From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

Rules for Previous Suggestions

  • These suggestions can only be voted on now, and only up to two weeks from the day they were submitted.
  • You can make new suggestions on the Suggestions Page.


  1. You are voting on Suggestions, not Users. The text of your vote should not personally attack or denigrate the user who has submitted it... no matter how ridiculous the idea. Flaming and/or Trolling will not be tolerated.
  2. Before voting please read the Suggestions Dos and Do Nots and Frequently Suggested Ideas Page to read about concepts that have been generally considered unworkable in the past. You do not need to follow the guidelines on these pages but they are worth consideration before casting a vote.
  3. One vote per user. No exceptions. You cannot use multiple wiki accounts to vote on a suggestion.
  4. To Vote, use the [edit] button next to the suggestion you wish to vote for. Then enter your vote in the suggest_votes field. Please ensure that your vote is placed before the double brackets of the particular suggestion (ie the "}}")
  5. Votes must include a signature in order to be considered valid votes. To sign a vote, use --~~~~. Please remember to sign your votes! Unsigned votes will be deleted after 30 minutes or when found.
  6. Each Suggestion will be open to voting for two (2) weeks, measured from the suggestion's Timestamp, unless it is a Dupe or Spam. If, at the end of that time, there are two thirds (2/3) more Keep votes than Kill votes, the Suggestion will be moved to the Peer Reviewed Suggestions page. Otherwise, the Suggestion will be moved to the Peer Rejected Suggestions page.

Rules for Discussions

Votes are NOT the place to discuss Suggestions. This page and archived suggestion pages are only to be used for the Suggesting and subsequent Voting of these suggestions. If you wish to discuss any of the suggestions or votes here, please select a specific vote's page by clicking on its link under Current Day's Suggestions and use the associated Talk page. Suggestions do not have to be submitted in order to discuss them. The Suggestions talk page can be used to workshop possible suggestions before they are submitted.

Valid Votes

  • Keep, for Suggestions that you believe have merit.
  • Kill, for Suggestions that you believe do not have merit. If you need to discuss a rule fix, use the discussion page.
  • Spam, for the most ridiculous suggestions.
Suggestions can be removed with Spam votes as described below in the Removing Suggestions section. If the criterion described there are not fulfilled, the suggestion must remain for the whole two weeks.
Spam votes are not a "strong kill", they are simply here to prevent the utterly ridiculous from clogging up the system. If you do not like the idea, and it's not some crazy uber power or something else ridiculous, VOTE KILL, NOT SPAM. Spam votes will be counted as Kill when votes are tallied.
  • Dupe, for Suggestions that are exact or very close duplicates of previous suggestions. For a Dupe vote to be valid, a link must be provided to the original suggestion.
Dupe votes can be used to remove suggestions as described below. Dupe votes will not be counted when votes are tallied.

Invalid Votes

  • Server Load and Programming Complexity are NOT very good Kill reasons. You are voting on the merit of the suggestion and whether or not you think it belongs in the game. Server load/complexity issues are up to Kevan to decide.
  • X should be implemented first is not a valid reason for a vote. You are voting on the merit of THIS suggestion, not how it compares to others.
  • Votes that do not have reasoning behind them are invalid. You MUST justify your vote.


  • Re may be used to comment on a vote. Only the original author and the person being REd can comment. Comments are restricted to a single comment per vote, and it is expected that Re comments be as short as possible. Reing every kill vote is considered abuse of the Re comment. A Re does not count as a vote, and any subsequent discussion not part of the Re comment should be held on the discussion page if there is any extended commenting.
  • Note is used by System Operators to invalidate trolling-based votes. Only Sysops may remove troll-based votes and they do so with a strikeout <s></s> in order to preserve the trolling removal for posterity. The voter may contest the strikeout with the Sysop that struck their vote out on the discussion page. Only a System Operator may remove a strikeout.

All Caps

Try to avoid YELLING, writing in bold, or using italics, except when emphasizing a point which has escaped other voters.


