Suggestions/20th-Nov-2005

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

20th November, 2005 - VOTING ENDED: 4th-Dec-2005

Scent Death

Timestamp: 00:05, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombies
Description: Allow zombies to see the number of dead bodies in adjacent squares. Useful for finding safehouses since those tend to accrue large numbers of fallen zombies in front.

Votes

  • Kill - I don't play zombies so maybe I'm just ignorant, but this doesn't strike me as very useful at all. -CWD 00:47, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Easy way to find a safehouse. Look at the buildings. Does it say mall, or fire/police department? There you go. This is not needed. --Zaruthustra 01:37, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, Zaruthustra is my hero--Spellbinder 02:04, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, Good job, Zaruthustra! Also, if there's a major enough attack that the bodies are piling up, there're going to be a bunch of zombies standing there too. --Shadowstar 05:16, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill uh.. above reasons -- P0p0 05:49, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Same as above. Bentley Foss 19:02, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - Many suvivors choose nondescript buildings like libraries and bars to hide in. I've often seen the ground in front of active safehouses containing thirty corpses and no zombies. This would simply let zombie players see everyone on their team which is pretty fair. --Jon Pyre 19:24, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Zaruthustra is correct. --Squashua 01:07, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- What Zaruthustra said. -pinkgothic 11:47, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill As Zaruthustra said, plus why should something like to be limited to Zombies, and what makes you think that bodies are automatically on your side? Madalex 13:45, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill I just don't think this would be very useful. --Carfan7 05:08, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Not necessary. --Dickie Fux 18:20, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- Why would a new zombie want this instead of the skills that improves attack and reduces ap loss? --Nov 10:11, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Give XP for Infecting Suvivors

Timestamp: 00:13, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Balance change
Scope: Zombies
Description: Give a zombie a slight xp bonus for infecting a suvivor. I play a suvivor but I still think zombies are getting shafted on experience. Getting 3 xp or so per infection would give them a needed boost, and be a reward for those zombies first to break into a safehouse. Plus it'd serve as a nice counterpart to DNA extracting, giving zombies XP in a similar way.

Votes

  • Keep - Like it. But 3XP is too much. Being in a horde, we are known for being organized, specially in spreading infections. So, 1XP is enough. Monstah 00:27, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Ya got 4xp for biteing him, what more do you want?--Spellbinder 02:01, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Infection is a tool used to clear safe houses and win in real time combat as well as swell the zombie hordes. Biting does not need to give more XP. Stop trying to turn bite into an uber attack. --Zaruthustra 02:15, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Infection is powerful as it is. IMO it's the zombie's headshot: you don't gain that much from it, but your whole side benefits as the other side is set back. Except that you actually benefit because few humans will fight an infectious zombie in real time. --McArrowni 02:31, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Maybe if the XP gain were less. --Lucero Capell 03:05, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Infecting is automatic, so no. --Squashua 04:53, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - NOOOOOOOOOOO! -- P0p0 05:51, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - You already get XP for infecting survivors. It's called Bite. Bentley Foss 18:37, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - No? Above reasons... --Steve 11:28, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- I've played a zombie for a long time and whilst I agree with the sentiment that EXP gain in general could be higher, I don't agree that this should be it. -pinkgothic 11:50, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill As McArrowni said. Madalex 13:46, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill No, just no. --Carfan7 05:07, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - 4XP gained for bite, 4 HP gained from prerequisite Digestion, 4 damage dealt to target and infecting the target of the attack is sufficient for a one AP attack. Bite is already my favorite attack, but this would make it too powerful. --Dickie Fux 18:24, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- The advantage of Infectious Bit is that it makes the survivor lose XP when they use AP. --Nov 10:12, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Constant Vigilance

Timestamp: 20:24, 19 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombie Hunters
Description: The Zombie Hunter does not count as asleep when he runs out of APs- that is, he can still see the map around him, drop items, and see events that have happened since his last action.

