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

29th December, 2005

VOTING ENDS: 12th-Jan-2006

Number of large hordes on stat page

Timestamp: 05:19, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Stat page Addition
Scope: Concentrations of zombies
Description: This would essentially count how many blocks have thirty or more zombies and report that number on the stat page. This wouldn't give away any location but would be interesting to see how the zombies distribute themselves, (solo and small groups vs large hordes) The number of zombies per block is flexible. In Kevan's Zombie Infection Simulator we can see how the zombie clump together, this is similar except it would would just be a number, not a strategic tool like the zombie tracker.


  • Kill - Serves no real purpose, I agree that it would be interesting but this is just uneeded. PS Also fixed up a minor formatting issues - Jedaz 05:24, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - We don't need to drain the server for useless statistics. --Xiombarg 06:43, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Except this would be useful as strategic information, on an operations level. This kind of information is exactly what is used for planning in grand strategy (look it up, or ask a Napoleonics expert).Rhialto 07:07, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep The server already has the exsisting tables in the database for this. If this was computed once a day, or once a week, it wouldn't tax the server and it'd be interesting to know what an average zombie group is - or more interestingly - what the average survivor group. Like the idea. --Nessola 10:04, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT).
  • Keep - I would prefer if it also included how meny buildings were berricaded above VS and how meny with survivers in one block would seem fair. - --Fullemtaled 10:14, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep --Kcold 12:51, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -zombie groups are important. not zombie stacks.--Vista 15:32, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Because I think it would be interesting. The ideas in Fullemtaled's vote are kewl too. It wouldn't drain server hardly anything. --Jack-Swithun 19:07, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Tally - 4 Keeps 5 Kills -- 16:24, 15 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Improved Bodybuilding

Timestamp: 05:39, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Survivors and zombies
Description: Subskill under Bodybuilding, gives flat +1 damage bonus to the fist attack, and perhaps a +15% chance to hit. Simple enough.

This skill would be useful if survivor items started breaking (i.e. your fire axe breaks and you're forced to punch it out), but I freely admit that right now it's about as useful as Knife Proficiency at the moment, so this is more flavor than anything.

EDIT: Forgot to add that this flat +1 damage bonus would carry over to zombies the same way bodybuilding carries over a +10 health bonus - a flat +1 damage to all zombie attacks. I think. Or maybe only claws, since I havent worked out my jaws lately.

This was inspired from the 'Head Crush' scene from Story of Ricky, where this huge, buff guy walks up to some dude, picks him up, and smashes his head apart (flying gore here) between his hands. I was going to propose a head crusher skill but after a while it seemed a bit silly.


  • Keep --Jack-Swithun 05:41, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I don't see why not. If a player was body-building, then yes, their strength, not just stamina, should increase. --Zacharias Cross 05:51, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - This would be useless to survivors and too over powered for Zombies. Thats why I'm killing - Jedaz 05:54, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Author vote. Point of clarification if there was a +15% attack bonus from this, that improved accuracy would *not* carry over, because as a zombie you're less coordinated. But I see no reason why a buffed out zombie can't do more damage than a skinny one. FireballX301 05:56, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Wow, way overpowered and totally un-needed. --Xiombarg 06:42, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill — Regardless of what actual bodybuilding does, this is not what was meant by the Bodybuilding skill. Too many things would be made obsolete. — Bartle 06:52, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - This would only really benefit the zombies (and how!) as written, and I'd rather have separate '+10 HP' skills for zombie and survivor anyway, as the forces animating the two aren't really comparable. This just forces zombies to get yet another survivor skill to be a viable zombie, which is exactly the wrong direction to move the game in. Rhialto 07:02, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -this would raise zombie HP/AP to 2HP/AP for claws and 1.5HP/AP for Bite without doing anything usefull for survivors. very very unbalancing, and a pure zombie skill in the human tree. also a bad idea.--Vista 15:30, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - So, why are we giving players even more reasons to be Death Cultists? --VoidDragon 16:15, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - this could be good if only it didnt carry over to the zombie. --hagnat 18:46, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Weapons don't break, and never will, so this is not important.--Broton 00:52, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Neither side needs a damage boost. Bentley Foss 20:06, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - The original was fine. The boost for zeds is just stupid--they don't even come close to needing extra damage. They already do the highest melee damage in the game.--'STER-Talk-Mod 20:12, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I like it. The 15% should not carry over. Perhaps not even the extra damage. Fighting without weapons should be an option.--Ev933n 20:29, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Overpowered. --LtMile 16:34, 2 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Tally - 4 Keeps 11 Kills -- 16:26, 15 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Bone Breaker

Timestamp: 07:57, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombie Hunters
Description: Level 10 zombie hunter skill. A zombie killed with either a pipe or a bat at the hands of a suvivor with this skill would stand up with 50hp even if they had Bodybuilding. Arguably not unbalancing since it merely prevents zombies from benefiting from a human skill (and they would still be able to use Digestion to get to 60hp). It would not be a free giveaway to humans either as they would have to get a zombie at 2hp or less (being careful not to kill with the higher damage of their main weapons) and then strike a blow at 25% maximum accuracy, no doubt causing the suvivor to spend more AP on the kill than they otherwise would have. In addition suvivors would have to carry one extra weapon meaning they could carry one fewer expendable like ammo/faks. Still, it would be worth it for suvivors that have full inventories and no need to search, don't have other targets, aren't planning to log back in for a day, and might as well finish off their AP this way. It's always bothered me that only one melee weapon has a purpose. This is a way of making blunt weapons worth carrying for some without unbalancing the game.


