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

Make Ransack a Reported Event

Timestamp: S.Wiers X:00 03:02, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Type: improvement
Scope: anybody in a building when it is ransacked
Description: If nothing else, this change is needed because a building being ransacked should be more obvious than a generator or radio being destroyed! As with those actions, ransacking a building should be a reported event, with a report along the lines of "A zombie has ransacked the building. BARHAH!!!"

Besides being a logically visible event, this would provide a link to the ransacking zombie's profile, allowing zombies to contact list the hero of the moment, and thus perhaps follow them in future attacks. Note that this event report would only ever be visible to zombies, as a building can not be ransacked if there are survivors present.

Keep Votes

  1. Keep the Barhah!!! --S.Wiers X:00 03:02, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. Keep - because we had to ask Kevan if it was him--Gage 03:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Yes, that was indeed the "WTF" moment that made me realise I should write this suggestion. --S.Wiers X:00 17:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. BARHAH-- Che -T GC X 04:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  4. Keep - Awesome! 10 ransacks to me!! --Ducis DuxSlothTalk 05:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  5. keep further vote that harmanz no longer show up as "X survivors" but as "X Harman Bananahzz!" --Honestmistake 10:40, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  6. keep - As all above. --Matt Scott 9 13:20, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  7. Keep - Without the barhah though; catchphrases get worn out. --Waaaaaasssssssuuuuuuuuuupp ?? 13:42, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  8. As everyone above. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 13:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  9. Keep Won't cause any spam if you're the only person in that building, so no worries there. MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 14:43, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  10. Keep - Useful. --Grace RR - PKer 14:55, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  11. Keep - But without the barhah. - BzAli 16:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Humans won't ever see the barhah- or any other part of that report message, for that matter. Zombies do like barhah, and even if it gets "worn out" (which it won't, that's like saying zen enlightenement could get worn out) it has historic value. --S.Wiers X:00 17:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  12. Keep - He/she who ransacks a mall should be recognized. --Reaper with no name TJ! 18:14, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  13. Keep - If you can recognize who destroyed a generator/radio, you should be able to know who ransacked a building. --ZombieSlay3rSig.png 20:27, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  14. Keep I suppose that it would make sense. --Lord Evans 03:45, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  15. Keep Yes, yup, you betcha. --Andre Aloisius 17:56, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  16. Keep - Why not?--Priz 06:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Kill Votes
Kill the Barhah!!!
Spam/Dupe Votes
Barhah tastes like brain spam!

Dying Gasp

Timestamp: Valore 13:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Type: Skill
Scope: Organised Zombies
Description: Basically a skill that can be bought if you have Death Rattle. When a zombie with Dying Gasp is killed, all zombies with that zombie in their contact lists will receive a notice, akin to that received from Feeding Groan.

e.g You hear Zombie Friend's dying gasp from 3 Blocks South and 3 Blocks East.

It will not increase spam, unless you're in a siege situation, and have maybe the whole of the RRF on your contacts list, since it is only restricted to Zombies on your contact list. It will allow Zombies who work together in close proximity to discover when one of their own is slain nearby, helping them hunt down guerilla Survivors. It doesn't make zombies overpowered, but allows zombies another tool to improve their gameplay, which I believe is currently somewhat lacking.