Votes

  • Keep - Author voting for own suggestion. --LibrarianBrent 20:24, 19 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - So basically he doesnt go to sleep when hes exhausted, and is therefore not human? --AllStarZ 00:18, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
RE: No, he just rests without sleeping or is able to sleep while still alert. --LibrarianBrent 02:55, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Maybe the flavour isn't good (he doesn't sleep), but the idea is good. Besides, he might be sleeping when logged off, or IP hits maximum. Monstah 00:26, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - It is possible to rest without sleeping. ----Arcos 01:41, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill The whole "you are asleep" thing was probably implemented solely to reduce server load; besides, this isn't substantial enough to spend 100 XP on. --LouisB3 01:59, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
    • Re On the contrary, I'd spend more than that to know whether the building I entered on my last AP was full of zeds or not. --Argus Blood 04:11, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Hey, now this is really usefull. someone who has run out of AP or hit his server max could still see whats happening on screen. But would this carry over to the other side, thus creating vigilanent zombies? and for the love of god, please nobody suggest the zombie version of this skill. don't we have enough cloning?--Spellbinder 02:04, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I don't like the flavour. Also not that useful--McArrowni 02:33, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Although I would say get rid of the ability to drop items. There's a difference between resting watchfully (that's what I'm assuming is going on) and actively throwing stuff away. --Lucero Capell 03:09, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Harmless, but I don't see any overall advantage to it. --Squashua 04:54, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - But eventually in real life he'd start hallucinating. ALIENwolve 05:45, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep maby he's hallucinating already, i mean.. he IS in a town overrun by zombies. -- P0p0 05:53, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Relatively useless, flavor's weird, and I feel like it might encourage lots of extra server hits. --RSquared 20:28, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - This would mean that no matter how tired you get, you never sleep. You just wait. --ThunderJoe 21:03, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Eh, I dunno. Why not just drop all your newspapers before you spend your last AP? Bentley Foss 21:28, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I'm pretty sure that you go to "sleep" to save on server hits more than anything else. Sleep is just there to prevent people from hitting refresh constantly while waiting for an AP - which is explicitly what this skill would allow. Thus, kill. Everyl 06:15, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- Awkward. Whilst it's always bothered me that if I spend my last AP to move into a building, I'm stuck having to guess what level it's barricaded at, I'd rather any refreshs at 0 AP would cause the "Asleep" screen, rather than dropping down to it, and this suggestion just ain't that. -pinkgothic 11:54, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - But change the name to Light Sleeper or something like that. --John Taggart 13:36, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill A skill that allows you see things for half an hour (as after that time you'd see again without that skill anyway)? Madalex 13:50, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Pointless. Even if you can see what the status of the building is, you can't act on it until your AP have regenerated. ----Pooky Romero 17:21, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - If you need to see what the situation is while you're not moving, save one AP. --Dickie Fux 18:26, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill --Nov 10:12, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Not a bad idea, but not worth the XP spent. After all, it's just 30 mins of difference. --Seagull Flock 15:13, 2 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Doesn't seem realistic Mikm 18:49, 4 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Dual Wield

Timestamp: 20 November 2005, 05:59:14 (a.m.)
Type: Skill
Scope: Survivor
Description: Rather than another "Advanced" skill that just gives better % to hit, Dual Wield allows a character to attack twice with a knife, at 30% per attack. At 2 damage a hit, 30% chance to hit x2, the damage calculation comes out thus: 30% * 2 + 30% * 2 = 1.2 damage / AP, which is equivalent to the axe. However, there's a 9% chance of a 4 hit, and a 42% chance of a 2 hit, meaning that a knife wielder hits about 51% of the time. It's subtly different from the Axe, in that the Axe wielder has both less variance in damage (always 3) and lower chance to hit (40%). It would be up to Kevan to decide whether to make this skill require the user to have two knives in his inventory, or make it simply a result of the speed with which a competent knife-fighter can wield one.

Votes

  • Keep - (Since I'm lurking around this page today anyway...) Y'know, this isn't that bad. It seems like a reasonable way to handle knife combat. The details need to be cleaned up a bit (two knives vs. a double attack) but I'd say this is a good raw material with which to work. Bentley Foss 20:04, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - *shrugs* whatever. Just don't start toeing the line with akimbo pistols. --Fixen 20:36, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Finally a good suggestion to add reason behind the knife skill. Thank you. --ThunderJoe 21:05, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Author here: I want to leave little details (like requiring two knives for the skill) to the coders, minimize db hits for a double attack, that sort of thing. Note that once you have this skill, it'd be pointless to attack with knife combat, since the chance of hitting for 2-4 damage is higher than the chance of hitting with 2 (40% with adv.). Therefore, I'd replace the dropdown item for a single attack with this. --RSquared 21:10, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep, great idea. --LibrarianBrent 21:17, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -This is a great idea. Melee weapons need more support in my opinion.--Mastergw 22:17, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - the only thing this adds is flavor. --Squashua 01:10, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Am i the only one who can't understand what this guy's talking about? --LouisB3 04:07, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep knives need to be better -- P0p0 05:18, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I didnt exaclty understand but... It seems fair. it seems fair if it is a zedhunt-skill.... --Steve 11:32, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- Knives thus far have always appeared a tad useless to me. -pinkgothic 11:55, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Pretty good idea- just don't call it 'dual wield' We're not rogue class --Andrew McM 12:51, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
"Knife Fighter", "Adv. Knife Combat", whatever. --RSquared 17:41, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Nice idea, but what I absolutely don't understand is where in the skill tree this suggests the skill should be placed, and how this should behave, i.e. once learned, do you still have a choice of fighting "old" knife combat style or "new" dual wield, or do you automatically switch from knife combat to dual wield. if this is a an either learn knife combat or dual wield, but not both-type of suggestion, what happens to people who already bought knife combat? As for an alternate name, based on what described something along the line of "fast striker/slasher/fighter" might be better. Madalex 13:43, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
As mentioned in a previous comment, there's no point to attacking once for 40% at 2 damage when you can attack for 51% for 2-4 damage. As far as skill tree goes, I have no problem with making knife wielders get two skills for equivalent damage - after all, it should be harder to do lots of damage with a knife than with a big rusty fire axe. --RSquared 15:43, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep I like it. Lemme run a number crunch real quick. A fireaxe deals 4*30% = 1.2Dam/AP. This set has the follwoing chances: 9% of 4Dam, 42% of 2Dam, 49% of miss. This makes it 1.34Dam/AP, which makes it a bit better. Not a bad tradeoff of reliability if yo uask me ^^ - Skarmory 15:25, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
<Sniped and moved to discussion page. more or less, Skarmory was proven wrong>
  • Keep - Balanced mechanics make me feel all tingly. --Zaruthustra 16:16, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep PUUUUURDY!--Spellbinder 00:23, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Great Way to include the Knife in the Balance of the game--User:Doctor Putzs
  • Keep Perfect for duplicate weapons. --Carfan7 05:05, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Sounds good. --Dickie Fux 18:30, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- but only if the other Knife skill suggestions aren't implemented. --Nov 10:14, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- But make it require 2 knives in inventory. With 1 knife you use the "regular" skill with 2 knives you can use this skill. --Pesatyel 20:21, 30 Nov 2005 (GMT).