  • Kill — That seems kind of useless, in that it affects such a small segment of the zombie population. Why would anyone buy it? Maybe if attacking with a pipe caused Lurching Gait zombies to consume 2 AP a move . . . Bartle 08:32, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I know "realism" is arbitrary in this game, but wouldn't a buff Zombie be less likely to get its bones broken? Unless they have osteoporosis, I guess. Hunters already have a slight edge on Zombies, I don't see a need for more at the moment. I get your concerns about melee weapons, but this doesn't gel for me, sorry.--Carnival H 08:35, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I can see what you were trying to do with this, but this just makes Zombies less fun to play. Being a newly revived survivor isn't as fun as being a full health one, this just turns the tables. - Jedaz 10:16, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Why would a pipe or a bat do that and not a shotgun? --Shadowstar 11:15, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -it isn't unbalancing and it is well thought true, Kudos. But my problem is with it that it has headshot mechanics. doesn't do anything noticible for the person having it, but griefs his victim a bit. To have two of such skills aimed at zombies is a bit much to my taste.--Vista 15:25, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Agree with Vista. It's just being nasty. If there was a balancing level 10 zombie skill suggestion I'm sure you wouldn't like that happening to your hunter. --WibbleBRAINS 18:26, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Virtually useless, and an implementation would be clumsy since the server would have to carry a tag per player just for this. Sorry - too much work for too little use. --Signal9 18:38, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - This is probably the last thing we need: another skill like headshot to cause so much trouble. --Horje 18:55, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Yep, well-balanced, but nothing but grief. --Dickie Fux 19:31, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I actually agree with Vista. --Unlife 01:49, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Don't screw with other people's skills. You didn't read any of the guidelines, did you? Bentley Foss 20:08, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Tally - 0 Keeps 11 Kills -- 16:27, 15 Jan 2006 (GMT)

NecroBeast-Unpredictable Metamorphisis

Timestamp: 16:44, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Random, Helpful to Zombies, Unpredictable
Scope: Zombies
Description: Similiar to the Necrotherium suggestion with some modifications.

1 NecroBeast per four suburbs. NecroBeasts can be in the same neighborhood and attack each other

Prerequisite: No Necrobeast present in closest four suburbs, player must have been active within last few days (Two NecroBeasts cannot be in the same suburb at the same time because they are territorial, this will prevent a mob of NecroBeasts bounding about and creating too much of a commotion).

Events that cause the change (one of the following)

  1. Human player is bitten by a zombie inside a necrotech building, cemetery AND dies.
  2. A zombie is killed in a square with 20 or more dead bodies.
  3. Revivification syringe caused mutation on a human or a zombie.

Remember that is it random and unpredictable. Along with the prerequisites, You could possibly play for years and never create a NecroBeast or become one yourself.

What the NecroBeast gets:

  1. 150HP since no one wants to heal a NecroBeast regens 1HP every half hour.
  2. Decreased Vision/Improved Smell (no it doesn't smell all fresh and clean like bounty dryer sheets) Can't identify player names but distinguishes as so: Bad Food, Good Food, Yummy Food. Zombies are Bad Food but aren't harmful to the NecroBeast. Good Food are normal human players. Yummy Food are humans with bodybuilding or free running (if both then Really Yummy Food) because the free running and bodybuilding denote health, the meat of the human would be yummier. Killing Yummy or Really Yummy food gains 5-10 HP. The NecroBeast's screen also shows "There is a lot of Food/Good Food/Yummy Food/Really Yummy Food nearby" when there is a large group (50+) within 2 squares, can be inside or outside. Once in a square with food it does not distinguish between zombie and human, it just sees food
  3. Barricade Obliteration WAIT READ THIS The NecroBeast can only enter certain buildings because of it's size and the door size (example malls, churches, stadiums and fire stations) The NecroBeast can smash cleanly through a barricade in one AP but with a loss of 100HP 75HP since it'd be all gored up and stabbed with rebar, glass, metal and other objects. It's a pretty dumb animal so it makes sense. This would provide balance so when the NecroBeast attacks a building,once inside it is a normal HP opponent so the survivors inside CAN take it on. EDIT Also so it can't barge through a building everyday and has to take recuperation time
  4. Large Paws/Claws. The NecroBeasts 'hands' are about half the size of a human. This increases his chance of inflicting damage to 25 - 30% Damage dealt is the same percentage. Don't fret yet this gets a balance too
  5. A Place to Hide Since the NecroBeast can't barricade and can't mob up with other NecroBeasts it does need a place to hide. Yes it can enter the fore mentioned buildings but these are generally useful buildings to survivors so they will come back and attack him. The NecroBeast is only safe on high buildings like those that have 'Towers' in the name or on mobile masts. Once up there to safety the NecroBeast can only be shot at with projectile weapons such as a pistol, flare, or shotgun. This will allow the NecroBeast player to actually live long enough to become tactical and regain that 1HP per half hour.
  6. Death Bonus the NecroBeast becomes a Zombie when killed EDIT and whenever it smells a NecroBeast after that it gets an Adrenaline Rush for +25HP (because they're territorial)and keeps the scent skills as a bonus, when revived the human player can smell zombies and other NecroBeasts outside without exiting a building (can't see them but gets that message "You smell something that reminds you of Food outside", "You smell something Bad outside")
  7. the NecroBeast can also kill itself by jumping from the top of the towers or mobile masts, this would cause it -140HP damage, with a possible 10Hp left it can suicide into a barricade (not destroy it but bring it down a level or two)

Please take all of the equation into account before judging. I really believe that with a max 20 NecroBeasts running around with those abilities/disabilities would balance Zombie power and add fear back into the humans. (By the way I play as a human) Thank you. --Zex Suik 16:45, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)


