From The Urban Dead Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Closed Suggestions

  1. These suggestions are now closed. No more voting or editing is to be done to them.
  2. Suggestions with a rational Vote tally of 2/3 Keeps over total of Keeps, Kills, and Spams will be moved to the Peer Reviewed Suggestions page by a moderator, unless the original author has re-suggested the Suggestion.
  3. Suggestions under the 2/3 proportion but with more or equal Keeps to Kills ration will be moved to the Undecided Suggestions page.
  4. All other Suggestions will be moved to either the Peer Rejected Suggestions page or the Humorous Suggestions page.
  5. Some suggestions may not be moved in a timely manner; moving Suggestions to Peer Reviewed Suggestions page will take higest priority.
  6. Again, DO NOT EDIT THIS PAGE IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM. It will be used as a historical record and will eventually be locked.
Suggestion Navigation
Suggestion Portal
Current SuggestionsSuggestions up for VotingClothes Suggestions
Cycling SuggestionsPeer ReviewedUndecidedPeer RejectedHumorous
Suggestion AdviceTopics to Avoid and WhyHelp, Developing and Editing

16th November, 2005 - VOTING ENDED: 30th-Nov-2005

Brain Preservation

Timestamp: 00:10, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Survivor
Description: Zombie Hunter skill:- Become unable to buy Brain Rot.

How many survivors out there will ALWAYS prefer to remain survivors? You can become a zombie and stay a zombie. But what if you're a hardcore survivor and you pressed the wrong button? You've got to start all over again. How many people have voted they wish they could find a way to 'unbuy' Brain Rot? Well. Same thing here. You can still die. You can come back. You just can't become a zombie permanently.

I don't think I need an explanation for this. For brain rot, why would a zombie be unrevivable? Surely a skilled zombie hunter is skilled enough to make sure he can be saved in the future by use of the First Aid Kits and Necrotech Syringes he's had before?

May require level 10 AND Lab Experience? If not a zombie Hunter, then maybe a Specialist Scientist?


  • Kill - This is poorly written, confusing, and unneccesary. --Zaruthustra 00:32, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - That just kills the reason in Brain Rot. If you wanted to revive from a zombie at any time, don't get Brain Rot. If you ever get revived when you don't want to, jump from a building or stand like a duck in a Ridleybank street and get yourself slaughtered. It's as simple as that. --Fixen 01:34, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - "...A hardcore survivor who pressed the wrong button." Um, wha...? If you bought this skill, then you were a zombie. You stayed a zombie after that. You couldn't have been a survivor when you bought this skill. And, if you were that hardcore of a survivor, you'd have noticed that whole thing about "Hey, you can't ever be revived again, EVER. Seriously. We're not kidding." and wouldn't have been buying zombie skills. Just, no. Kill this one. Bentley Foss 03:03, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I don't think this makes sense. If a user presses the wrong button, well, tough sh*t. --Seagull Flock 10:12, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - The solution to this is... don't buy Brain Rot. --Squashua 14:57, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Never becoming a survivor makes sense. Never becoming a zombie is just stupid. It takes a lot of work to make a zombie strong, they deserve to be able to play without fear, just being vicious. Survivors don't. --Bcrogers 21:13, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
    • Re: You miss the point. This is just a "skill" that makes the user unable to buy brain rot. It doesn't prevent you from becoming a zombie ever. X1M43 22:26, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • KILL with extreme prejudice. Don't want brain rot? Don't buy it. That said, I would support a skill allowing a zombie to "un-buy" brain rot. Hey, maybe there are some hardcore Zeds who want to go human without creating a new character. Also, my vote for this suggestion keeps disappearing... X1M43 22:26, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Mainly so that survivors can actualy be the same level as Zombies. As it is at the moment the highest level Zombies are 1 level higher then the highest lebel Survivors because the Zombies can have brain rot. Jedaz 23:45, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - What Zaruthustra said. --Sknig 01:00, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill --Milo 03:20, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill its pointless, just dont buy brain rot -- P0p0 05:11, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill my voice goes to just don't by brain rot, however my eyebrows go up at jedaz coment. what the &%#$? buy it so that you can be the same level as a zombie?? WHO CARES??--Spellbinder 20:39, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam - Yeah, just don't buy Brain Rot. Completely unnecessary. --Dickie Fux 22:20, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam - Brain Preservation? Like bottle it in a jar or something? --Nov 19:10, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam - Needs a reality check.--The General 19:14, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Um, not only is this bad, but if you bought brain rot, you were a zombie at the time, which means you are a zombie now and forever, so, how would a HUMAN skill help you in the FIRST PLACE? --Vellin 01:09, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Utterly stupid.--Jorm 06:18, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Shallow Grave