Multiple Tower Floors

Timestamp: 06:17, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Improvement
Scope: Towers
Description: This is a suggestion to give towers multiple floors. The first floor would exist exactly as they do now, but the "jump from window" button would be removed (ON FIRST FLOOR ONLY! Don't worry, I'm not trying to take that away.. heh) Players inside a tower would see a 'Climb' button upon entering a Tower. Upon pressing this button, they would see the same map view, but would be on the second floor of the tower which would act like a seperate room from the first. This would go on for however many floors deemed appropriate for towers. Perhaps different towers could have a different number of floors to add 'flavor' to the game and give survivors buildings to plan around. When you are any floor but the first, you will see a 'Descend' button next to the 'Climb' one. (you will not be able to climb, however, when you are on the top floor of course!) Each floor has its own door to the staircase, so these could be barricaded as well. This would give survivors a good reason to barricade themselves into the top floor -- but survivors can only free run into the first floor of a tower, no matter where they come from. (in other words, no free running into the top floor!!)

This would give Humans a better 'fort' against invasions, without giving them too much else (Not able to search for ammo or anything good there, so it's basically, as I say, a fort.) Of course the undead can break down barricades to any floor as they would break any other given barricade anywhere else. Zombies can aslo travel the stairs unaffected by barricades on the floors. (The doors TO each floor are blocked, not the stairs themselves.) Changing floors would have the normal 1AP action cost, unless you are a zombie without the lurching gait skill, of course.

If you are on any other floor than the first, you would have the option of throwing any corpse that may be in the room out the window instead of the front door. (Again, flavor!) All of this would apply ONLY to towers, so don't worry about this being abused in areas where you can search for weapons and all that. Zombie seiges would not be Nerfed here. Just think of it as a few blocks stacked ontop of eachother. Zeds could climb the stairs to any level and attack the barricades.

Free running would be relatively unaffected. You'd free run into the building next door, (via fire escapes) and if you came back, you'd free run into the first floor of the tower by default. I think this would be a great way to impliment a new style of 'fort' for survivors under attack.

Alternatves: Not being able to barricade seperate floors, so zombies coming up the stairs are automatically in the room with you.