  • Keep - This will add to the fun and FEAR. --Zex Suik 18:16, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Way too elaborate. I couldn't even read the entire thing because I got bored halfway through it. This is a simple game. Small turns, Ellie. -- Poppins 17:01, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • RE - I redid the layout so it's easier to read. Hopefully this will help. --Zex Suik 18:16, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Kill- Some difference's from the previous necro Suggestion's but I think you are getting closer to an accepted Necro suggestion, but not this draft Sorry for not explaining why, but the edit fixed it --Lord Evans 17:52, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • RE - Can you Elaborate on how this could get closer? --Zex Suik 18:16, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I prefer the last Horror [[1]] suggestion, voting is still open on that. --WibbleBRAINS 18:11, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • RE I've read that and it seems okay at first but then it is too powerful and still doesn't address the issue of over balance in favor of humans, can't hide/protect itself when offline, requires previous skill sets, doesn't add random FEAR!!!
  • Comment: NEW SUGGESTIONS GO AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE! (I put it where it should be). No Keep/Kill vote because I like it, but it's an implementation nightmare. And you put it in the wrong place. --Signal9 18:45, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • RE I changed the 1 per 4 suburbs requirement which should severely lighten the implementation nightmare. Please revisit your vote.--Zex Suik 20:14, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
      • Re: I appreciate the attempt, but any "extra creature" suggestion is hard to implement. There is still another tag that you have to add to all players because of (6), and there are a lot of other Beast-specific details that I'm not sure are worth Kevan's time. And now that I'm thinking about it, a horde cooperating with a Beast might be a little too much. Sorry, no vote. --Signal9 20:41, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - ow, come one Signal9. This clearly deserves a Kill. --hagnat 18:48, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • RE Can you clarify why this deserves a kill? --Zex Suik 19:57, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
      • Re - perhaps the whole "Two NecroBeasts cannot be in the same suburb at the same" thing ? This is the worst mutation suggestion i ever seen ! --hagnat 22:42, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Number 6 -- the survivor smells zombies skill -- is an absolute deal-breaker for me. I also don't see why there shouldn't be more than one in a suburb; let them fight! And, losing 2/3 of its HP by breaking into a barricaded building is too much; any two survivors can deal 50 damage easily. --Dickie Fux 19:01, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • RE I changed the 1 per 4 Suburbs, Changed HP on Barricade Obliteration to -75, added a reason, and changed the Death Bonus to just smelling a NecroBeast and getting an adrenaline rush. Please vote again. --Zex Suik 20:14, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -you've got humans, you got zombies. that's all I need--Vista 19:26, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - It was stupid the first time. It was stupid the second time. What makes you think that it won't be stupid now? CthulhuFhtagn 21:10, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • RE Can you please validate why you think it's stupid? --Zex Suik 21:48, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • KILL - When I think Zombies... I think Dawn, day and Night of, not Resident Evil. I dont want to fight monsters. Unbelievably large hoardes yes, Monsters no! DarthMortis Dec. 29th 5:30 pm EST
  • Kill - What darth said. Rhialto 22:55, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill This is way too overpowered and would cause the zombies to very easily take over all the city in a matter of days.--Broton 00:58, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill i'm very quickly begining to HATE resident evil -- P0p0 08:30, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Oooh, it's an idea that's overpowered, un-themely, difficult to implement, ... Is there anything here that doesn't scream kill? -- Torfin 18:28, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - The Necrotherium and the Horror were better than this by a mile. --Penance 19:22, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - What Penance said. Bentley Foss 20:09, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Is this a joke? I don't get it. If you want something this ridiculous implemented, go code your own game. --Jack Destruct 00:12, 2 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Kill - How about we also add superheroes. Also, space marines for the 40K crowd. And World of Warcraft stuff because that's so coolio. And while we're at it... --Elderdan 01:27, 2 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Kill - Uber class. The implementing of the territorialness would be difficult. --Torin Mai 01:31, 5 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Tally - 2 Keeps 16 Kills -- 16:29, 15 Jan 2006 (GMT)

People-Reinforced Barricades

Timestamp: 18:15, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Barricade mechanics
Scope: Barricades
Description: Here's a controversial one. As a Zombie, I'm tired of seeing every building I pass as "heavily barricaded." I know most of them are empty! You're just trying to keep me from your sweet, sweet innards. Such poor sportsmanship! C'monnn, let me eat you...

I propose a tweak to barricades that makes the chance of knocking off an item variably dependent on a human presence. For the purpose of the idea we'll assume the current chance is 20% [[2]]. Barricades would have three levels of strength:

More than 20 Inhabitants - Barricades are reinforced by the people pushing at them from the other side. This could be an actual action ("Hold Barricades") or it could just be presumed/automatic. With the changes, barricades will have a 15% chance of having pieces knocked off.

20 Inhabitants or Less - Barricades are reinforced as above, but less so. There would be no change from the current knock-off hit percentage (20%).

No Inhabitants - Barricades will be weaker than they are now and much easier to demolish. 40% chance of knocking pieces off.

Main benefits for Zombies: Waste less time pounding on barricaded buildings for no reward; more areas to explore.

Main benefits for Survivors: Strengthen their own barricades by virtue of being around; low level survivors have better odds of finding refuge if fewer empty buildings are barricaded needlessly.

Main deficit: Players might create phantom characters whose sole purpose is to sleep in barricaded buildings. Something like a slow zerg. In time they would realize that maintaining 20+ fake players for this purpose is not only tiresome, but counter-productive as it would merely provide XP for Zombies who finally do breach that "unwatched" building.

Edit: Sorry to be vague. I've updated the above info to reflect that changes would be made to barricade hit percentages, since as far as I know barricades have no hit points. However, being as I'm an English major and not a statistician, I leave the final numbers up to the discretion of Kevan and the community. ;)

What say you?