Keep Votes

  1. Wow... You guys are coming up with some good ideas. Familiar groans, for feeding groan is the prescedent for this.. so this is a familiar grouns not for those of your zombie group.. but of your contacts list. Do-able, and it has very high requirements, just to be able to use it.. zombie co-ordination, without speaking. Excellent, in Genre. "Nearby, 4 zombies turned after a zombie cop was shot in the stomach with a shotgun 5 times in a row.. They seemed interested in the final wince made by the zomie before it died.. not a wince of pain, but an almost whisper of some kind..." MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 14:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. Keep -- Especially if the skill remains when a zombie is revived. It would help loosely-knit, non-metagaming zombie hordes *and* human groups seeking dead members who have been recently killed in order to revive them. It's very consistent with other zombie skills (like feeding groan) as well. --LadyEleanor 16:38, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. Keep - This is exactly the sort of "flavor" boost zombie gameplay needs to be more enjoyable, and hence the game needs to create long term player balance. It's not all that "useful" but it would be entertaining to know who died in what order, and it won't produce excessive spam- probably less than a radio does. What it really does is encourages zombies to contact list each other, which (IMO) is a good thing, and, equally important, it enriches play for newb zombies (who can hear the Gasps) without forcing them to buy a skill. On the other hand, if this crossed over to survivors, it would be a BAD THING- distress calls, anybody? I'd suggest that, like feeding groan, this can only be heard outside, and maybe even only when the listening character is a zombie. --S.Wiers X:00 17:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  4. Keep - Zombies on your contacts list? Weak keep from me. --The Supreme Court RR 15:12, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  5. Keep - Good idea man. - Downinflames 22:02, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Kill Votes

  1. Useless. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 13:49, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
    Kill - I'd be surprised if it helps zombies find guerrilla survivors, since the survivors would have ran some distance away. Zombies die all the time, and it's meaningless and empty. Because of that, I can't see this being useful. --Toejam 14:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Re - I beg to differ. Sure, this skill may not be useful in all situations, but in suburbs that are heavily zombie populated, zombie groups could focus their attentions if they for example realised that members continually died towards the northwest, searching for a human stronghold there. Zombie deaths ARE a common thing, but if you have 5-10 zombies dying within a certain area in a zed populated suburb, it'll at least give zeds an idea where the survivors are. --Valore 15:11, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
    Ok, well as long as it has a use. Vote withdrawn. --Toejam 18:50, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. kill - Guerillas move. And zombies tear down barricades anyway, even if their friends didn't die in front of it. - BzAli 16:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. Change - Make it so the other zombies only get the message if they have the skill as well. That way, there won't be any communications spam for those who don't want it. --Reaper with no name TJ! 18:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  4. Kill - spam. --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 19:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  5. Kill - It would generate a good amount of spam. --ZombieSlay3rSig.png 20:29, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes
Spam/Dupe Votes here

Roofless/Fenced Buildings Not A "Full" Part Of Free Running Network

Timestamp: MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 16:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Type: Survivor Movement
Scope: Free Running Network takes a "hit"
Description: I fully understand, for making this suggestion.. that I could in fact be taken "out back" by and angry mob, beaten, shot repeatedly and/or hung. Unfortunately, it does make a lot of sense, that survivors may have to pay more AP to move around the free running network, depending on how a specific suburb is set up.

Roofless/Fenced Buildings Not A "Full" Part Of Free Running Network:

  • The following buildings not not considered a full part of the Free Running Network: Junkyard, Mansion, The City Zoo, School.
  • These buildings can still be entered, and exited using the survivor free running skill normally but due to the extra athletics and actual on foot running to make it to, and enter the buildings this takes extra effort and a lot more stamina to do so: These 4 building types cost 2 AP to enter if you do so using free running, as it is a LOT more work to get there safely. But you still do not have to go "outside" to do so.
  • These buildings only cost 2 AP to enter using free running, all other buildings are still 1 AP per square moved with free running.
  • You can still enter these buildings with free running, if doing so puts you down to -1 AP! Noone should have to die, because they were running like hell from massive zombie hordes that are overrunning your safehouse! Especially new players, who have purchased free running. "Mommy!"
  • This entire suggestion is only about free running, it has nothing to do with entering a building going outdoors to indoors, or vice versa. It has no relevance to zombie movement. Only survivors moving, using free running.

Why these buildings were selected, for their layout:

This is due to the fact that they all have large lawns, fields, or open space bewteen their primary (or only) buildings.. and it doesn't make sense that you could have a long plank running to them at the 2 story level as is common for most office buildings, appartment buildings, hospitals and the like.

This also includes buildings with a perimeter fence, that inherently surrounds the outskirts of the square.. creating a vast distance from the end of the property and the only buildings it has (like a mini fort, really.)