Timestamp: 01:44, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombies
Description: Zombies have the option of going to a cemetary and "hiding" themselves in a shallow grave. Survivors could get access to a shovel item and could go to a cemetary and dig and have a chance of digging up a zombie, if their is one. This would allow zombies players to stow their characters in a semi-safe environment while still allowing survivor players to find and kill them. In response: One of the benefits of the skill would be slight insulation from headshots received while standing in the street after you are done for the day. I feel this would help balance the headshot skill.


  • Kill - I like all these things that make some piece of territory valuable for the zombies. Though, I think maybe they should be able to heal while there or something... --Shadowstar 02:10, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT) ---- Changed to kill for below reasons. Try working on it, I do like the idea of Zombies in Cemetaries. --Shadowstar 03:39, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - There are enough zombies just walking around that I don't think anyone would spend AP digging for them. Also, since when did zombies become crafty masters of disguise and not shambling piles of brain-lovin' fun? If you want to "hide" your zombie, just don't log in for five days. --Ethan Frome 02:35, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
    • Re: Although I must say that I do like the idea of cemeteries being "dangerous" places for humans to hang around in. That's a nice plot element to add to the game. Maybe the "Corpse" class should have a higher chance of spawning there...? --Ethan Frome 02:37, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - For the reasons listed above. Bentley Foss 03:06, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Considering that zombies only lose 1 AP for being killed it doesn't make sense for them to spend multiple APs to avoid it. --Jon Pyre 03:27, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - See comment above by Jon Pyre. But I like the idea of differentiating locations, making some more dangerous. --Seagull Flock 10:24, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Easy way to hide is to hide in a group. I'd prefer Feign Death suggestion to this. --Squashua 15:00, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill i agree that cemetaries should do something for zeds, but i dont think letting them hide is what it should be. -- P0p0 05:16, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Nope. Only the spawning in the cemetary ideas has merrit to it. I meen, why would the dead hang out in cemetarys. START there, yea, but afterwards, they are going after the Living, not the dead--Spellbinder 20:44, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Zombies don't bury themselves. Also, Kill to spawning in cemetaries, because griefers would just hang out and kill newbie players. --Dickie Fux 22:24, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - What's the point? And why get this skill over Ankle Grab? --Nov 19:12, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam Contains the word "hiding".--The General 19:17, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Zombies. Not. Vampires. --Vellin 01:10, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Shouldn't be able to hide like that. --Jorm 06:19, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Ankle Grab Revision

Timestamp: 03:31, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Balence change
Scope: Zombies
Description: In the time that I've been playing Urban Dead, I've always noticed that zombies got the short end of the stick. Headshotted, spending a chunk of your hard earned AP to get back up, all of it is disheartening. Then Ankle Grab came along. Ankle Grab changed a lot of things. It made it easier for the zombies to level. But it also made it a lot harder for survivors to clear buildings. There has been many a siege of the malls in Malton, I think every mall has fallen to zombies at some point by now. At this moment, Caiger Mall is embroiled in a large siege. During the defense, I've noticed one thing: It's hard as hell to evict zombies when they can get up for only 1 ap. We've shot them, time and time again, yet they can get back up before we get the bodies out the window. Know why? Ankle Grab. Ankle Grab makes it possible. Survivors cannot realistically survive a siege with the addition of Ankle Grab at this point. I know that, you know that, we all know that. What I suggest is a balencing of Ankle Grab in buildings. I love the skill as a zombie, hate it as a survivor, just the same way zombies feel about Headshot. Headshot was changed recently, so that it was done by 10 XP per level rather than just resetting it to 0. My suggestion is that we do the same for ankle grab. I'm not suggesting that we totally gimp the skill, no, but a simple addition of 1 AP per times you've gotten up in the last, say, 12 hours. (Ie, if you've gotten up 3 times in the past 12 hours, now when you get up it costs you 4 ap.) The maxiumum AP cost it could reach would be 5 (revised from 7), not wholly negating the effect of Ankle Grab, but also not making zombies be able able to get up 8 times in 10 minutes.