Keep Votes

  1. Keep - I am the author and I am allowed to vote once on my own suggestions. --MrSuggester 05:01, 11 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  2. Keep - Best. Suggestion. Evar. --Bob_Zombie 04:01, 11 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  3. Keep - Good sugestion. no signature --FakeSuggester 07:39, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Kill Votes

  1. Kill - This is a terrible idea, but you can totally fix it up. --NegativeGal 06:01, 12 Nov 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - Please be more specific about how to fix it on the discussion page. --MrSuggester 14:01, 12 Nov 2005 (GMT)
      • Re - Sure, I have detailed my proposed fixes here. --NegativeGal 23:38, 12 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  2. Kill - You will eat my poopie and love it! --PooEater 11:12, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
    • Note - Inane vote removed. Defend in discussion. --DaModerator 11:13, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. Spam - Kung Fu CB Mama on Wheels is an inappropriate Survivor Class. --NoFunAtAll 09:01, 12 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  2. Dupe - Duplicate Suggestion --AnotherSuggester 05:01, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Removing Suggestions

Suggestions can be removed for two reasons:

  • Dupe If a suggestion is a duplicate of an earlier one, and has recieved at least 3 Dupe Votes linked to the Duplicated suggestion, then it can be deleted as per the guidelines below.
  • Spam If a suggestion is deemed by the community to be either not made seriously, or simply completely awful and not worthy of inclusion on the Suggestion page for a two-week period, it can be Spaminated. The suggestion may be sent to either the Peer-Rejected or Humorous suggestions pages.

Eligibility for Spamination is acheived if there are at least 7 Spam votes and the number of Spam votes are equal to 2/3rds or greater of the total number of votes, with the author vote included in all these tallies. In addition, A Sysop can if they so choose delete any suggestion with three or more Spams as long as Spams outnumber Keeps; this includes their own spam vote. Suggestions may not be removed as spam unless voting has been open for 6 hours.

Authors are not allowed to use Re: to defend their work or correct the editor after a suggestion has been removed.

When removing a Suggestion, you take the responsibility to be mature regarding the situation. Each Suggestion is an author's child and they can be come quite passionate in regards to the Suggestion's removal. Please do the following when removing a Suggestion:

  • Duplicate - If the removed Suggestion is a duplicate, you must:
    1. Confirm that there are absolutely no viable differences between the original and the duplicate.
    2. List the number of Dupe Votes received.
    3. Provide a link(s) to the Suggestion that it duplicates.
    4. Optionally note the Linked Suggestion status: Reviewed/Undecided/Rejected.
    5. Sign the removal.
    6. Be Polite and make no additional comments.
  • Humorous - If the removed Suggestion is deemed humourous, you must:
    1. State that the Suggestion has been deemed humorous.
    2. Move the Suggestion to the Humorous Suggestions page.
    3. Sign the removal.
    4. Be Polite and make no additional comments.
    5. Bring fourth a vandalism case against the user who posted it citing rule 13 of making a suggestion.
  • Spaminated - If the removed Suggestion has become eligible for Spamination, you must:
    1. List the number of Spam Votes received and the total number of votes.
    2. State that the Suggestion was Spaminated.
    3. List or summarize/paraphrase the comments/reasons made on the Spam votes.
    4. Move the suggestion to Peer Rejected Suggestions page.
    5. Sign the removal.
    6. Be Polite and make no additional comments.

It is your responsibility to be a mature editor.

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


If the two week deadline for voting is passed, your vote WILL BE DELETED AND IGNORED.

DNA Scanner Hack (was DNA Scanner Modes, in discussion)

Timestamp: Seb_Wiers VeM 00:28, 1 May 2007 (BST)
Type: skill adjustment
Scope: survivors with Necronet Access
Description: Background: When doing revives, it is not uncommon to run into a situation were "all subjects in this area have been scanned". At that point, you generally can only scan one subject repeatedly. There may be many subjects that you personally have not scanned, but whom you have no way to scan yourself, thus meaning you can not generally view their profiles before reviving them. This suggestion would allow survivors with Necronet Access to overcome this problem by going into the scanners BIOS settings and over-riding the Necrotech mandated target selection algorithms.

Suggestion: If the survivor has Necronet Access, their scanner has multiple "modes", which are selected via radio buttons that appear where the scanner is listed in inventory, next to the button for the scanners use. Clicking the button to use the scanner can have somewhat different results, depending on which "mode" is currently selected. As with weapon target selection, a mode (once chosen) becomes the default when the page re-loads.