Although technically once you're inside a junkyard you could be running on top of cars and garbage piles up to 3 stories high.. but you still had to make it to the edge of the perimeter fence doing your tightrope walk on the plank almost at arm's reach of zombies below. Then you did a jump off the top of the fence, to the ground. Someone who worked hard to establish the free running network set up a massive pile of matresses just for the safety of doing so.

Why this happened: (Background, don't read for game mechanics, flavour/history only)

The free running network is the direct result of when Malton was 1st hit with the outbreak, there was chaos, and destruction, everywhere. Head on collisions, human beings were dragged out of vehicles only to be eaten, lamposts were overturned and knocked out power lines.. etc. Explosions, screaming, people trampled by other people, only to be eaten.. total anarchy.

2/3 of Malton's entire population was dead, or undead.. in a matter of a week.

Those who survived did so... not as a result of glorious battles, but due to hiding, and barricading. The only defense against any real natural disaster, even an unnatural disaster, lots of boards on windows saved you, and not your house.

In time, brave creative souls started to errect planks from rooftop to rooftop, working with survivors in the nearby buildings to errect such structures. (A lot of yelling to people on the other roof, and securing the planks in place.)

Malton's population did not grow so much as NT revive technology allowed zombies to become living, breathing productive human beings again. Soon the decimated populace began to swell, and more and more of the free running network was completed. Unoccupied malls were re-taken, and humanity begain to reclaim what it needed to survive, well, eat and stay alive.

Recent events have caused the free running network to deteriorate:

  • There are no new lumber supplies being air dropped into Malton, ever.
  • Planks have begun to rot, and many survivors have fallen to their deaths, or broken both legs, only to be eaten.
  • Zombie hordes have become massive and pack-orientated, the manner in which they have obliterated survivor safehouses, up to, and including ransacking buildings have caused non-deliberate damage to the entire free running network.
  • PK or murderous looter groups have caused a lot of what which is good for humanity to be lost to man's inhumanity, to man.
  • The fall of many of Malton's malls, at the worst possible times have caused a shortage in being able to replace and maintain the free running network.
  • Time, and the elements, have taken their toll on wood which should have been treated or covered in stain, to protect it but now.. it's too late!

Keep Votes

  1. Author Vote It's not nice.. but 2 AP to enter 4 specific building types is quite the kick in the balls to survivors as of today. Kevan should only impliment this.. if at all.. sometime this summer or fall.. after a heavy rain season (England?) However, this would merely cost more AP to move using free running, depending on the map of some suburbs. Headshot, got taken down a notch because zombies losing XP, was a funkiller (zombies on strike.) Free running taken down a notch, will shut zombie players up about the survivor's movement advantage, and make movement a much more measured consideration for the living. MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 16:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. I believe this is justified. (And yes, I play pure survivor.) -Mark D. Stroyer 16:41, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. Keep - The only one of those 4 buildings with any real importance is the junkyard, and it gets the unfair advantage of being unransack-able (don't even try to tell me the lack of a door makes up for this). It needs a minor change like this to bring it back down to the level of other buildings with regard to defensive potential. --Reaper with no name TJ! 18:21, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  4. Weak Keep - Personally, I hardly ever find myself in any of the buildings named. This would not impact me much, and would not impact other people much as well (at most, you have to spend perhaps 2 AP more. There are no large segments of these buildings where survivors have no other option, and it would change the barricading dynamics a bit, which could be good for the game - a bit of a shake-up, so to speak. However, Realism =! Fun, so this keep is a bit weak. --Saluton 02:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  5. Free Running is overpowered.--Pesatyel 14:54, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Kill Votes