  • Keep - I agree with what you're saying. Though, you got the other skill wrong. Headshot, not Brainrot. --Shadowstar 03:37, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Great idea, though it seems to me that the AP cost is still a tad low. Perhaps 2 AP per times stood up in the last 12 hours? Or perhaps raising the time limit to 24 hours? Regardless, a good suggestion to balance the issue. --Lucero Capell 03:59, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep ...but possibly Change. I like the idea of revising the Ankle Grab skill. However, as a zombie, I'd like to say that nerfing it too much will ruin the point in adding it. I think that keeping it around 5 AP to stand up is just fine. It reduces the cost a lot, but doesn't make us impossible to stop once we attack. I'd say that something like this or making Headshot kill AP instead of XP would help remedy the situation (since even elite zombies can evenutally get tired of getting their AP taken away and leave). --Volke 04:28, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill I agree there needs to be a balance to ankle grab. This isn't it. (Note: You had Brainrot in the main body where you should have had Headshot, I fixed it for you)--Vellin 05:18, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill As i see it, the fact that a zombie horde is an insurmountable enemy, is really what they have going for them. I play both survivor and zed, and find my zeds sucking. maby revamp it, but i dont think this is the solution -- P0p0 05:19, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - sorry, but I like Ankle Grab as it is right now. (To avoid misunderstandings or bad thoughts, I have 1 survivor and 1 zombie. The survivor is the main.) --Seagull Flock 10:28, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep I'm allowed to vote for my own suggestions once, I believe. Jonesy 12:39, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep It sounds like it would ask a lot of work out of Kevin however. --McArrowni 14:08, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I would prefer to see a Survivor attack skill or weapon that adds APs to the cost for a particular Zombie to Stand Up. --Squashua 15:02, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I like this idea. Like the author said, just make sure it doesnt completely negate the effect of Ankle Grab. Oh, and by the way, Kevan has stated that he is against adding any attacks that take away the AP of another player. --Xamnam 22:02, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - But fiddle with the numbers... max of 5AP sounds good.--Milo 03:22, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - What everybody else said. Max of 5 AP sounds excellent to me. --Kulatu 05:21, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill i like unstopable zombie hoards, i'm sorry. --Spellbinder 20:49, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep I like this idea. 5 AP max should be ok. Brizth 17:01, 18 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- Without changes. -pinkgothic 17:44, 19 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I almosted killed because you took to long to get to your actual suggestion. It's a nice suggestion, though. 5 AP max is perfect. --Dickie Fux 22:30, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - The gist of this suggestion is "WAH!!!". tell you what, look at Caiger Mall, its been surviving just fine with the largest mass of zombies ever seen attacking it. With enough humans who dont run away we run out of AP. Strategise, dont complain. We have a bloody hard time taking you down anyway.
  • Kill - Yet another call to reduce zombies back to being fish in a barrell. -- Jorm
  • Keep - This or a "cool down" peroid on the skill. --Rolland CW 09:01, 25 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill ---Heamo 12:50, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- There are better suggestions out there. --Nov 19:13, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Doesn't hurt zombies returning after signing off for the night, but it does make it fair so you only have to kill the same zombie once before dragging them outside.--The General 19:23, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- Zombies have it hard enough as is. No need to weaken them any further. --Patrucio 16:12, 28 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- If Ankle Grab is too powerful, just change it to cost 3 or 4 AP instead. --Pesatyel 08:59, 30 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Something to do with weapons breaking or wearing down

Timestamp: 04:06, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: No clue
Scope: Weapons
Description: Constant usage of melee weapons will eventually wear them down, causing them to do reduced damage and eventually have a 1% chance of breaking on each attack.