Votes

  • Keep, sounds like fun. What happens when a floor below the zombie is barricaded? Do they automatically descend to the next available floor? Jirtan 13:51, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep, Zombies can always jump down windows if the staircase down is barricaded. And this is an interesting fort for survivors with axes --McArrowni 17:27, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep I like the idea, but I doubt it is technically feasible. Maybe some other buildings, like Necrotechs and hospitals, could have a few additional levels too. --Hexedian 18:38, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
    • Re: I totally agree. I wanted this to have the best chance of passing, so I made it Towers-only. Were this ever approved and implimented (You never know..) I think other buildings would either get new floors or not based on Kevan's preference, plus there can always be follow-up suggestions after that. Like giving Mansions an attic and basement, or whatever floats peoples' boats. :) -- Amazing 19:44, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I'm with Hex. X1M43 19:13, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - If it can be implemented, it sounds fun. --Shadowstar 20:01, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - But change one thing. If there are the fire escapes on the side, why can't a person free run to the top? If some noob got in and made the barricades EH, then we are all going to waste AP trying to smash through.
  • Keep - I'd rather make survivors have to fight their way up, that way it really becomes less of a super-safehouse. This is less for flavor reasons than for balance. --RSquared 21:13, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Excellent idea. --Lucero Capell 21:36, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I really like the idea... but making zombies smash through 3 or 4 layers of baricading just sounds mean. Otherwise really great suggestion. --Zaruthustra 22:09, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Sounds fun, really. Just not sure about its feasebility, and I don't like the idea of each floor having it's own barricades, either. Besides, in case you haven't seen many horror movies, climbing stairs == BAD idea. Monstah 22:41, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Sounds like fun. More places to hide. --Squashua 01:06, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Brilliant. I love it. And now that power has been (partially) restored, this could be a GREAT method of gameplay! :D --MaulMachine 20:09, 20 Nov 2005 (EST)
  • Kill - I hate it. Why vote "keep" on something that makes the game more boring and encourages cheating? This effectively just creates more locations for survivors to baracade and hide in- or leave empty. That sucks for zombie players. If you force zombie players to waste even more time finding where the safehouses are, then they are just that much more likely to use human spys and other meta-game techniques to keep form getting BORED. Extra spys also sucks for human players (meaning this suggestion results in no extra safety) and even if that doesn't happen, having lots of places to hide removes to much of the tension from what should be a dramtic, stressful game scenario. --Swiers 01:22, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
    • Re: I don't even know where to start with this. I don't see how it can inspire cheating in the least.. But hey, it's a free Wiki. -- Amazing 05:58, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- But with the alternative. Don't let the new floors get barricaded. Personally I'd go as far as to not demand AP to travel between the different levels, even, so people won't try to stash in the top level so zombies have to spend more time to get to them, leaving them with less AP to attack. -pinkgothic 12:00, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep There some very minor glitches in this, e.g. when have free running you can get from the top to ground floor with 2 AP, but without it it takes 3 or 4. Madalex 14:01, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill So multiple barricades on safe houses? Id be up for it if we zombies could actually trap survivors on the higher floors, forcing them to kill all zombies standing between them and the exit before leaving. bbrraaiinnss 14:57, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Great idea, but not exactly innovative. There are still hurdles though. One: Zombies are stupid and lack balance. Can they climb stairs on two legs without falling? They probably can with Memories of Life. Two: What happens if free runners are trying to get from a two story firestation into a skyscraper? Those tend to lack fire escapes accessible from outside. AllStarZ 01:31, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
    • Re: May be a good idea that only Zombies w/memories of life able to climb, since they can't open doors without it. Small change to the skill's desc and it's a go. If a free runner moves FROM a multiple floor building, it is assumed they did some daring feat like landing on something or using grooves or outcroppings. If you free run INTO a multiple floor building you enter the bottom floor of it. I dunno if that second part was something you were asking. -- Amazing 06:12, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Why not just make seven barricades on the first floor? --Dickie Fux 18:32, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
    • Re: Because that isn't supported by reality whereas towers have multiple floors in the real world. -- Amazing 23:11, 24 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- but make it such that you can use free running from Towers. --Nov 10:17, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep I like the idea, but how about if you could also get onto the roof? Like, you could see whatever is going on in a one block radius on the ground, also it could show a message like 'You are at *something* towers, *human* is on the roof'. elks 10:20, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep --It only makes sense that some buildings would have multiple floors. --Pesatyel 20:24, 30 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Works for me Mikm 18:53, 4 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I like it --Jorge 06:02, 5 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Great Idea, I like elks' variation too. --Atrayo 09:57, 5 Dec 2005 (GMT)

SMG/Machine Pistol

Three spam votes and it's gone. Given that every machine gun suggestion has been shot down, I'd humbly submit that it's most likely impossible to fit in with the existing game design. WIth apologies, Bentley Foss 19:54, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)


Rifle

Four spam votes, and it's gone. Along with all the other Rifle suggestions so far. Monstah 20:39, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)


Automatic Rifle

Four spam votes and it's gone. Given that every single rifle suggestion has been shot down, I'd humbly submit that it's most likely impossible to fit rifles in with the existing game design. WIth apologies, Bentley Foss 19:53, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)


Animal Training

Timestamp: 11:23, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombie Hunters(?)
Description: I'm sure I saw something like this on the old page (and I'm similarly sure this will be killed), but I like the idea and wanted to add my ideas. Animal Training (name is terrible, feel free to suggest an alternate) would give the player the ability to find dogs in a search, possibly with a seperate button so as not to clutter the current system of searchable items. The dog would take up two inventory spaces, representing abstractly the burden of caring for it (but really more for gameplay reasons). The dog has its own HP, in the 10-25 (which the owner can heal or damage, with no effect on xp) range, and an attack (10%, 4HP?... bites of a feather...). To observers, dogs are added after the names list on a space in the format 'A dog is here', or more among a group of humans, and can be targeted randomly like zombies. If a player has a dog, finding another dog in a search delivers a message about the two dogs barking and the new one running off: one dog per person! The main reason to have a dog is its protection. Any successful attack on a player with a dog results in the dog attacking (which, with 10% to hit, isn't amazingly powerful). Attacks on the dog itself will also provoke attack.