The scanner modes would be as follows:

  • "Default" mode- Scanning functions exactly as it current does, which seems optimized for collecting Necronet data and for XP gain by users of scanners.
  • "Verbose" mode- Scanning works as currently, with the exception that when you reach the end of the "stack", you start over again at the top, allowing you to intentionally scan "duplicates" for revive and other purposes.
  • "Backup" - Scans zombies in the opposite order of the normal stack order, and allows scanning of duplicates as for "Verbose".
  • "Random" mode- scans one random zombie selected from all those present in your location, allows scanning of duplicates as for "Verbose". While not nearly as efficient as the "Verbose" or "Backup" setting, it does allow you to (if lucky) avoid attempts at scanning zombies with Brain Rot who might block the "stack" when using those modes.

The actual radio buttons would only be labeled "D/V/B/R" in order to save screen space. The skill description would not detail what the modes meant, except that they alter the order in which zombies are scanned and they allow re-scanning of subjects already scanned by other techs. This would force players to experiment with the modes, or use meta game means, to discover their meaning. I think this extra challenge would add play value; Necronet Access an optional / advanced skill, and it need not be easy to use right without some practice.

Keep Votes

  1. keep - I like it even better than the idea above, but both are good. - BzAli 10:22, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  2. keep - clearly, if folks have duped it so much and it is here twice... this is something folks want. --Ev933n / Talk PPGC 19:00, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  3. Keep - I like it. If saving space is too much of a concern, it might be worth considering handling similarly to the ability to control what items you automatically throw away now. Of course, that would make the "backup" option less useful, but it's really not that necessary anyway. Just a thought, but it's just fine as it is. --Rgon 19:28, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  4. Keep - Author's vote. --Seb_Wiers VeM 20:49, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  5. Keep - --Vista 11:30, 3 May 2007 (BST)
  6. Keep - The only thing that would worry me is duplicate scanning; that could be abused for EXP farming. And it'd be useful to circumvent brainrotters clogging the queue. --Andromai 05:27, 8 May 2007 (BST)

Kill Votes

  1. Dupe - But it's different enough for it not to be a complete dupe. I'm killing because this will clutter the interface which is not good IMO. Maybe if it showed all of the extactors as one (and hence one set of radio buttons) then I'ld be fine with this. - JedazΣT MC ΞD GIS S! 01:53, 1 May 2007 (GMT)
    Given the April 20 update, anybody with the experience to have NNA should know the game well enough to avoid ever having multiple scanners. Also, I kept the radio button labels to D/V/B/R for clutter reduction, not just game value. --Seb_Wiers VeM 03:08, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  2. Kill - I really just dont see, how this would improve the game. Sonofagun18 05:28, 1 May 2007 (BST)
    And yet you voted keep on a suggestion that solves the same problem in a different way? --Seb_Wiers VeM 09:56, 1 May 2007 (BST)
    Sorry I misunderstood the suggestion but I still voting kill cause I just don't like this idea. --Sonofagun18 05:56, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  3. Kill - As I voted in the similar suggestion above -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 09:19, 1 May 2007 (BST)
    There's already no need to kill rotters to keep scanning. You just keep scanning them until you get them. I get them on the first to third try most times; I figure its a 50% or so shot. This isn't aimed at rotters, its aimed at zombies you can't scan because they are already "in the system". --Seb_Wiers VeM
    Yes, but once all the zombies are scanned, and a brainrotter ends up on top, you can't choose to scan the others. Your suggestion means that brainrotters can no longer block revive points, because you just choose another mode, and start working back through the pile. Nerfs brainrot revive queue blocking -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 10:10, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  4. Why would you, really, use ANY other mode except "verbose"? "Default" is just the normal mode that is the reason for this suggestion in the first place. "Backup" what difference would that make? "Random" is the reason I am killing. Why would you waste time even using it? If your scanning to get XP on a crowd of 5 zombies, 2 of which have previously been scanned, you will still only get the XP for three. If you are doing it to see who is there to revive, for example, you still have to cycle through to get there (which might make "Backup" useful). "Random" is useless.--Pesatyel 22:48, 5 May 2007 (BST)
  5. KILL If you are going to do random revives then it should be random. If you are looking for someone in particular add them to your contact list. --דקקGunen.pngThe Malton Globetrotters#99 13:17, 30 April 2008 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes
A spammy dupe of an idea that got posted for voting while I was being a good boy and putting this through discussion?