  • Kill This is not Fire Emblem, this is Urban Dead! Weapons breaking is a very big hassle and causes griefing to survivors since they will likely break during attacks on zombies, leaving the survivors to have to change their strategy a lot. Zombies will obviously not have to worry about this since they have natural weapons, and therefore, will make this unfair. Even at a 1% chance, I do not like this idea, as I only want to have to carry around a single fire axe and such, and any more of any weapon (guns especially) will easily begin to clog my inventory from holding more useful things (i.e. syringes and First-Aid Kits). Honestly, as a survivor, I would say that I have enough to worry about without having to be ready if my weapons break. --Volke 04:20, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • keep--Only if it's for melee weapons. In fact, I'd say only for the axe or the baseball bat. Wood breaks more quickly than steel. And the 1% chance really isn't bad when you think about it. X1M43 05:20, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill don't like then, then professional zombies will permanently loose their barricade breaking bats. -- P0p0 05:19, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Don't nerf melee. The only advantage of melee is a reliable attack that doesn't require searching to stay available. The drawback is low damage compared to guns. If this was put it, maybe it would be ok for guns only. --McArrowni 14:11, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Noble effort; I would prefer to see a reliability % number on all weapons regardless of usage, that if rolled causes the weapon to malfunction (guns jam and need to be repaired) or a bat/axe to break. Ridiculously low for some weapons (1% on axes) and higher on mechanical weapons. Add in a "repair gun" skill, and Bob's your mom. --Squashua 15:04, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Stop trying to kill melee weapons. They're hurting as it is. *cradles fire axes in his arm and croons softly to it* --Lucero Capell 17:03, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - No, no, no. All the reasons listed above. Bentley Foss 19:47, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill --Milo 03:22, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Far too complicated already, what everybody else said. --Kulatu 05:20, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill altho i have to admit a certen charm of having an axe break off in some zombies head. Think i might have that writen into one of my zombies profiles--Spellbinder 20:52, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Weapons breaking over time is a good idea, but this suggestion is too weak. --Dickie Fux 22:32, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Why make life more difficult? Might also upset the game balance (i.e. melee vs guns). --Nov 19:15, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam Did you put any thought into this idea? A pain and it increases server load.--The General 19:36, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam - Agree with the General. --Jorm 06:20, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Hide Unused Skills

Timestamp: 05:33, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Interface
Scope: User profiles
Description: This would change how user profiles appear to other users. The user has the option to hide skills used by the opposite "species." When this option is active, a survivor's profile would show the user's survivor skills, but zombie skills would be hidden. Likewise, a zombie's profile would show the user's zombie skills, but their survivor skills would be hidden. This includes cross-skills such as bodybuilding and ankle grab, but this point is negotiable. When the option is disabled, other users could see all skills the user has. This modification would mesh nicely with the above suggestion "Separate Zombie/Survivor Levels."

Votes here

  • Keep i feel bad for people who honestly play their role (human or zed) and are killed as survivors because they "might be" zombie spies, but i think skills that work for both sides should still be shown. -- P0p0 05:21, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I suggested in an RE on Separate Zombie/Survivor Levels that someone suggest this; hence, keep and add a button to possibly view the opposing profile. --Squashua 15:05, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Would reduce a lot of paranoia. Also thinking of a group that would not like this. ALIENwolve 20:15, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Yes, yes, yes. I see too many people PK'ed because of the paranoia of spys. Maybe add a button that lets you choose whether or not to display the oppsite sides skill. Xamnam 20:15, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep I do like the togle option proposed by Xamnam. AS much as it anoyed me to be lynched for having zombie skills, I have had lots of RP fun trying to convince people that I was no longer a threat. bbrraaiinnss 22:23, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
    • Re: Adding toggle option now. Also, I checked the history, and I don't think ALIENwolve made two votes. I think someone else made that second vote...not sure how it got assigned to him. So don't delete it without looking through the history first. X1M43 22:35, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
      • Re: Ack, sorry, that was me. I copied his vote so I could keep the format, and forgot to change the name. Sorry again %_% Xamnam 23:15, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - See above. --Arathen 22:31, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Though, with the stats page having that addendum about infection/revivification flags adding into things, I don't know if this wouldn't be a fairly large and annoying bit of code. --Shadowstar 02:37, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I agree with the comments thusfar. --Kulatu 05:20, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I agree, and have personal issues with how one can look at a live human being and judge how he/she might do as a zombie. Hide skills.--Spellbinder 20:54, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Agree Brizth 17:04, 18 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- I'd personally not use this idea if it were implemented, but I'm all for that others could. -pinkgothic 17:48, 19 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - No harm done here. --Dickie Fux 22:34, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Going with the flow. --Nov 19:16, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Has pertential to help PK'ers as well as normal survivors.--The General 19:41, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Changes dynamics too much. The paranoia is part of the game. --Jorm 06:21, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Actually when you find a survivor without any skills (if this was implimented) would be as bad as finding one with only zombie skills. (pretty good sign they are dedicated to playing a zombie and are just looking to get Bodybuilding, a Flak Jacket and some Intel.)--Matthew-Stewart 01:12, 1 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Show Time Until AP Gain