Additional skills branching off from Animal Training could include Sic 'Em, wherein the dog attacks whenever you do, and Scent Hound, which would provide some Scent Trail-esque skill. These are skills of the owner, a way in which s/he can train an animal anytime s/he meets one, and thus not an upgrade to the item itself.

Other things - Individual dogs could be targeted by recognizing their owner (There are 3 dogs here. You recognize Soandso's among them.) and you would be told their owner when attacked (Soandso's dog attacks you for 4 HP). Dogs can be discarded like any item, and are automatically discarded when the owner is killed. Damage against dogs by anyone but the owner gives xp as normal, and only the owner can heal a dog. It's possible that zombies can't see dogs until they're attacked by them, as, depending on the source, zombies care only about humans. Dogs cannot deliver headshots. Dogs exist only as pertaining to owners and there are no wandering dogs. Dogs lie completely out of the normal death system: when they die, they're dead and are immediately discarded. A possibility is that dogs could, by default, attack with you, and a seperate skill has them guard you, as an alternative to the way I've set it up now. I'm not sure where you'd find dogs. I'm thinking open spaces, but perhaps any place with corpses? Depending on whether dogs are searched for seperately from other items or not, you could have dogs show up in searches as 'flavour' (You see a thin, wild-looking dog. It growls and runs off), but only someone with Animal Training would 'pick it up'.

I await the Kills.

Votes

  • Spam - This was shot down repeatedly on the forums, for reasons such as complete lack of belevability (Where would you find a dog?) And the massive amount of coding required. --Stroth 19:51, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Re: I'd like to point out that these aren't the forums. And complete lack of believability? I would be surprised if there weren't dogs wandering around in a zombie apocalypse. That said, I agree with Bentley Foss that it's too complicated for its own good (and is by its very nature too complicated). An author kill vote is bad form, methinks --Donggrip 21:32, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I actually like the idea in theory, but in practice...I think it'd be too difficult to deal with. Therefore, I must vote kill. Bentley Foss 19:58, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - see Stroth, plus any skill that auto-attacks for you is very unbalancing. --RSquared 20:24, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Way too complicated. And if dogs die, they can be infected, right? This branches into too many things. --Fixen 20:38, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Killing zombies and humans is one thing. Killing a dog is absolutely unforgivable. --Lucero Capell 21:45, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I play this game to escape my pets. --Squashua 01:05, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Poorly thought out. Just because some other MMORPGs have pets doesn't mean we have to copy them. If World of Warcraft jumped of a bridge would you do the same? :) Besides, I think in an RPG sense all animals would have abandonded the city or got eaten very early on. --Andrew McM 12:51, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill K.I.S.S. Madalex 14:03, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill My character already has a dog, actually its a zombie dog, a zombie chiwawa bbrraaiinnss 15:13, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill One of the reasons that this game is fun is that its completely composed of only players. Every action that is performed in game is performed by the players and by the players only. Implementing your idea would be the first step to transforming this into another Runescape or whatever sh*t little kids play online. AllStarZ 23:41, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - The server shouldn't play for you. --Dickie Fux 18:38, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- What next? Carrier pigeons to carry messages? --Nov 10:18, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

XP for Searching

Timestamp: 17:05, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: improvement/rebalancing
Scope: Survivors
Description: A very simple suggestion: 1 XP every time you search and successfully find an object, regardless of what that object might be. This would help most any starting character, especially characters such as beginning Consumers. Compared to the amount of XP one gets for slaughtering zombies, this is comparable to the XP from tagging. It gives another non-combatant path, however, while remaining slower than the zombie-hunting method.

Votes

  • Kill It would also further increase the xp you get from firearms, which require searching for ammos.--Hexedian 18:32, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Agree. The XP rate is pretty good the way it is now. Bentley Foss 18:40, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Way too much xp. --McArrowni 18:42, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Way too powerful. Certainly much more powerful than tagging. An XP every time I get a syringe or a FAK? Or, presumably, a newspaper, GPS unit, or DNA extractor? Obscene. X1M43 19:23, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Far to much XP would be gained from this. --Stroth 19:49, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - No. --Squashua 01:04, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Let's see... at most 50 XP per day for searching for nothing. So in a week you get... 350 experience. Hell no. ALIENwolve 02:46, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Actually, it would be 10 XP per day for characters withough bargain hunting or outside a mall. But still, searching for ammo/FAK/syringes has an added immediate benefit? Madalex 14:06, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I FOUND A BOTTLE OF BEER!!! YAY I KNOW A LITTLE MORE ABOUT KILLING ZOMBIES! HUZZAH! Um, no. AllStarZ 23:47, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Simple sugestion, yes. as in, the person who posted this must be rather simple. Short bus simple--Spellbinder 00:29, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Isn't there a 100% chance of finding a book in a library? Even without that, it's too much. --Dickie Fux 18:41, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- The rewards of searching is getting an item for free. --Nov 10:20, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Kill -- Survivors already have enough ways to get XP. --Pesatyel 20:27, 30 Nov 2005 (GMT)


Grafitti Artist

Timestamp: 17:16, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Civilian Skill
Scope: Survivors; taggers specifically
Description: This skill would be taken after Tagging. It allows a longer length of grafitti messages. Nothing really game breaking, just allows a bit more freedom for those that like spraypainting.