  • Kill Keep - We don't need to provide more power for survivors right now. I think the main purpose of the suggestions page has turned to making zombies more interesting. Wait, I misread it, yeah, I like this idea. --Horje 18:51, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - And Wall Grab will probably be part of this I guess. Might increase the amount of zombies attacking actual surivor buildings. --ALIENwolve 19:21, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keepage - I like it, but please explain me more. Stronger and weaker in what way? (De)Increased chance of hitting sounds ideal to me, but what's your idea? --Monstah 19:22, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - (someone deleted my keep vote???) - When you say "stronger" or "weaker" I'm assuming you mean that you are less or more likely to cause a part of it to collapse, respectively (please elaborate). Makes sense in the context. And you pointed out that survivor zerging would be useless. --Signal9 18:55, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • kill Only because survivors are nearly everywhere I go. One second a crafty tactician barricades an empty building, the next 10 people not in on the plan fill it up. --bbrraaiinnss19:25, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - One reasonable solution to the problem of every building in Malton being barricaded for no good reason. --Dickie Fux 19:30, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -Numbers, Numbers, Numbers. It needs numbers! how much stonger/weaker. what is the AP cost of demolishing going to differ. etc, etc, etc. Do the math! Now it is just a declaration of intend, lets make them "slightly" stronger and "much" weaker. what does that mean? nowadays it looks like the vaguer the suggestion the more change it has to pass. Numbers! people! specify!--Vista 19:35, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT) Edit, I'd like more specific numbers attached to this, what is the cost of demolishing when stronger and when it is weaker, etc. right now I just find it too vague.--Vista 21:41, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)edit2 thank you.--Vista 22:08, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Very nice. 10 people seems a little low for a full-power barricade holdin, especially since most of them would be sleeping. --Hexedian 19:43, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - This is a good idea. Plus would have the benifit of helping new survivers, since there would probably be less extremely barracaded buildings! DarthMortis 5:30 pm EST
  • Keep - I love it! now when i have a sleeper in a crowded PD when i go on holiday, theres less chance of finding him dead 4 days later!!! woot! --Trayton 22:33, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - The title was stupid but the idea should help gameplay - and I play a survivor. Yikes! --Nessola 22:38, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT).
  • Keep --Lord Evans 22:43, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - but add a few more survivors. i rarely see important buildings (PD, Hospitals) with less than 20. --hagnat 22:50, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Although annoying, barracading empty buildings and evacuating obvious targets are tactically valid for survivors. I would rather see barracades slowly degrade. As for holding the barracades, that is a "something for nothing" attribute that would just reward zerging. --Unlife 00:06, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Seems balanced. --Tom mot 00:51, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Makes decoy bildings useless and causes zeds to find and easily erradicate all humans.--Broton 01:00, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - doesn't nerf decoy buildings, just makes them weaker, and actually increases the barricade power of buildings with lots of humans... sounds okay to me. I'm surprised there aren't a bunch of zombie kill votes though... The numbers might have to be adjusted a bit, but... sounds good... --Shadowstar 01:51, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Seriously limits decoy barricades and just makes it harder for zombies to breach resource buildings (especially malls). I don't think this is a very good idea. - KingRaptor 01:58, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I don't think this detracts from decoy barricaded buildings. How easy do you think it would be to beat against a building for a while to figure out if you have 40% odds or 20% odds of breaking in? Perhaps the percentages need to be revised so that sentence holds more weight, but the concept behind it is solid. Remember, more lesser-barricaded buildings means more places lone low-level players can rest, which is good for humans. - intx13 22:45, 29 Dec 2005 (EST)
  • Kill - Why do you want to make it easier for zombies to get into empty buildings, and harder to get into buildings with survivors? I think this would hurt zombies more than it would help them. --Asrathe 04:04, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Yay womething we don't have to use because it is on the survivers side - --Fullemtaled 07:41, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - It's in-genre (people trying to hold the barricades so the zombies won't enter), and pretty well balanced IMO. --Omega2 13:05, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Risky, but I like it. - Skarmory 15:53, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Barricades are already overpowered, and you want to make them even MORE so? --Grim s 17:51, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - My survivor and my zombie characters do not like this idea. - phungus420 1818, 30DEC05 (GMT)
  • Kill - Any building with over 100 people are now invincible fortresses? ---Siddhant 18:23, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - What, no increased search rates when there are whole bunch of people looking, too? The zombie side of the barricade is difficult enough as it is, thanks. --Beauxdeigh 18:49, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I can see where you're coming from, but this one really hasn't been thought through. How about if the barricades come down easier on empty buildings because there's no one on the other side building them back up? This has the advantage of being the current state of affairs, thus requiring no changes be made. Potatojunkie 19:51, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - When will you people get it through your heads? One zombie can easily knock down Extremely Heavily barricades with just a bit of luck. And I've already noticed that, in sparsely-populated areas, my zombie seems to have a LOT of luck with this. I wouldn't be surprised if a similar change has been made already. Quit asking for it. Bentley Foss 20:11, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Flavourwise it makes sense (if there's nobody manning a barricade, surely it ceases to be a barricade?), and it would be great gamewise. Would make sieges harder, but then again, if Bentley Foss is correct, then it'll balance it out. --Matson Jade 21:17, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I see what you were thinking, but this is so wrong I don't even have time to explain all the reasons why. Not that I need to, though, since I think about half the RRF is about to votekill it. --Brickman 01:11, 31 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Proud memeber of the RRF. --Thelabrat 11:45, 31 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Destroy - Making barricades stronger is just... wrong.--Denzel Washington 14:11, 31 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill At first I thought this idea was going to let me reinforce the barricades, using people as screaming hellish brick and mortar. But this would just make resource buildings the only acceptable hiding place. --Zaruthustra 16:15, 31 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Barricades do need a nerf. This is not a nerf. --Marluxia 21:38, 31 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Barricades need nerfing; this is a survivor barricade buff. It totally overpowers survivors in situations where there are LOTS of survivors.--Jorm 00:50, 1 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Kill I can see this go wrong in so many ways. It will give to much power to survivors clogging malls, PD's and hospitals. It will be a nice way to pick off the newbies, but survivors will learn soon enough and flood recource buildings. --Paddy Fitzgerald 22:42, 1 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Kill - It is an interesting idea, and much more well-thought-out than many that appear on the wiki. I do appreciate the attempts at balance by also making barricades weaker in certain situations. However, barricades do not need to be made stronger, in any situation. Having 100 people in a room already makes the barricades stronger, by having more people around who can barricade. -Murgatroid 23:12, 1 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Kill - What a stupid idea. Nerf the 'cades. --Jack Destruct 23:54, 1 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Kill - There are many many good ways that barricades could be fine-tuned. This isn't one of them. --Elderdan 01:25, 2 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Kill - Barricades do not need to be made stronger, regardless of whatever "counter-balancing" reason you have when doing so . ----Mookiemookie 18:59, 2 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Kill - Barricades don't need buffing in this fashion. Petrosjko 21:32, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Kill - It's all been said. Kashara 08:54, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Kill - It's all been said. Cavey 14:32, 6 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Tally - 19 Keeps 23 Kills -- 16:32, 15 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Bile attack

Timestamp: 20:12, 28 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Attack
Scope: Zombies
Description: The search percentage is is changed to 18.5% and finds 3 items, this in order to keep the relative HP/AP at 1.0HP/AP


With his permission; I've based this on steveha's inspired Rot Mold, placing it under Bite and a bit later in the zombie development and hopefully also solving the problems some had with the search flavor.

A new form of a bite attack which is fueled by Bile acquired in cemeteries.


Wandering round the cemeteries of Malton a zombie finds in one of the mausolea, that what he believes is a cadre of perfectly succulent sleeping survivors. When feasting upon the embalmed bodies he soon discovers that not only are they not delicious warm fresh Harmanz, but that the embalming fluids, that kept the cadavers looking fresh, reacts strangely within his stomach. And form a deadly corrosive Bile...