Timestamp: 05:00, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Browser Enhancment
Scope: All
Description: Show time remaining until the next AP recharge. Just have Time until next AP point: somewhere, maybe near the bottom of the page. I think it's a simple little addition that can help people when they need just one more point to complete something, or get caught out in the street, ect; so they know when to come back.


  • Keep - Makes sense and probably won't hurt nothing, but after implementation, potential to see use spikes during the post-five-minutes. I could have used something like this once or twice, tho. I blame myself for not budgeting better, and others for barricading buildings while I was gone --Squashua 16:17, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep This might have kept me alive... X1M43 16:59, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Uh, why bother? Top and bottom of the hour. Not that hard to remember. I can see a server clock making sense, but this just seems... lazy. --Lucero Capell 17:04, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Like Lucero said, make it a server clock. Xamnam 22:02, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - What Lucero said. --Sknig 01:05, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I concur with Lucero's notion. --McArrowni 03:21, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill --Milo 03:24, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep But it might cause server lag -- P0p0 05:23, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Lazy, and i'd MUCH rather have other ideas worked on then this.--Spellbinder 20:55, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Thirty minutes -- not hard to remember. --Dickie Fux 22:36, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Why do you need to know how long till you get AP? Just login multiple times to check if you are desperate! What? you don't want to waste server hits? Then pay $5 to ignore that. --Nov 19:18, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - 1)I don't want to waste money and 2)It would actually be useful. Also,it can't be too much drain on the server because it's in Raven Black's Vampires.--The General 19:45, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Unneeded. --Jorm 06:21, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Climb Building

Timestamp: 20:31, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Survivor
Description: This skill would be a subskill of free running and would allow survivors to directly enter heavily barricaded buildings as they normally would with any other level of barricaded building.

edit: Because the proposed Climb Building skill would be a subskill of Free Running, the effects would not carry over to zombies. Since this skill is only applicable to heavily barricaded buildings, it can be rationalized as survivors who have the dexterity to climb over barricades that normally block entry and enter the building either from the roof or windows on multistory buildings.


