: Don't vote on this right after reading it. Take five minutes, do something else, and then come back. Note: Important points bolded for easy reference.

Ransack will make it 20% harder to cade per level a building is ransacked- 80% of normal on one ransack, 60% of normal on two, 40% of normal on three, 20% of normal on four, and no chance once ruined (5 ransacks.) New opinions based on that?

In exchange, a survivor repair on a ransacked building- if the survivor doesn't have a toolbox- only repairs one level of ransack- if it's been ransacked three times, the survivor would need to spend three AP to repair it.

CLARIFICATION: THE PERCENTAGES DO NOT EFFECT REPAIRS, JUST THE ABILITY TO BARRICADE THE BUILDING.

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. Keep-Author vote. I think this is well balanced, and makes it more fun for both sides. Nalikill 03:46, 7 September 2007 (BST)
2. Keep- I like it, seems to add a bit of a point to the ransacks between ransacked and ruined. -- Bop 06:15, 7 September 2007 (BST)
3. Keep- Makes sense since ransacked buildings have no furniture to barricade with. also would prioritise repairing more.Wootle 15:46, 7 September 2007 (BST)
4. Keep - I like the way each ransack level makes it more difficult to cade. It's quite a balanced suggestion. I like it.--Unema19:11, 7 September 2007 (BST)
5. Weak Keep with a small change - If there's a way for this to be counted as a half-vote, that's what I want. Changed vote to Keep after clarification. You can't fix a full Ruin without a toolkit. "Levels" of Ransack makes sense, just like levels of barricades. Here's the change part: change it so that in addition to the percent chance of successfull barricading, there is also a maximum barricade allowed. 1 level of ransack = VSB++. 2 levels of ransack = VSB. 3 levels of ransack = QSB. 4 level of ransack = Lightly Barricaded. These maximums are definitely open to change. If you implement them, though, I'm pretty sure you'll need to make an entirely new suggestion. --Steakfish 03:10, 8 September 2007 (BST)

   If this fails, I'll resubmit it with that change. This is something I wanna get to PR, no matter how I must tweak the circumstances. Nalikill 03:21, 8 September 2007 (BST)

6. Keep - Good idea. --Sonofagun18 06:37, 8 September 2007 (BST)
7. FYI - This doesn't affect normal, non-ransacked buildings. Either way, it makes a lot of sense, and isn't as "Pro-Zombie" as you think. BoboTalkClown 13:03, 8 September 2007 (BST)
8. Keep - Just because it doesn't give your side an advantage, doesn't mean it's unbalanced. --Midianian|T|T:S|C:RCS| 17:00, 8 September 2007 (BST)

Kill Votes

1. Kill - Well balanced? Favors zeds too much and survivors too less, work out a way where it helps out the game on both sides or doesn't dramatically move the game in one direction. Darkvengance 04:14, 7 September 2007 (BST)

   It doesn't change game balance. It gives survivors more time to respond to a breakin- the time it takes to go from lightly ransacked to fully ransacked- AND it makes ransack a little harder to repair, hence, balanced.Nalikill 04:15, 7 September 2007 (BST)C

   the time it takes to go from lightly ransacked to fully ransacked- AND it makes ransack a little harder to repair, hence, balanced Wrong, let's see, zeds have about a 100% chance to ransack a building and they do it 5 times and you can't fix the building without a toolbox, even then survivors still only have a 20% chance to repair cade per ransack level....yeh it's not that balanced. Darkvengance 14:31, 7 September 2007 (BST)

2. Kill - I think Nalikill will be the next Mr.Auschwitz ;D.Make sure to look at the suburb map.See the red to green comparison and think of something that will help the survivor/zed ratio.Chill 04:32, 7 September 2007 (BST)

   I gotta give it to swiers, he predicted this would be killed into oblivion, and it is looking like that- both sides hate it because it makes too much sense, and they both see it as a bad thing for them. I'm hoping Kevan sees this and likes it, mainly. Nalikill 05:10, 7 September 2007 (BST)