Votes

  • Kill - Really, how long do you need a grafitti message to be? And are you willing to drop 100 xp on what is basically a flavor skill? A better suggestion might be one that allows spray paint cans to last longer, allowing for more tags. X1M43 19:26, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - This would allow for interesting Roleplaying. --Stroth 19:48, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - How many people are willingly going to use 100 xp to make a bigger sentence? That just seems like a waste of coding. --ThunderJoe 21:15, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - ^^^ --Monstah 22:33, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I would prefer to have a button to click and see a history of all the graffiti on a building. --Squashua 01:04, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Just getting in my one vote as the creator. I guess I just had the idea that the people that really liked tagging would take it, and those that wouldn't, wouldn't. I guess there must be some core problem with this I'm not seeing. --Snikers 03:29, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep tasty, mechanically useless -- P0p0 05:20, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Longer messages would indeed be nice. The skill could also grant the ability to gain XP for tagging any building/area, not just the current ones. --Zarquon 11:43, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- Little coding effort, nice addition of flavour. I'd buy it just to complete my skill set but for no other reasons, but that doesn't mean I can't picture someone else buying it for the effect. -pinkgothic 12:03, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Currently you've got a 50 character limit on a graffiti tag which is pretty low considering that you've 2x 256 characters to describe yourself. Madalex 14:13, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep I would, X1M43. It would make my life easier when trying to tag U.N.I.T. buildings - if I have a cool name for a U.N.I.T. facility that's over 50 characters, I can't use it. --John Taggart 14:33, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill: What, are we stencilling the tiny letters now or something? There's only so much wall to write your novella on, so if your message isn't concise- revise it. --Kehraus 23:19, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill John, does this meen you keep trying to spray paint your UNIT onto the side of a building?--Spellbinder 00:31, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill I think the length of messages depends solely on the size of the spray can, which is why the size of messages are limited ingame. AllStarZ 01:34, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep nice idea--Matthew-Stewart 07:10, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - What max message length are you thinking? Anything long enough to go past the end of the screen is too much. --Dickie Fux 18:45, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- The length of the message is tied in to the database, so I doubt it's possible to increase the length. --Nov 10:21, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

XP points

Timestamp: 18:29, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Whole revision
Scope: All
Description: I know its probably too much of a long shot, but i'll write it anyway... the idea is this, divide XP points. into 4 kinds

Military: Sur Military: Zed Misc: Science

Bascially, Military: Sur increases when you kill survivors, and the XP is used for skills related either to zombies, (zombie skills) or military skills Military Zed: increases when you kill zombies, used to gain ZOmbie hunter skills, or miltary skills Misc: Gained by misc, skills (reading, tagging) used for misc skills (civilian skills) Science: Gained by science actions (revive, DNA) used for scientist skills

Now, each skill would have a requirment, all military skills would need military XP point ect... (except the first skill of the tree) Or a mix of them

Advantages: No more killing and becoming a better scientist PKers never get to zombie hunters (if they never killed any zombies) You can have a mix (Example : Anatomy, increases damage; requires 100 Military XP and 50 Scientist) More realistic FLow can be arranged (currently scientists take a lot of time to skill gain).

Votes

  • Kill - This is too complicated. It also really wouldn't change anything. Persistent players would still have shotgun-toting scientists , it would just take longer and be a lot more annoying. Bentley Foss 18:42, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
    • RE: - I'm not trying to stop THAT.. i'm trying to stop a person killing zombies, and becoming a scientist instead --Adrian 19:08, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I agree with where you're coming from (I can learn to use a shotgun by applying first-aid kits?) but this suggestion would overly complicate the game. XP works fine if you think of it as an abstraction. X1M43 19:29, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill- See X1M43's comments --Stroth 19:47, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill- See Stroth's comments --ThunderJoe 21:17, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam Incromprehensible. --LouisB3 00:41, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - A div into two (Zombie and Survivor) I can understand; this I can't. --Squashua 01:03, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- P0p0 05:20, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- While I kind of like the general idea behind this - science-ey actions building science skills, military actions building military skills, etc. - I vote kill for 2 reasons. One, it would be extremely difficult to implement such a fundamental change in mid-game; you'd need to convert everyone's experience points to the new system on the fly. And two, it would make it effectively impossible for many of the starting classes to learn military skills, as one would be required to build experience with, at best, 10% accuracy. Everyl 06:06, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam K.I.S.S. Madalex 14:14, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill simple game, simple game, simple game. reguardless of weather or not this is a good skill or a bad skill. Just like any and all modifying weapon suggestions--Spellbinder 00:32, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • SPAM KEEP SIMPLE --Deathnut 04:53, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Too complicated. --Dickie Fux 18:46, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam -- Say what? 4 spam votes, time to remove this. --Nov 10:22, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Multiple Item Drop

Timestamp: 21:28, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: improvement
Scope: all
Description: Change CGI scripting to allow multiple items to be highlighted in drop menu. This would reduce server load and the annoying process of dropping the 10 GPS units acquired in a day of searching the Necrotech office. It would not affect balance, because dropping doesn't take AP anyway.