Moaning from discomfort he wanders for days. Until he finds a lone Harman. Biting and clawing the struggling survivor to a halt, he coughs up some of the bile during a bite attack. The zombie doesn't really register that the Harman dies far quicker then usual... All that the zombie knows is that he feels better and before him is a meal of warm flesh...

Game mechanics

the Item Bile

Ransacking graves would have a 18.5% chance of finding a suitable embalmed cadaver to fool the zombie into thinking it is a survivor to acquire Bile. 3 Bile 'items' would be placed in the inventory in order to keep track how many attacks you can make for gaming purposes. this would also limit the times you can stockpile this attack. when a Bile bite attack is made, one bile 'item' is consumed.

In the cemetery a button would appear 'hunt Humans' if unsuccessful, 'you found no humans'
if successful you'd read something along the line of 'you found a cadaver, it tasted sickening... you gain some bile'

Edit Forgot to put this in the draft, the Bile disappears with a revive. (gets vomited up for flavor)

the bile bite skill

The bile attack is usable after you take the skill located directly under Digestion. You then can select the attack in the dropdown menu.

It would do 7 damage (6 with flack jacket) at the same percentage to hit as a normal bite attack.. all other bite effects would not stack. for game purposes it is another sort of attack. for flavor it is because the corrosive Bile would counteract them.

Locating it under digestion would give it a total of 4 skill needed to reach it full potential. Most of them are of dual nature. It would keep the skill tree relatively flat keeping it in style with the versatility that offers zombies in leveling up without placing this out of bounds for mid level zombies. (It would be out of reach for low level zombies for the same reason that humans don't start maxed out in shotgun or pistol skills)

Relative Damage

With an occurrence rate of 18.5% of acquiring 3 Bile at cemeteries, the relative damage compared with the other forms of attacks is:

1.5HP/AP Claws
1.2HP/AP Bite
1.0HP/AP Bile Bite
0.85HP/AP Bile Bite (combined with flak jacket)

The fact that although Bile bite is the biggest attack purely on damage is countered by the relative ineffective HP/AP . A zombie would be better of using Bite and Claws standard and the Bile bite when in need of a bigger punch when low on AP, as a finishing attack, or in a first shock attack. In prolonged conflict such as sieges the relatively wasteful HP/AP proportion comes into play and the zombies are better of with claws and normal bite as in those conflict you need to use your AP as effective as possible.

Personal thoughts.

I've tried to take great care in making this skill and attack a viable strategic alternative that adds the dept of AP conservation that survivors have but zombies still lack, adding what I hope is a fun addition to the zombie arsenal. Without making it overpowered threat to survivors. AP conservation was purely a survivor talent, and to show that zombies just aren't as good in it (because it is based on instinct and luck, role playing wise) it lowers their HP/AP damage, unlike with survivors were it raises that statistic. It does add a whole new area to them, balancing AP's for use now or for uses later in the game. Adding dept I hope, without losing distinction between the survivors and the zombies.

Being a dyslectic dutch person my talent for describing the flavor and the text of this suggestion may not be up to scratch, please look trough all that, or in true wiki sense try to help me with it.


  • Keep- author vote--Vista 20:57, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - The idea of zombies scrounging for "ammo" in cemetaries is almost amusing enough to make me vote for this by itself, but the actual idea isn't bad. -CWD 21:07, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I normally don't like anything that deals with zombies searching, but you actually managed to come up with a logical method of implementation. CthulhuFhtagn 21:14, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Whee, I get to say "eww!" again. --ALIENwolve 21:33, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Just one problem: Bile is produced in the galbladder, not the stomache. Get it right, jeez! Love the idea, though. --TheTeeHeeMonster 21:39, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I don't see why not. --Signal9 21:49, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Finally - the zombies will all have to go somewhere to search for something, making them easier to massacre.. err.. I mean, good suggestion! --Nessola 22:43, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT).
  • Keep --Lord Evans 22:47, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - my survivor hates you --hagnat 22:55, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I was tempted to vote kill at first glance but your thorough explanation and full understanding of gane mechanics convinced me this would be a decent addition. Perhaps though rather than as a result of embalming fluid this could simply be the result of zombies feasting on zombified flesh and they could "search" for bile amongst corpses with a greater chance of success the more corpses there are (without actually affecting the people on the ground of course". It would actually give suvivors a penalty for killing and headshoting the zombies standing outside during a siege and assist zombies that are being repeatedly and overwhelmingly slaughtered. Of course the ease of finding bile that would should impose a inventory restriction so zombies could only carry a few biles, maybe 3 at a time maximum. --Jon Pyre 23:14, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Makes zombies a little more harman-like, but I still like it. --Hexedian 23:30, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I like not having to search for things when I play a zombie. Make it so that finding Bile happens as a result of kills, maybe as a level 10+ skill to balance Headshot. Going to a certain location to find a certain item to stockpile damage capability seems like more logistical work than a zombie should be able to do. PS, you have a better grasp of the english language than most of the native speakers I've seen on the internet. --Dickie Fux 23:36, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re Thanks for the compliment!--Vista 00:02, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I like it. A use for the Flak Jacket for survivors other than keeping the PKers at bay. --Blobmorf 23:49, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I don't know why, but I actually like this.--Arathen 04:05, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep SAZ!!! -- P0p0 08:38, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - It might not be as bad as some others, but i think it still needs some improvement. PRoblem is, I can't put my finger on what I don't like. Maybe it's the fact the suggestion isn't all that seriously written. - Skarmory 15:56, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • re -I'm glad you find it better then some of the others, And I assure you it's dead serious, I've spend three days writing it, making sure that every aspect of the game mechenics work and are balanced. I've put a lot of time into it. I'm sorry if I can't make it sound like you want but as I explained I am a dyslectic writing in a non native language, I have hit my limitations, I can't see it. So please eleborate on it, what isn't serious about it? and what needs improving?--Vista 16:14, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Spewing bile onto humans in order to kill them seems plausible. --Penance 19:28, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - So it's the zombie version of a gun. Whee, let's have zombies cluster together in undefendable areas, wasting their AP searching for crap. You also don't tell us how long this lasts/how many shots you get/etc. If this is permanent and has unlimited ammo, then it's stupidly overpowering. If this has only a few uses, then it's a stupidly annoying waste of time. Either way, it's stupid. There are a lot of better zombie suggestions out there that just don't involve increased damage. Bentley Foss 20:15, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re numbers weren't right, crap, sorry--Vista 02:22, 31 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - What happens when a zombie with bile gets revived? I know the game isn't supposed to be totally realistic (no zombie game can be), but having someone walk around with embalming fluid in their stomach isn't feasible. I'll change my vote to Keep if you make it so that bile disappears from inventory after being revived (RP reason; survivor gets sick and vomits it out), or make Brain Rot a pre-req for using it. -- Asrathe 20:29, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT) Edit: Vote changed to keep, as the revive issue has been addressed. -- Asrathe 21:06, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • re O -bleep- spend all that time on it wether it should merely be hidden to be used again when died, or completly disapears, and forgot to put it in. Concluded tentively the same as you it should disappears from inventory. disincentives hording the stuff.--Vista 20:32, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Finally there's something to waste my APs on as a zombie. I am a ZKer when zombified, and this would keep me busy, especially if there's a revive point near a cemetery. --Matson Jade 21:18, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)