  1. Kill - Higher than usual AP drains make the game less fun by reducing play time. --Toejam 18:09, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Re Well survivors and zombies alike have AP drains that affect them.. this is a movement AP drain for survivors who save a lot of AP using free running to begin with. Survivors get to do a lot each and every day, that they are alive, zombies.. not much, really. =MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 03:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. Kill - no thanks. --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 19:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. Kill - Logical and realistic, but hurts the gameplay significantly. --ZombieSlay3rSig.png 20:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  4. kill - Free running could also include other routes than the roofs. - BzAli 21:51, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Re This suggestion implies, that it does. Some of them are a lot of sprinting, climbing, jumping, diving, run for your life marathons! Not quite batman or Captain america jumping from rooftop to rooftop.. but you definately work for your.. er... survival. =MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 03:13, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  5. Check the link to wikipedia Free running doesn't involve makeshift bridges. It's about being able to jump over the gap between buildings, jump off a fire escape to a fence, flip over the top, land and roll on the other side, run up a pile of junk, jump and grab a drain pipe, climb up and swing through a window, etc. It's dependant on skill and you could free run from pile of rubble to pile of rubble if that's all there was. Plus, free running is fine and doesn't need to be made weaker even if this made sense. --Jon Pyre 04:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  6. Above. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 13:04, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  7. Grudging Kill I have always maintained that freerunning makes the game less fun in its current format. It makes no sense that the massively more athletic/acrobatic method of moving it represents involves no risk and no penalty! As it stands freerunners only ever go outside to hunt zeds, Free running SHOULD already cost 2AP and we should be discussing why these buildings should cost more!--Honestmistake 13:59, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  8. Kill -I don't like free-running to be "explained." People should be free to use their own explanations. We have a huge list of possibilitys, why should just one be correct?

-jumping from roof to roof.

-going through the sewers.

-a rope network.

-military-access brideges (explaining why FR is a military skill).

-leaving the building your in and going over to the next one and entering through the main door. (despite the fact that it makes the game not even internally realistic, it seems oddly popular among people suggesting free-running nerfs.

-flying from one building to the next. (my personal favorite, because quite simply it fits with the fact that a quick check of the game reveals that KEVAN HAS NEVER OFFICIALLY USED THE WORD "HUMAN" WHEN TALKING ABOUT UD. I think...

see? --AlexanderRM 4:12 PM, 4 March 2007 (EST)
Spam/Dupe Votes
A spam vote, probably because it's not very "nice" and survivor players are probably choking on their coffee and gnashing their teeth!

Only One Flak Jacket

Timestamp: Kyrygvald March 1st, 2007 21:43 (UTC)
Type: search alteration
Scope: Flak Jacket findage
Description: It's very simple. Once you find ONE flak jacket from whatever source building, it is omitted from being found until you drop the previous one you picked up.

Keep Votes

  1. Author Keep - It's rather annoying when searching for ammo to find a flak jacket instead because you already have ONE! There's no multiplyer for having more so why would you need to find more than one in the first place? Kyrygvald
  2. Too sexy, not to keep Dear god yes, why am I finding and carrying additional flak jackets so I have to drop them. Extra work, waste of server load and record keeping. To hell with it! One Flak Jacket, fits all... =MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 03:17, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. Woo! Keep! - Makes sense too, we arn't all so dumb that its like "Hey look, another flak jacket, but I already have one. Yay?" --Lord Evans 03:43, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  4. How about doing this with all items you only need one of? Axes, binoculars, knives, DNA Extractors... --Jon Pyre 04:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  5. For Sure - I'm in on this one. --Ducis DuxSlothTalk 07:29, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Kill Votes

  1. Kill - The basic idea is nice, but as you put it "it is omitted from being found" it messes with search odds-- Che -T GC X 07:38, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. Kill - This suggestion is far better, and doesn't mess with search odds. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRCT+1 08:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. Deceasificate - Gotta agree, search odds research is fairly precious... and if that's not the issue here, then my vote would be dupe instead. Bubacxo 09:53, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  4. As Matt. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 13:02, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  5. Kill - Also as Matt. Good idea though.--Priz 06:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. Dupe or Spam - Either it is functionally a dupe of Autodrop_Useless_Double_Item or its a major change to search percentages. --S.Wiers X:00 16:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. Dupe - More or less a duplicate of this suggestion. --ZombieSlay3rSig.png 16:38, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Scent Disrupter