Votes

  • Keep - There was a similar suggestion, but this one is better, since you can keep a certain amount of the items. --McArrowni 21:52, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - As McArrowni said. Someone suggested something along these lines before, but this is better and simplier to implement, I think. Monstah 22:16, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - How I think this can work: Make a checkbox beside every item, and a button on the bottom called "Drop selected items." --Fixen 22:22, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Checkbox == good. I like this one. Bentley Foss 22:39, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Even I like to be lazy some times. --ThunderJoe 00:51, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Nice with the checkbox idea, Fixen! I would like to drop SPECIFIC items, not the "first item of that type in the list". Dropping items should give that item's unique id, not a generalized name for that item. --Squashua 01:02, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep yup ^ -- P0p0 05:21, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- Ah, the joys of simplicity. -pinkgothic 12:05, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Ah, somebody actually who follows K.I.S.S. :) Madalex 14:17, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I'm down with this. --John Taggart 14:29, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - The K.I.S.S. factor in this one is brilliant. -- Skarmory 15:13, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep, Still damn lazy.--Spellbinder 00:33, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- Guess this is OK. --Nov 10:22, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Sounds good. I'd like to see a "drop duplicates" button that would drop only the items that aren't useful when you have more than one (fire axes, flak jackets, GPS units, etc) this would NOT affect pistols/FAKs/generators/ammo/etc. Mikm 18:56, 4 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Yes, I have lost many a cell phone and shotgun trying to get ride of pesky newspapers, and kitchen knives. --Atrayo 10:02, 5 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Degrading Barricades

Timestamp: 21:39, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Overall change
Scope: Everbody
Description: As time passes in Malton, the piles of refuse which act as barricades in myriad buildings begin to crumble under their own weight or the inexorable pull of the weather.

Barricades in a building with no survivors inside degrade after time for weathering and lack of care. This is intended to address the fact that almost every building in the city is currently barricaded, usually as a griefing tactic. Maybe it's not a very big deal, but I don't like the idea of nearly all buildings being relatively safe, it's not very zombie-esque.

Votes

  • Kill - If you think that nearly ever building is relatively safe, you must be sticking around in the wrong places. --Lucero Capell 21:47, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Re: I guess the city of Malton is the wrong place. The only time I've seen widespread lack of barricades is after a major zombie attack. Other than that, most suburbs are locked up. --Donggrip 22:25, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I must vote kill on this one. Each and every building would now require a constant status watcher that checked to see if the building was unoccupied, how long it had been unoccupied, and decrement the barricade strength when a certain level was reached. There are 10,000 blocks in Malton, and maybe, what, 7,500 or so buildings? That's a lot of hassle to deal with server-side. Therefore, I must vote kill. Bentley Foss 21:48, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I absolutely agree with the spirit of this idea, but I have a few modifications. Don't check for survivors inside. RE: Coding: Mark each barricade with a timestamp of 'last added to' and degrade it when someone next sees it. Not nearly as bad as degrading EVERYTHING at once on a regular schedule. If you're feeling nasty, degrade it only when someone attacks it ("The barricade, though it looked strong, collapses easily before your blows.") would have the additional benefit of making survivors more wary of barricades they didn't set up themselves... ^_^ --RSquared 21:56, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Re: That's a better idea, and better for the server. --Donggrip 22:24, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Re: Added to the talk page, will submit my version when this one dies --RSquared 22:25, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - McArrowni 22:02, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Poor, poor server. Monstah 22:17, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Relatively safe? Absolutely nowhere is a very safe place in Malton as every safe huse I've been in has always gotten broken into at least once, and I sometimes don't make it out alive! I always have to keep tabs on my character after I use up my day's AP to be sure that I can get out of there if the safe house is broken into, and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone (especially since offline times are where you die the most). Bently Foss pointed out the problem with having to constantly keep track of how a suburbs barricades were doing, so I won't bother going into it. Seriously, it only takes a zombie or two to break down a barricade and leave it open for other zombies, why make them so much more easier to destroy? Also, how long do you intend to have them degrade? Unles its over a span of many years, things aren't going to degrade that fast, especially since RP-wise survivors would take the time to make sure something that could save their life would be sturdy enough to not degrade very easily, even if they leave it becuase 1. even temporary shelters need good defences and 2. other survivors can make good use of them. --Volke 23:39, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Abandoned buildings really shouldn't be the same sort of impregnable fortresses that heavily occupied buildings are. --LouisB3 00:44, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Please, think of the server man! --ThunderJoe 00:53, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - No helpful comments this time. --Squashua 01:00, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - The server load will be fine, the same mechanism can be used that checks if a zombie has been tagged or not, and resets it accordingly. The buildings(zombies) will drop a level every 24 hours(Be taggable every 24) unless the have someone with construction in them (have not been tagged.) --E-man 03:14, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT) Apologies, but see the talk page for a reply to this. It's not that simple. Bentley Foss 01:22, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- P0p0 05:22, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- What Monstah said. -pinkgothic 12:06, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Next thing is that ammo will degrade due to lack of proper care if no humans are in building etc. etc. Madalex 14:19, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Not worth it. --Dickie Fux 18:49, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- Why is this required? And won't a degrading barricade actually increase the barricades' effectiveness? --Nov 10:23, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Report to Authority