  1. Dupe - You made this once before,... and I believe it failed. --Poodle of doom 15:43, 7 May 2007 (BST)

Fight back Timestamp: freebiewitz 8:50, 30 april 2008 (aus time) Type: skill add Scope: survivors at level 10 (zombie hunter skill) Description:Basically This would alow the person with the skill to have a better chance to avoid tangling grasp/ make the zombie lose its grip sooner.

Another addition to this skill tree would be :last stand making it the in order to be seen as wounded or dying the survivor would have to have 5 hp less making them harder targets.

Another skill would be for the zombies and it would be called bloodrush basically it gives the zombie a say something like 5-10% chance to do extra damage

Thats all I have right now :)


Timestamp: Seventythree 09:59, 1 May 2007 (BST)
Type: New Item
Scope: Survivors, I guess.
Description: Ok, Quick quiz for you all here. You're in your hose and there's a power cut. Do you:

a) Nip down to your local branch of B&Q, steal a generator, pausing only to nick some fuel from the local garage on the way back b) Nothing. You're content to watch a blank TV screen and eat Doritos. c) Sigh. Dig out those crappy lavender scented candles that a relative gave you as an excuse for a Christmas present a few years back.

Now, I don't know about you, but most people, in an emergency are going to go for option C. The thing that puzzles me is that, for some reason, candles do not exist in the game. Seems to me that what most people would do to get light would be to dig out some candles. Now, obviously, candles are going to be easier to get hold of than the two items otherwise needed to power the lights of a building. So, here is my suggestion.

Candles (new item).Found in churches and cathedrals at 5%, Mansions at 3% Hardware stores at 2% and warehouses at 1% (I don't know, maybe you stumble across a crate of 'novelty' candles) Each candle takes up 2% encumbrance in your inventory. Once set up in a building they add a 1% to your chances of finding things.

Up to four candles can be added to gain a maximum of 4% Increased odds. Candles can be added after that but they do nothing else. The building can be seen as lighted from outside. They burn for 6 hours, with a 1% chance every half hour per candle that they will go out. If they go out, they disappear into the ether.

If a generator is placed in the building, the odds gained for searching due to candles are nullified. The candles are still there, burning away prettily, but they do sweet FA. If zombies ransack a building with candles set up the candles are destroyed. Ok, there you are. Thanks as always to the Invaluable help given by those people on the Discussion page, Blood panther, Honestmistake, Seb Weirs, saluton and pesateyl. .

Keep Votes

  1. Author Keep Well, I wrote it.--Seventythree 09:59, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  2. keep - Makes sense, and is balanced. - BzAli 10:25, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  3. keep Adds an extra dimension of play for those of us who live on the fringes... still like the idea of ransack causing extra damage because of fire (an extra AP to fix) but it does complicate things and I can live without it! --Honestmistake 11:37, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  4. keep - Not that bad. Tweak the numbers a bit here, and we might have a winner. --Ducis DuxSlothTalk 12:39, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  5. Keep - Good idea. Are the search increase %s for generators known? Candle numbers should be based on that and be 30-40% of a generator's effect in my opinion. --Rasi 07:58, 1 May 2007 (EST)
  6. Keep - As above - well balanced, and adds another element of gameplay for people who don't carry around generators/fuel but still want a small search bonus. --Saluton 14:26, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  7. Keep Woah, a valid reason to search churches! Please implement this! --Jon Pyre 16:08, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  8. Keep I like it --Blood Panther 16:47, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  9. Keep ! --The Hierophant. 17:51, 01 May 2007.
  10. Keep - I can think of lots of fun roleplaying options to be had with this, besides the search odds increase. --c138 RR - PKer 19:48, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  11. Keep- Well done.--Grigori 20:20, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  12. Keep - I like it.--Canuhearmenow Hunt! 20:25, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  13. Keep - Makes since.... --Poodle of doom 02:28, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  14. Keep - Sonofagun18 05:23, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  15. Keep - Very nice! --Hhal 12:41, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  16. Keep - exellent! it is also very realistic and not over powered. --Jakey07 19:59, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  17. Keep -- Not sure when I would be in my "hose" but it's still a good idea --Lord Evans 06:14, 4 May 2007 (BST)
  18. Keep - Nice idea, but a building with only candles in it should show as "dimly lit" or something along those lines. --Andromai 05:31, 8 May 2007 (BST)
  19. Keep - Fair enough. It's cheaper than generators, but doesn't do as much, and still carries the risk of alerting zeds (which too many similiar suggestions have failed to do). --Reaper with no name TJ! 18:24, 9 May 2007 (BST)