3. It takes away the tactics of using reg. Ransack versus Ruin, as well as sort of allow for barricade starfing. Basically, I'm voting Kill because it nerfs zeds, unlike the other two Kill Votes above (the Z-H ratio is cyclical, if you wait, suriviors will eventually dominate). However, Kevan might want to implement this Peer-Reject suggestion, and in the end, Kevan's vote, not our vote, is the one you should be chasing.--ShadowScope 04:53, 7 September 2007 (BST)
4. Kill - Its fine as is. If humans are having problems, they should learn to play smarter. I did write a guide a few weeks ago to teach them how to do so. It would be nice if they played along. --The Grimch ^U! 05:08, 7 September 2007 (BST)
5. Kill - Probably best not to tweak this mechanic just now. I suggest readers ignore Grim_s's "guide" and advice either way. :) --Pgunn 08:52, 7 September 2007 (BST)
6. Kill - leave the current system alone, it ain't broke, don't fix it. and, i suggest people **do** read grim's guide and heed his advice, just ignore grim, himself... :P --WanYao 10:45, 7 September 2007 (BST)
7. Weak Kill/Change Hrmmm... I'm not sure about this one.

   1. What success rates/ap expenditure for zombies are we talking for these various levels?
   2. Are you meaning that survivor repair success rates will be factored inversely according to the level of ransack, the less survivors can 'cade as the building approaches ruin?

   I can't help but think that survivors would be far more negatively impacted than zombies ever could be if the answer is yes to those questions. The last thing humans need is a nerf to recovering buildings; I'll change the vote if it's more costly to undead ap than human. --Slightly Lions 12:47, 7 September 2007 (BST)

8. Kill - don't like it, sorry --~~~~ [Talk] 17:20, 7 September 2007 (BST)
9. Kill - Don't zombies with ransack normally ruin a building completely, instead of leaving it partially intact?--  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 19:29, 7 September 2007 (BST)
10. Kill - I don't like the idea in general because I don't see a stong enough survivor benefit for it. I only see the benefit of the zombies here.--Doggie 23:35, 7 September 2007 (BST)
11. Kill - Adds more complexity to what is otherwise a simple game. It doesn't add any new ability to survivors because they are already far more encouraged to carry a tool box around. --Karlsbad 23:31, 8 September 2007 (BST)
12. As everyone above me. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 04:13, 9 September 2007 (BST)
13. Screw it. I'm not giving a reason for the rest of my votes in this spree.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 17:43, 9 September 2007 (BST)
14. Kill - As Axe Hack. -- John Rubin^{T! ZG} 19:00, 9 September 2007 (BST)
15. KILL Sorry, but that makes no sense. If everything is scattered on the floor, wouldn't it be easier to block the doors and windows? --Driaquer 04:20, 10 September 2007 (BST)
16. Kill - Nothing wrong with the present system.--Jiangyingzi 13:16, 12 September 2007 (BST)
17. Kill - as above.-- Vista  +1  21:43, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam - Don't encourage zombies to help survivors.--Karek^maps?! 16:48, 7 September 2007 (BST)
2. Huh?? - I couldn't understand a word of your suggestion. Try re-writing it. --Hhal 17:35, 7 September 2007 (BST)

   Okay, help me with its comprehensibility. The spirit? If you ransack a building once, you have 80% of the normal chance to barricade it. Twice? 60%. Three? 40%. Four? 20%. Five(Ruined)? 0%. Nalikill 20:22, 7 September 2007 (BST) If you have a toolbox, you can still repair all of the ransack of a building, but if you don't have one, you can only repair one level at a time. Nalikill 20:22, 7 September 2007 (BST)

   So you mean that this change would make it possible to barricade a ransacked building? Just with reduced success odds? --Hhal 23:57, 8 September 2007 (BST)

   Exactly. Just not ruined buildings. And in exchange, survivors without toolboxes take 1 AP to repair 1 level of ransack. Nalikill 00:08, 9 September 2007 (BST)

   One RE per vote. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 04:13, 9 September 2007 (BST)

3. Huh? -I know this is either a zombie nerf or a survivor nerf, but I'm not sure which. --AlexanderRM 22:18, 8 September 2007 (BST)