Timestamp: 22:47, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Game mechanic
Scope: PDs and other buildings
Description: This has been suggested before by someone, but before the suggestion page changed. And now there's already electricity involved in the game, so it's really more suggesteable.

"Public" buildings, such as Malls, Museums, Libraries, Schools, Hospitals, Fire Departments and such should have a "Report Authority" button, similar to speak. When you use it, your message is displayed in all the PDs in the same block. It comes out as "A voice from the radio said:", instead of the player name.

To avoid spamming, it might use 2AP, but that's not nocessary. Also, the reporting building needs to have a generator running, and the PDs need a generator to get the message, too.

Or maybe all the buildings can report, but there must be a generator running in the building for the "Report" button to appear.

Votes

  • Keep - I like the idea. It gives a more realistic report, but most buildings just have an alarm that goes to the PD. It gives a good way, but I think it should be more than just 2AP, if you want to avoid spamming. Thats just me. --ThunderJoe 00:55, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Not hurting anything. --Squashua 01:01, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - It's ok, will probably be used as a warning mechanism about attacks (That, and spam about how big someones balls are.), so limit it to Buildings that would realisticaly have emergency radios in them Hospitals, PDs, Firestations, And ?Malls(think Electronic stores.) --E-man 03:14, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I would like to keep this. it gives people a better reason to secure their surroundings. --YuriRuler90 01:17, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep I'm tempted to kill this on the basis of its being not all that helpful, seeing as everyone already ignores flares, but I kind of like it. I like that it's dependent on there being power both places, and therefore not a sure thing. Still, it might be good to roll this into a mobile phone / radio scheme, though, rather than as its own thing. -- Ethan Frome 02:47, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
    • RE: Hey I answer flares all the time, but only if a reasonable amout of time passed between firing flare and seeing flare and I have enought AP to get there. --Atrayo 10:14, 5 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I like this idea. It adds some flavor to the game, even if the functionality is a bit limited. Your Contact List could even come into play on this, with the message going "You recognize Soandso's voice on the radio. It says __________."
  • Keep - Though I think military buildings should be able to hear the transmissions too, along with places like firestations, and hospitals. Also, buildings that would have valuables in them, but are not publicly owned (such as malls and mansions) might have a similar, but more generic "alarm button" that simply displays "the burgler alarm at [location] has been activated" at all nearby police stations. --Zeek 04:32, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)

--Arcibi 03:12, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)

  • Keep -- P0p0 05:23, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Like the loudspeakers in malls idea, this is great. Maybe even have a portable version that lets you recieve these messages, but maybe not send, if only for spam reasons. --Zarquon 11:46, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- Loudspeakers need power, don't they? I was under the impression power was shot. -- Skarmory 13:47, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
    • We have portable generators now, Skarmory. --John Taggart 15:23, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
      • Portagens won't power a transmission net... though now that I think about it, it working only in buildings with power isn't all that bad. But as I said, portagens won't power a PA system... - Skarmory 18:24, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
        • But nine volt batteries power walkie talkies, so what's the deal? -Monstah 19:54, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep/Change - Libraries wouldnt have a direct PA to PD's would they? Mabye a 'Police Radio' item that could be found in the PD's and that can transmit back? -Valente 15:34, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - The list of buildings needs reworked, though. PDs, firestations, hospitals, forts, maybe banks. --Dickie Fux 18:53, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- Sorry, I don't understand... what would this do? Do remember that PDs etc. could be zombie infested anyways... --Nov 10:25, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)
    • Re: - That would be the main reason to use the PA, If building is zombie infested then you want to warn other survivors and call for help at the same time before the generator gets destroyed and you loose electricity. --Atrayo 10:14, 5 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I like this Idea, Great flavor, but it should not be anonymous, to discourage spies using it to set up an ambush. --Atrayo 10:14, 5 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Personal tools
advertisements