Kill Votes

  1. Kill - They should be destroyable by survivors as well, even if they burn for only six hours. Otherwise they are too easily used as zombie attractors--Vista 11:26, 3 May 2007 (BST)
  2. Kill - If only this was a gateway to survivors being able to ruin a building by arson! Why not just use the AP to find a generator? And 2% seems a bit much for a candle unless it is one of those 3 wick sandalwood scented ones from Bed, Bath, and Beyond. mmmm Sandalwood.--דקקGunen.pngThe Malton Globetrotters#99 13:23, 30 April 2008 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes
Spam/Dupe Votes here

Ditch unloaded guns

Timestamp: Dance Emot.gifTheDavibob T 17:14, 1 May 2007 (BST)
Type: Feature modification
Scope: Dropping weapons (after picking them up)
Description: The recent change by Kevan is really good, the one where you can choose to drop specific items after you pick them up, automatically, however I believe you need the option to drop empty firearms, rather than grouping them together. I suggest, as new options, replacing the current 'Pistol' and 'Shotgun' options:
  • Empty Pistol (in case you pick up a pistol with no bullets)
  • Not fully loaded Pistol (1-5 bullets)
  • Fully loaded Pistol

And, for the shotgun, the same:

  • Empty Shotgun
  • Not fully loaded shotgun (1 shell)
  • Fully loaded shotgun

Simple, and effective.

Keep Votes

  1. Keep Yup. Says it all realy.--Seventythree 18:57, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  2. Keep - Useful and functional. Mr Bound 19:10, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  3. Keep - I'd probably never use it - all guns are precious - but it'd be useful for other folk. --c138 RR - PKer 19:45, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  4. Keep - Because I have the SAME THING essentially on the discussion page right now. :-) --Darth Sensitive Talk W! 23:17, 1 May 2007 (BST)
    Re. Whoops... Hope you don't mind. :( -- Dance Emot.gifTheDavibob T 07:30, 2 May 2007 (BST)
    Re:^2 It's OK. I'll just take some credit if/when it gets implemented. :-P --Darth Sensitive Talk W! 23:22, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  5. Keep - This is one of the "wait, this isn't already part of the game?" suggestions. --Saluton 01:53, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  6. Keep - Makes since to be able to drop variations of tools and items as well. Not just generalities. --Poodle of doom 02:29, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  7. Keep - A no-brainer. --Uncle Bill 03:22, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  8. Keep - Makes Sense. Sonofagun18 05:30, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  9. Author - Thought it was needed. -- Dance Emot.gifTheDavibob T 07:30, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  10. Keep - Oh, for sure! --Ducis DuxSlothTalk 09:08, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  11. Keep - usefull will it be --Duke GarlandLCD 10:25, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  12. Keep - Makes sense. This would be pretty useful. --Hhal 12:41, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  13. Keep - Seems pretty sensible. --ZuluDeacon 16:43, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  14. Keep - Certainly makes sense to me. --Rgon 19:30, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  15. Keep - Definite improvement. --The Hierophant. 20:24, 02 May 2007.
  16. Keep - It's great, and makes sense. --Pvt De 00:00, 3 May 2007 (BST)
  17. Keep - I hate it when all I get is empty guns. It's worthless when I already have the guns, but need ammo. --RAF Lt.G Deathnut RAF 00:03, 3 May 2007 (BST)
  18. Keep - small improvement--Vista 11:15, 3 May 2007 (BST)
  19. Keep Train - choo choo! --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 16:01, 4 May 2007 (BST)
  20. Keep - Nice idea, though I'd like to choose just how many bullets are "not enough." I always saw three or more shots to be enough. --Heavy DDR 07:33, 8 May 2007 (CEN)
  21. Keep- Although I would prefer if the "partially loaded" ones were grouped based on ammo. I might want to drop a pistol with 1 round in it but not one with 5. Still, I can't argue with the usefulness of the concept. --Reaper with no name TJ! 18:26, 9 May 2007 (BST)