  • Keep - Suggestion author. --VoidDragon 20:43, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Edit #1 works for me; Would like to see this work in conjunction with other Suggestions such as Rooftop Access; - unfortuantely for you, I agree with p0p0's argument below. --Squashua 21:19, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - U R NOT A N1NJA, but, if you can jump over buildings, you'll be able to climb around some tables. --Bcrogers 21:26, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Just as long as you aren't able to climb over the best level (extremely heavily) barricade. --Xamnam 22:02, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep I like it...but getting through a barricade should still be tougher than getting through a door. Maybe give it a 50% success rate or something. X1M43 22:14, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Spending 100 XP so you don't have to move a building or two isn't overpowered. It would however mean that people would be even more tempted to barricade over strongly, making the early game even harder for beginners... --Hexedian 22:46, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill As much as getting locked out of buildings annoys me, I don't think there should be anything that lets anyone directly enter over-barricaded buildings. Knowing that you might get stranded outside if you're not careful keeps you on your toes :) --Sknig 01:09, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill I must agree with Sknig. Having people staying careful is more important to me than this idea, even though it IS a good idea, and well formulated. --McArrowni 03:23, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I'm against this simply because it makes Very Strongly Barricaded only useful for helping newbies. --Kulatu 05:18, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I don't like this because it makes a particular game mechanic meaningless for people who have achieved a certain xp level - if the game mechanic of there being a penalty for heavily barricading buildings is something you'd want to eliminate with a skill, maybe you just shouldn't have the element in the first place. It's a step towards making the game hard and frustrating for newbies, then boring and flat for advanced players. If the game rules are good & fun, they should apply for everybody. I do however think this skill makes a whole lot more sense if it allowed you to directly enter the building with some extra AP cost (like if it cost 3, so it was even with going one square over, entering another building then coming back) --Thorbrian 10:52, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT-8)
  • Kill it'll strand newbies... its hard enough to do anything before earning freerunning, with this you'd have to live in the streets for 200-300 xp before getting indoors. (aka impossible) -- P0p0 09:07, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
    • Re: There are already areas that are almost entirely heavily barricaded with "very strong" entrance points few and far between. Having to spend 10-20 AP just to find an entrance point after somebody overbarricaded one was what prompted me to propose this skill. --VoidDragon 17:33, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - It's dumb. If implemented, it means that any survivor could get the ability to climb a freaking building after 100xp. That doesn't make any sense... actually, it doesn't make any sense for anyone to have this skill. --Biscuit 19:16, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
    • Re: - Read the suggestion before strawmanning. The ability is to climb a building via a barricade that would normally block access and gain entrance via the roof or windows. On unbarricaded to strongly barricaded buildings, the barricade isn't thick enough to let you climb into the building, but you don't need to climb because you can enter through the barricade. --VoidDragon 20:05, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - THIS is why I carry a crowbar around wherever I go. ALIENwolve 20:08, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill i understand where the author is trying to accomplish, however i honestly see this skill used as justification to barricade even higher, thus leaveing even MORE n00bs stranded.--Spellbinder 20:58, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill What was said above. While good idea, it would hinder low level survivors too much Brizth 17:09, 18 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Some barricades should be impassible to humans. --Dickie Fux 22:38, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- effect on newbies and on high level survivors as per above. --Nov 19:28, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Are you seriously suggesting this? --Jorm 06:22, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Reduce AP

Timestamp: 21:23 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombie hunters
Description: I think that Zombie hunters should have a skill that knocks off 5AP everytime the zombie is killed.I mean how many times have i been attacked by zombies and as soon as i drop one of them another pops up within seconds using ankle grab thus using up 1AP per death!This means you have around 13% chance of being able to throw the body outside before it comes back up.This makes zombies near invincable because in the end survivors will give up and leave there safehouse before the zombies run out of AP. This skill would give the survivors alot more chance of protecting there HQs.


  • Keep - Now this is why we keep losing the forts!--Carlos Olivero 21:34 16 Nov (GMT)
  • Kill - Make part of this suggestion dropping headshot and I'll vote keep. Making zombies lose XP AND AP when they die will make playing a starting zombie/survivor who died TERRIBLE. --Pyrinoc 22:13, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Headshot XP damage will be reduced if the Survivor Level/Zombie Levels are separated per yesterday's suggestion. An idea I'm fumbling with is to be reprinted on the discussion for this suggetion. --Squashua 22:17, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - This skill would make the AP cost of zombie deaths equal to the minimum AP cost of a suvivor to kill them: 5 perfect blasts with the shotgun.--Jon Pyre 22:29, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep...but change. Making two separate versions of headshot that are mutually exclusive, with one taking XP off and the other taking AP off would make more sense. Zombie Hunters are already powerful enough as it is. Either that or making this a level 20 skill. Jonesy 22:32, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill- Im against offensive AP reduction in any way. I'd be willing to accept an ankle grab modification that would require 1 GAINED AP to stand. Making it so a zombie cant stand back up just as it has fallen. That way when 2 live players go head-to-head the suvivor has a chance to "win". bbrraaiinnss 23:00, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Absolutely not. Poor newb zombies would be starting way too many days with 35 AP if this got put in. --Sknig 01:11, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - The other suggestion for making Ankle Grab a little less powerful was better. --Shadowstar 01:14, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Sknig--So ramp it like Headshot--1 AP for every level over, say, 5. Better if this only counted for zed levels, but good anyway.--'STER 02:12, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam - I don't think this is significantly different than various other "zombie hunter takes your AP" ideas.--Milo
  • Keep, but change. I like the idea of sucking AP, but only if headshot is weakened, and of course this would have to be a seperate Zombie hunter skill -- P0p0 09:08, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill I don't agree with reasoning like this. If your safe house is being broken into, try suggesting skills that can stop Zerging, not ways to remove honest zombies from getting at you.--Spellbinder 21:01, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • KILL! You simply do not mess with another's AP. --Snikers 05:25, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Not unless Headshot is removed from the game altogether. --Dickie Fux 22:40, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - This is too unbalancing. --Nov 19:29, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - It mentions AP and there is a much better suggestion about this further up the page.--The General 19:57, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam - Blah, blah, anklegrab overpowered, and let's reduce AP. --Jorm 06:23, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Stand Guard