*Kill One of the biggest differences between humans and zombies in this game is humans can "store" their AP as ammunition and zombies can't. Don't change that. Make zombies better at what they do, not better at what they're not supposed to try to do. Vote not signed --Grim s 14:24, 31 Dec 2005 (GMT)

  • Kill Zombies don't store Ap for a reason. --Brickman 01:46, 1 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • re -And what is that reason? if the mechanics work and the flavor is right... Already a zombie can speak semi-coherently, turn door-nobs, call for reinforcements. they're Kevin Zombies unlike any other kind, so why not?.--Vista 02:11, 1 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep --LtMile 16:38, 2 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Kill - Very much like the idea, but I think it could use maybe a point or two more damage, with accuracy decreased accordingly to keep the same HP/AP ratio. My main complaint, though, is that, while realistic, losing the bile when revived comes dangerously close to breaking the "Leave Other People's Inventory Alone" rule. -StarmanDX 10:08, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Tally - 18 Keeps 5 Kills -- 16:35, 15 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Wasted AP on Invalid Actions

Timestamp: 21:03, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Improvement
Scope: Players
Description: I'm probably not doing this right, wiki's are about as intuitive as this game, lol. Anyway, I'v noticed that most, if not all, invalid actions in this game require AP dispite the fact they don't do anything. I'm a new player and have found it frustrating that after 3 days of looking for a gun I wasted AP by clicking on it hoping to load it with ammo. Apparently you have to click on indivual bullets which is fine but not obvious from the begining, I think it's wrong to penalize players that don't know every little nuance of the interface. There are several other situations like this that I don't think you should loose AP on. I havn't been keeping a list because I didn't relize I was going to be frustrated enough to try to use a wiki.

I'm not sure what "That's already the case." means, just to clarify I'm proposing that the AP not be used when you make insignificant actions. In case you thought I proposing that the waste was a good idea. If you don't believe that the AP vanished, log on real quick an click on your flak jacket. AP vanishes for me (I just did it to verify). Anyway, I'll quit baby sitting this suggestion now, it seems inapropriate on my part. (Posted by user Bayn)


  • Kill - That's already the case. CthulhuFhtagn 21:09, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT) Spam - Because this is already in the damn game. CthulhuFhtagn 03:44, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT) Kill - It isn't in the game. However, it tells you that it doesn't do anything, so if you don't learn the first time, you deserve to lose the ap. CthulhuFhtagn 01:56, 31 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Skills, Items, Suburbs, Building Types, Frequently Asked Questions, Guides. Read these and you won't be a noob anymore. So you won't need to waste AP. --ALIENwolve 21:37, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Well, some of those AP wastes are a little silly (like clicking on the gun), but there are some that make sense (like trying to heal people who are at full health). I would vote keep, but not without a list of all of them. --Signal9 21:55, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -It's steep learning curve for newbies, that's true. but right now I don't really see what you want with this? Signal9 has a point. do that and you've got my vote.--Vista 22:01, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I am not a noob, but I think it is a good Idea. I have noticed this but I always assumed that was a bug, but never bothered suggesting fixing it. I just tried the flak test and lost an AP but when I tried shooting when I had no Ammo, I got the warning but didnt loose the AP. 2 months ago when I started I know that I did loose APs for shooting with no ammo. That convinces me that this is a bug that Kevan either hasnt caught or hasnt gotten around to fixing yet. Bravo for the sugestion. --Tom mot 00:59, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I personally am tired of AP being used when I look at my own profile... ??? This has to be a game bug and needs to be fixed. --Jason Killdare 01:06, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Why does this remind me of the guy that complained that flak jackets should only work against bullets? Rhialto 01:13, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - "You stare at the Flak Jacket intensely for 30 minutes." Heh. --Hexedian 04:55, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - that always bugged me. --Deathnut 06:34, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep "takes off his flak jacket, puts it back on" -- P0p0 08:41, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - for reasons in the comments above - Skarmory 15:57, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Agreed. I hate losing AP. --Coreyo 19:49, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Everybody learns how to do this. Not to be mean, but just deal with this. (And Rhialto, I almost agree with you...almost...) Bentley Foss 20:17, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Unnecessary. And Jason Killdare, if that really does happen, then yes, it's a bug. But it doesn't happen to me, and I've never heard anyone complain about that. --Brizth 21:49, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Riktar 22:08, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Why penalize newbies for being new and everyone for silly misclicks? It's really not necessary and adds nothing to the game. Slicer 01:30, 31 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Anything that eases the learning curve is a good thing. -Murgatroid 23:14, 1 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep - What Slicer said. When time is wasted ICly (e.g., trying to heal someone already at full), then it's fair to waste an AP. Otherwise, it's just unfun for the player. --MoonLayHidden 09:25, 8 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Tally - 11 Keeps 6 Kills -- 16:40, 15 Jan 2006 (GMT)


3 dupe votes. Duplicate of "powered consturctions". --Grim s 18:15, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Zombies hidden in cemetery

Timestamp: 5:43, 29 Dec 2005 (EST)
Type: Improvement
Scope: Zombies
Description: A simple change to increase the flavor of the game as well as give a little advantage to the undead of Malton. A Cemetery would hide a Zombie player from the view of survivors "outside" of the block (assume they crawl into a grave or into a crypt). When I first started, I would always go around the Cemetery becuase I assumed there was a danger there. That fear is a good addition to the game.