Kill Votes
Against Votes here

  1. Kill - It costs 0 AP to drop a weapon. They are only "grouped" together if you are running a script of some kind, by the way. If it automagically drops a weapon that isn't fully loaded you might screw yourself when you are desperately in need of a weapon if you forget to change that. A better idea would be if it only loaded the exact numbers needed to fill a pistol when you reload instead of always putting in all 6. Sometimes you have 2 bullets left and you lose them if you reload.--דקקGunen.pngThe Malton Globetrotters#99 13:30, 30 April 2008 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes
Spam/Dupe Votes here

Feeding on the Dead

Timestamp: WriterX 19:48, 1 May 2007 (BST)
Type: Improvement
Scope: Zombies
Description: I was thinking on the possibility of allowing zombies to feed on dead bodies. This way, the Undead would not have problems with regenerating their health points and it would also add some climax to the whole game. The problem which I faced was how to stop the abuse of corpses, and so making zombies swamp in an area over corpses, and furthermore I wandered on should it somehow effect the dead player (aka corpse).

The solution, which I though would be reasonable is this (if it is possible through coding, I don't have a wide idea on that):

1)A corpse may be fed upon once (zombies don't share their happy meals) and once a corpse is "used" no other zombie may try to eat it.

2)A "feeding" would regenerate 5 hp per corpse ate.

3)The action would cost 10 AP (which is in fact generous, because we all know how zombies eat... and that IS time consuming).

4)"Eaten" players are not effected by being eaten by their brothers and sisters (aka zombies), since (as it might be noted on all classic movies) the majority of the body is still left behind.

Suggestions are largely welcome, since maybe the idea is of poor quality now, it might be improved and put into life in the future.

Keep Votes
For Votes here
Kill Votes

  1. Kill - This is well thought out...BUT: A zed with Digestion can simply munch on another zed for less AP. Though this isn't overpowered, it still doesn't work.--Hhal 19:59, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  2. Kill - looks like just a digestion without casual factor and need to find alive thing to eat. thus - not really needed. For improving suggestion and discussion please use the talk page. --Duke GarlandLCD 20:24, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  3. Kill I'm just not sure it'd work.--Seventythree 21:52, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  4. kill - 10 AP spent for 5 HP... better to just use digestion and bite some survivors. - BzAli 22:00, 1 May 2007 (BST)
  5. Change - I think if you made it so that the corpse would become infected (since infection carries over when you get revived), it would be better. Make the change, and I'll change my vote. Also, don't forget to vote for it yourself either! --Poodle of doom 02:33, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  6. Change - Heh, maybe you could change it so that it uses the bite hit rate and so that you can target reviving corpses so they take 5 more AP to stand up =P - JedazΣT MC ΞD GIS S! 06:39, 2 May 2007 (GMT)
  7. Kill - For the time being I will just have to sit on this a while longer and think up a different system/idea. This was ment for players/zombies that have a low level and don't have digestion yet. This does seem now like a "wasteful filling space", that is why in the future I will send a new suggestion, similar idea, different system/skill. --WriterX 10:19, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  8. Kill - Seems kinda useless, and I don't like the idea of feeding on corpses anyway. Although it is good flavor. --Rgon 19:33, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  9. Change - I like it, but it's very underpowered, as others have mentioned. Fix that and I'll vote keep. --Reaper with no name TJ! 21:54, 2 May 2007 (BST)
  10. Kill -Standing up and Digestion are extremely effectiant. They cost little AP wise, even when the extra cost of a headshot is taken into account. There tend to be few wounded zombies anyway. Most are either dead or standing with full health in a horde.--Vista 11:14, 3 May 2007 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes
Spam/Dupe Votes here

  1. Dupe - [Dupe] of a [Dupe] of a [Dupe]--דקקGunen.pngThe Malton Globetrotters#99 13:38, 30 April 2008 (BST)