Timestamp: Nucleon 22:29, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Type: New Necrotech item
Scope: affects zombies with Scent Fear skill tree
Description: The name says it all as to what this item would do: adversely affect the ability of zombies to dectect survivors with the skills of the Scent Fear tree. Before everybody starts moaning about this being blatantly overpowered/ another zombie nerf/ too easy to use for griefing, realize that the above is a simple description of what the item would do without any of the mechanics governing it, and I have already taken into account the aforementioned potential problems. Let me start with the basics: this item would only be found in or be able to be manufactured in Necrotech buildings. This item would take up 2 inventory spaces and costs 2 AP to activate. Upon activation the device starts to disperse chemicals which will interfere with the sense of smell of any zombie entering the area for a set period of time. Any zombie in this square loses the use of ALL skills on the Scent Fear tree as long as they remain in the square and will lose all scent trails detected via the Scent Trail skill.

That's the bad news for the zombies, but now comes the bad news for the survivors (and especially griefers.) Such a device would logically be used to confuse a zombie so the survivor using it could escape, but it would be completely pointless to utilize this kind of device in close proximity to a zombie as all this would end up doing would be to alert the zombie that the survivor is nearby. Following this logic, survivors would be unable to activate this item if they were in the same square as a zombie; while this would not make griefing impossible, it would make it impractical. The effects of this item on a zombie would last only as long as the zombie is in the affected square, barring the scent trails which would be lost permanently. (That's the scent trails that the zombie had picked up and NOT the ability to use the skill.) The effects of this item would not hide a survivor from the zombie if they are in plain sight; while a zombie's sense of smell is affected by this item, it does not affect their ability to see. The final touch (and one that zombies will probably like) is every time a survivor uses one of these items, there is a chance that the device will activate before the survivor can get clear. While doing no damage to the survivor, they will end up having a nasty problem for the same time period that the effects of the device have; during this time period the act of simply passing by a zombie with Scent Trail will end up creating a scent trail despite the survivor not having interacted in any manner with the zombie. In addition, the survivor will also be prohibited from any other copies of this item during the time period.

Keep Votes

  1. Author Keep - Duh. --Nucleon 22:29, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. Keep Sporting goods (hunting supply) stores can also have this if NT buildings don't.. it's a hunting no scent spray. Anything that tracks by scent is kind of screwed. Make it disposable.. spray can, 1 item slot, make it last for 24 hours per use. =MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 03:37, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Kill Votes

  1. Kill - we need to make this game better for zombies not worse--Blood Panther 22:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. Kill - If it needs that many caveats and drawbacks, its a bad idea to start with, and adding them doesn't make it good. Kill, but maybe re-work- strip all the silly limitations, and just let people vote on whether the idea sucks in its essence. Because its actually not THAT bad- most zombies with scent skills have "diagnosis" anyhow. Also, the function this has vs scent trails would never ever come into play, because a zombie gets ONE scent trail report only, at the time they log in- they never get any AFTER moving, except in the rare case of "live combat". Also, what does "unable to activate while in the same square" mean? If there are zombies outside a building, and survivors inside it (the most common situation), can it be used? Because if it yes, its a lot more useful than if no. --S.Wiers X:00 23:49, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. Kill Don't turn off people's skills. --Jon Pyre 04:14, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  4. I think there's something in the Dos and Do Not that says..."Don't mess with other people's skills!" or something like that. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 13:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  5. there's "bad news" for survivors using this? Big deal, they can't activate it when a zombie is nearby.--Pesatyel 14:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  6. Kill - I think it would be better if the zombie is unable to trace only the person who used the scent disruptor. --ZombieSlay3rSig.png 16:41, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  7. Kill - And to think, I was just talking about Sex Panther. Really though, it just doesnt seem like a great idea to me.--Priz 06:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  8. 'Kill - make it free and call it Fart--SporeSore 15:52, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes
Spam/Dupe Votes here

Personal tools