Any Zombie who entered the block of a Cemetery would only be visable to other Zeds (In or outside the block) and any Survivors in the Cemetery. From out side the block it would appear empty. I do not think this would help the Zombies too much (everyone would know to look there) but it would give some more drama to the game, plus give a purpose to the Cemetery. Also it would help to hide Zombie numbers from the Humans, to help in their mass attacks against human strongholds. DarthMortis


  • KEEP - Author Vote DarthMortis Dec. 29th 6:00 pm EST
  • keep -Would make them good staging points due to being outside for feeding groans and requiring headhunters leaving their precious free running routes to scout. --Jack-Swithun 23:21, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -zombies shouldn't hide from survivors, survivors should hide from zombies. and with the zombie count already at 36% that time is near once again!!... BHahahahaha!!!~(??...why am I laughing?... I'm a survivor!...never mind...)--Vista 23:27, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • keep -Reckon it's not a bad idea. Cemetaries are supposed to be scary and deathly and small changes to help Zombies out would improve the game. There's no need for Zombies to plan this - they would be attracted to cemetaries because of allt eh dead bodies, and once there, as long as they don't movie, you wouldn't be be able to spot a zombie from a corpse (except maybe up close), which explains the "hidden" feature --Difference Engine 11:08, 30 Dec 2005 (AEST)
  • Kill - Zombies in cemetaries under this suggestion would be about as "hidden" as survivors in a mall or powered Necrotech building. --VoidDragon 23:47, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Neat idea. It would be very useful for low-level feral zombies. I don't think it would change much else except to bring some fear and mystery to the places. Fear is good. --Unlife 00:14, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - General thought in the past has supported the idea that Zombies are incapable of complex actions and planning, and that no one should be able to hide from anyone else more than you can now in buildings. -- Amazing 00:55, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - You are not a ninja. Rhialto 01:11, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • RE - No I am not, I am not even a Zombie, I just want cemeteries to be spooky! DarthMortis Dec. 29th 11:00 pm EST
  • Keep - If I've got this right, you're meaning that you can see the zombies if you go INTO the cemetary? Then keep. If you can't see them even when you're in there, I'll have to change to kill... --Shadowstar 01:58, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • RE - Exactly, if you are "in" the cemetery, you can see them, just not from the outside. DarthMortis Dec. 29th 11:00 pm EST
  • Keep - Adds flavor to and creates usefulness for cemeteries. --Daednabru 03:18, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I like this for many reasons. First of all, I was going to suggest something like this, but this is better than what I was going to do. Second, I like this because it means zombies will have a good meeting place so enourmous and powerful groups of zombies will start to randomly form. Plus, zombies are always getting killed when they log out, this will help a little. --Horje 03:26, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Excellent idea that adds flavor and suspense! good on ya! --Trayton 03:45, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep --Lord Evans 04:38, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Few APs lost for survivors searching empty cemeteries, that seems nice to me.--Hexedian 04:50, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Not sure exactly how well it would function, but earns a Keep just for flavour --Jack Destruct 05:37, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • keep - I like it. The zombies need some new skills, or they're gonna get bored Grant Page 07:32, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I like the idea of Zombies having a special place, a "building" just for them. I too went straight to cemetaries when I first started, it seemed like a natural place to go.--Carnival H 07:50, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Not overpowering, makes some sense, adds flavor and functionality. --Signal9 08:36, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep YAY for zombie flooded cemetaries -- P0p0 08:45, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Jirtan 15:05, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Definitely adds flavour, and makes cemetaries more than just another wasteland. --WibbleBRAINS 16:19, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Monstah 16:56, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I nearly voted keep, but, you know, this smells a bit too much like a stealth skill to me. It doesn't have all the usual problems, but, eh, you know. Bentley Foss 20:18, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - A neat little feature for cemeteries that wouldn't unbalance anything. I envision the rationale for this being that there are so many dead bodies here anyway, it's hard to tell what's what. --Dickie Fux 20:43, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Keepy keep keep KEEP! Good flavour. Survivours SHOULD run from cemetaries. --Ev933n 20:58, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Good idea, adds atmosphere, etc etc. great as is, though I might even be inclined to add that Zeds who go inactive in a cemetary disappear from place description a day or two sooner (what, is it 4 days for everyone now?) --Reverend Loki 21:39, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Like finding a zombie in a zombiestack, or zomething. Good idea. -Nessola 01:05, 31 Dec 2005 (GMT).
  • Keep - Adds flavor, atmosphere, and a potential but relatively small tool for any horde that can figure out a way to use it well. Will never even pretend to affect balance. Plus, it would indeed cause there to be more zombies in cemeteries by its very presence. --Brickman 01:16, 31 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep --LtMile 16:39, 2 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep -- Great idea! Perhaps if this had a whole "Enter Empty Grave"/"Exit Grave" action button that took a action point to do and only was availible/hid zombies, that'd work all the better. The zombies could still see all of their buddies and any humans in the area, yes? --MorthBabid 20:39, 5 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Keep - With 130 cemeteries in Malton, this would make for a good place to coordinate hordes or keep low level zombies from being headshot every two minutes. Of course, it may make for too good a hiding source for zombies. Time will tell. DocDiva 03:48, 12 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Tally - 31 TOTAL VOTES - 26 KEEP - 5 KILL as of 03:50, 12 Jan 2006 (GMT)

More Cemetary Usefuleness to Zombies

Timestamp: 10:46, 30 Dec 2005 (AEST)
Type: Improvement
Scope: Zombies
Description: Seeing as Survivors seem to have the upper hand in Malton right now, might it be worthwhile to have an alternate way for Zombies to regain Hit Points, without having to have a whole skill to that effect AND have to attack Survivors to do so?