Timestamp: 22:25, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Suvivors, Military
Description: You get a message telling you how many times the barricades of a building you are in were broken since your last turn. This skill would have a very important purpose: to allow suvivors to know how heavy the assault against them is and how active the suvivors with them are. Currently I have no way of knowing whether zombies broke in and killed fifteen people or if none did. This would also not cause spam since it would be summarized in a single line only when they were broken: "The barricades were breached X times since your last turn".


  • Kill - Looking at what other people say or tag. This is unnecessary. --Elijah 02:05, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - A single message that gives you some sometimes important info. Sign me up --McArrowni 03:30, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- P0p0 05:40, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I don't think there is anything bad about this, I just think it's not worth doing cause it wouldn't help me. It's more interesting to assess the danger by seeing zombies lurking, through survivor speak and actually seeing barricades go down and people dying. And when zombies have attacked then all left (or got killed) it's just more noise to ignore Thorbrian 10:56, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT-8)
  • Keep I like it, but I would suggest adding a timestamp of some sort so that you know how long ago the last breach was. Also, if you are presumably "sleeping" during your inactive hours, you would'nt be keeping a vary good watch.--Zeek 10:37, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - And add by whom. --Squashua 15:38, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, and do not add by whom, otherwise noobs trying to get into the damn house will be labled unfairly.--Spellbinder 21:03, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - This reminds me of a scene from a movie: Robin: "Watch my back!" Achoo: "Your back just got punched twice." --Otona 00:45, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - When you're offline, you're asleep. If you need info, ask someone. --Dickie Fux 22:42, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I would vote keep if the message was that the barricades have all been broken down, but not for each level as this suggestion currently is for. --Nov 19:31, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill There's an easy way to tell whether people have been killed, you look around!--The General 20:01, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Don't think this is essential.--Jorm 06:24, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Combat Report

Timestamp: 22:35, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Suvivors, Military
Description: Summarizes numbers of people/zombies killed where you are since your last turn. Messages would follow this template and only appear if the appropriate death occured: "Zombies killed X Survivors", "Suvivors killed X Zombies", "Suvivors killed X Survivors", "Zombies killed X Zombies". This will allow players to see how hot the area is. There's no reason not to let this skill cross over to be used by zombies.


  • Keep This would reduce paranoia about PKs. --Carfan7 23:53, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep It's so useful that I don't want to vote kill, even thogh change isn't valid. It should be a standard mechanics thing. --Shadowstar 01:12, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Finally someone submits a version of this idea that isn't spamtastic.--'STER 02:17, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Whilst I would like to see it change as a mechanic for everyone, a skill would still be satisfactory enough for a Keep vote. Damn I write all weird today --McArrowni 03:33, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill I agree with above - would be great if it wasn't a military skill. And if it becomes a military skill it won't become universal --Thorbrian 11:06, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT-8)
  • Kill - I prefer specifics: "X killed Y" and "A killed Z" messages; summaries do not give properly detailed info. --Squashua 15:39, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I agree, you should be able to tell when a survivor kills another survivor, but perhaps that can be added later, for now I believe this idea is quite good. --Lord Kelvin 22:03, 25 Nov 2005 (CST)
  • Keep - but make it an interface change, not a skill. --Nov 19:32, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep It's just plain useful.--The General 20:03, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Agree. Useful.--Jorm 06:24, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Great idea. The concept that survivors start their next turn, or even carry out their current turns, with 100% obliviousness to their surroundings is absurd. --S Kruger
  • Keep I like it as a skill, perhaps in the tactitian advanced class that was suggested and accepted into the peer review suggestion. -Matthew-Stewart 01:06, 1 Dec 2005 (GMT)


