Suggestion:20080604 Protect

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Nospam.gif Spam!
This suggestion was voted as spam and closed for voting, with 4 keep, 1 kill, and 7 spam votes.


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


20080604 Protect

Deyo 17:06, 4 June 2008 (BST)

Suggestion type
Action

Suggestion scope
Survivors

Suggestion description
Add an action to the Survivor menu: "Protect [ ] with [ ]" This allows a large enough group of survivors to protect a high-value item, a trained healer or reviver, or a nefarious killer whose bounty has climed to KOS.

The first bracket is a drop-down which gives the following selections:

  • Yourself
  • All Survivors in the same location (like Attack/FAK)
  • All destroyable objects in the same location (like Attack)

The second bracket is a drop-down with weapons, exactly like Attack.

Effect: Until your next action, you are "guarding" the target in the first bracket. You will attack any zombie or survivor who attacks the target, once, with the selected weapon.

Cost: 2 APs

AP-wise, this would obviously be less efficient than a direct attack, but it gives a large number of survivors the option of protecting a target from a small number of intruders. Voters will immediately deduce that I am trying to prevent GKing by roaming zombie-survivors, and will be absolutely correct.

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. Zombie players and PKers claim that GKers have little to no real effect on the game except to irritate survivors. Let's see them put their votes where their mouths are. -- User:Deyo 17:06, 4 June 2008 (BST)
  2. Keep - Don't see a point in griefing and metagame encouraging. But I'd change it in that way - (1) Protecting is a skill, probly in Military branch, and (2) protecting means that all attacks are redirected from protected to protector. So, if someone attacks a generator that John protect, then this attack will work as john is a target. IF there are several protectors, than attack is redirected at one of them at random. -- Leon Clinton 19:06, 4 June 2008 (BST)
  3. Keep - A rather radical change but I see no problem with it if the player is willing to pay for it with the double AP cost. And I'd even include cades in the target list. I reserve the right to change this vote to dupe if someone posts a link. --Explodey 18:47, 4 June 2008 (BST)
    Extra: not a dupe - The suggestion linked by Cheese is very different. See talk page --Explodey 19:42, 4 June 2008 (BST)
  4. Keep - As Explodey. And I don't see the 'auto' part in thsi suggestion being much different than barracade blocking (Don't totally understand Midianian's addendum though) --Tselita 22:17, 4 June 2008 (BST)

Kill Votes

  1. Kill - Auto-attacks are bad, and there is a high potential for zerging. --ZsL 22:38, 4 June 2008 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. Dupe/Spam - I've seen it before. I'll dig out a link later. -- Cheese 18:17, 4 June 2008 (BST)
    Extra: This is a link for most of it. I'll keep digging. -- Cheese 19:26, 4 June 2008 (BST)
  2. Dupe. The quicker we can call this suggestions a dupe and get it out of here the better. Furthermore you have just lost yourself all credibility. Well done. Nobody will ever take your opinon seriously anymore and you have demonstrated a complete lack of any knowledge about the game. So congratulations.--KOOKY 18:19, 4 June 2008 (BST)
  3. Dupe - And also a shit suggestion. --The Hierophant 18:24, 4 June 2008 (BST)
  4. Spam I am willing to believe it is a dupe, too. But it is most definitely spam for the auto-action aspect of it. When will people learn? --– Nubis NWO 18:45, 4 June 2008 (BST)
  5. Spam - Auto-attack. 'Nuff said. --WanYao 18:51, 4 June 2008 (BST)
  6. Spam - Auto-attack. --Midianian|T|T:S|C:RCS| 18:53, 4 June 2008 (BST) Addendum: Even though I don't agree with all Explodey's points on the talkpage, here's another reason why this is spam; Potential Insta-kill. Enough protectors for a single person/thing and you might die immediately, with no warning beforehand. --Midianian|T|T:S|C:RCS| 20:06, 4 June 2008 (BST)
  7. Dupe - of various Jon Pyre suggestions from back in the day. Spam because it's an auto-attack. --Funt Solo QT Scotland flag.JPG 19:23, 4 June 2008 (BST)
  8. Dupe and Spam - Dupe and auto-attack.  Billy Club Thorton  T!  RR  19:47, 4 June 2008 (BST)
  9. dupe - not 100% the same as the one linked, but close enough for me --Scotw 20:52, 4 June 2008 (BST)
  10. Spam Auto-attack --Trav 21:33, 4 June 2008 (BST)
  11. Spam As above, with the addition that this is eminently zergable. A positive gift to the multi-abuse inclined. --Sir Bob Fortune RR 21:50, 4 June 2008 (BST)