Timestamp: 22:45, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Survivors
Description: This is my first suggestion, so please just edit if I get some formalities wrong. The skill of Gossip would apply to survivors, and would give a character the ability (using the power of gossip) to hear the last 5 or 10 things that had been said within a building (assuming that there is already at least on person in that building with whom to gossip with). This skill isn't much of an advantage, but more of a social thing. You walk into a building and want to know what has been going on recently, so you hit gossip... it could be related (twinned with) to some of the zombie communication skills (death rattle). Finally, I like the idea of using a skill to find out what has been going on in a building. Like learning how to elbow your buddy and whisper 'dude! wsup?'.


  • Kill - Why? --Zaruthustra 00:03, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I can't imagine it being useful, but it is cool--Milo 03:27, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Nice. --McArrowni 03:38, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I like the suggestion because I am always annoyed at how I step out for a bit and miss something important like, "there are 1000 zombies headed this way ... you might want to leave!" but this also makes it impossible to have private conversations. Plus this might be difficult to program, since the last X messages would have to be stored, and when someone wanted to gossip, the server would have to query if anyone was around at X time when Y messages were being posted, etc. It sounds like a lot of work for not too much payoff. I do like the idea, but maybe another form would be more workable. --Ethan Frome 04:49, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- P0p0 09:10, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - useful for tracking pk'ers, but I can see some server usage here. --Squashua 15:40, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- Am I allowed to vote for my own suggestion? ;) Thanks for the comments guys! It would be fun, but perhaps needs to be reworked... --Faceface 07:42, 18 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- Since the server already stores these... --Nov 19:33, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Kind of interesting, though I don't think it's too important. --Jorm 06:25, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

City Events

Timestamp: 23:42, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Improvement
Scope: Everyone
Description: At the discretion of the game creator(s), various events would randomly take place in Malton. Here are a few examples:

1) Let�s say there�s a decrepit building in some neighborhood. It gets destroyed by fire and collapses. If there are survivors or zombies inside, they are killed. Anyone directly outside would get a certain percentage HP knocked off. Afterwards, the area where the building stood would be a wasteland.

2) NecroTech has developed a new chemical spray to use against the zombie hordes. It gets tested in some neighborhood. All zombies in that neighborhood lose a certain percentage HP in that 24hrs before they become immune and go back to normal.

3) The virus has mutated and all survivors in a neighborhood are infected. They must seek medical attention or continue to lose 1 HP per AP.

Like I said, these are just examples. The creator(s) can choose whatever they want to do. It mixes up the gameplay by adding the element of chaos and surprise along the way.


  • Kill - From what I understand the outbreak was recent, so I doubt buildings would just collapse, and as far as other events, i think a zombie breaking a barricade and eating humans is enough of an event for me --Angry12 23:51, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - My favorite thing about this game is that everything interesting that happens in the city is all a result of players' actions. --Sknig 01:16, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill ^--Milo 03:27, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- Check some of the older suggestions. Game events are already being suggested. Just be more precise about it. And no killing/infecting people for no good reason (let it be fair to them, give them a warning, or something). --McArrowni 03:41, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- I like the chaos idea and this adds an element of danger to all characters in this game. --Deathnut 04:13, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- P0p0 05:47, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam - I like the idea, I just don't think it's right for a suggestion... It's like saying "I wish the designers spent more time making new fun stuff", it's not the kind of thing that you could evaluate and implement. I would support something along these lines more specific and contained tho Thorbrian 11:01, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT-8)
  • Kill - I like it, but you're recommending concepts for events with minor specifics that are somewhat able to be brushed off in the larger scheme of things, signifying nothing. I'm not 100% that lacsidasical events such as these are needed (though I did propose Fire!). --Squashua 15:42, 17 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Could use some more ideas, but events in general would be neat. --Dickie Fux 22:48, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- Too vague. --Nov 19:34, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Too much server load.--The General 20:04, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I'd prefer that time be spent on new skills and more permanent enhancements. --Jorm 06:26, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Personal tools