This suggestion might have limited effect but it might help the Zombies out a little. I was thinking that Cemetaries could provide Zombies with a limited amount of nutritious brains. There's thousands of dead bodies in your typical cemetary, and some of them may have not rotted completely away. Perhaps a Zombie could enter a cemetary, perform a search (with some suitably low chance of success), find a cadaver that fits the bill and feast for a few hit points? The search might implicitly include the requirement to dig up some graves. (I mean Zombies can smell brains right?) What I mean is, you just click on "Search for Cadavers" or something, and you use one AP for the entire process of searching, digging, eating etc... (Assuming you were successful).

It might be an extremely slow way to gain hit points, but at least it wouldn't expose the Zombie to the chance of being wounded, killed or head-shotted. Possibly combined with some other cemetary modifications (like the suggestion from someone else to give Zombies the ability to hide in cemetaries from Survivors who are outside) it might make cemetaries scarier places, as well as congregation points for both the dead and the undead. Difference Engine


  • Kill -as it is isn't enough to warrant this. I'm biased ofcourse, but I'd like something more like my own Bile Attack, it gives a reason to cemeteries without it being grafted especially to do so. --Vista 23:43, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • keep -Author Vote: Although this is a minor change I think several small changes to cemetaries in favour of Zombies could make these locations a much cooler part of the game --Difference Engine 11:11, 30 Dec 2005 (AEST)
  • Kill --Broton 01:06, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - This goes well with the suggestion above. --Horje 03:29, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep --Lord Evans 04:40, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill--Deathnut 06:29, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Humans get first aid kits we zombies should have something - --Fullemtaled 07:29, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I like I've said, zombies need new skills and advantages, or players will get bored and/or annoyed and leave the game (some already have) Grant Page 07:37, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep i've come to the conclusion that i'll vote keep on any semi-logical suggestion that involves cemetaries and make zombies better -- P0p0 08:47, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Jirtan 15:04, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Maybe new skill? Monstah 16:58, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Yup, yup. =) Coreyo 19:51, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Zombies regenerate quite well enough with Bite and a little thing called Ankle Grab, which restores ALL your HP for a mere 1-6 AP. Bentley Foss 20:20, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re Yeah but you have to die first. What happens when you're walking around with 10HP? You can't get HP back without risking your life, or rather, undeadedness--Difference Engine 18:38, 05 Jan 2006 (AEST)
  • Kill - Wouldn't it be a bit counter-productive to lure zombies to cemetaries to heal, where hunters would definately, well, hunt them? Also, what Bentley Foss said. --Brizth 21:43, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Riktar 22:09, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - We don't need injured zombies lining up to be headshot. -- Asrathe 23:17, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Why do this when you can gain HP and get EXP by attacking a human? Sorry. --Nessola 01:09, 31 Dec 2005 (GMT).
  • Kill - Currently zombies are a combat based class, unless that changes I'm going to kill "press a button for free AP/XP/HP" skills. --Zaruthustra 16:10, 31 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re Frankly I regard any skills that supply HP as combat related. I mean, combat-based Survivors get FAKs right? Why not a Zombie equivalent? Zombies desperately need more skills and resources equivalent to Survivors, as they are desperately under-supported --Difference Engine 18:22, 04 Jan 2006 (AEST)
  • Kill Oh so you die first to get your hp back! Well now that's terrible, considering they use only ONE AP if the guy doesnt have headshot. And think about this. If you die without a headshot, you use 1 AP to heal ALL your hp, and if the guy had headshot, this just turns into 6 AP for 50/60 hp, considerably better than a survivor without First Aid or Surgery. AllStarZ 17:21, 8 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Kill This would make Cemeteries to be an XP farm for zombies... high level zombies will stay away and low level zombies will be griefed when all the headshotters camp around the cemetery. --Nov 03:36, 12 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Tally - 19 votes 10 Keeps 9 Kills -- 16:44, 15 Jan 2006 (GMT)

In-game Product Placement

Spaminated. Three spam votes, no keep votes, plenty of kills. Comments about how its commercialism, and not about the game itself. --Grim s 18:17, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Feed (FAK equivalent for zombies)

Timestamp: 20:31, 29 Dec 2005 (EST)
Type: New skill
Scope: Zombies
Description: With the "Feed" skill, a zombie can feast upon a corpse found lying about for a 10 - 20 HP boost (maybe more with an advanced skill?). If the zombie tries to feed again within 24 hours, it gets a message stating that it's stomach is satiated. This would be an analogue (though different in operation) to the first aid kit. Also, the idea of a zombie crouched in a cemetary, feeding on a corpse has a home in every zombie apocalypse!

EDIT: Upon seeing the initial reaction, I have a comment. Death is not so trivial for new players... You log in, have to spend 10 AP to stand up. Now you only have 40 AP left (if you're back to full already). That means 20 moves (assuming you don't want to attack anyone). 20 moves is enough to move you out of range of the nearby humans, but in comparison to how far a human can move per day, useless. So you get killed again. Repeat ad infinitum. This keeps a lot of new players from playing zombies, I think.

I see, however, that it might be in conflict with digestion. Maybe if it was changed to cost more AP, thus making it useful only if no humans are around?

EDIT: Points well taken. I think I can agree that ankle grab + digestion cover the topic pretty well already, so you can let this one die. Thanks for the input everybody :)


  • Keep - The idea fits. If you may only do 1 feed per 24 hours 10 HP seems proper as well. --Jason Killdare 01:41, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Author vote. BTW this is my first addition to the Wiki, so be kind :) --intx13 20:46, 29 Dec 2005 (EST)
  • Keep -Contaminated 01:56, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Zombies don't need healing since death is so trivial for them. Probably unbalancing. -CWD 01:57, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Definitely unbalancing. 1AP to boost your health like that? Why buy digestion? --Shadowstar 02:01, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Just go eat someone. --TheTeeHeeMonster 02:39, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Why not? It could be a subskill of digestion.--Daednabru 03:09, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Zombies can already heal with digestion, and they normally get killed rather than just injured anyways. Between Digestion and Ankle Grab, it's just plain redundant. --Catwhowalksbyhimself 03:27, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Woo hoo!! More cool zombie skills! (Good first suggestion, by the way) --Horje 03:31, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Give's zombie's more flavor, Along with most of the suggestions I have voted on today --Lord Evans 04:42, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - First I was going to say that this is spam because corpses as zombie first aid kits is in the Frequently suggested pile, but because you have a once per day limit it isn't as shortsighted. I do, however, kill because this means that every zombie gets +20HP per day almost automatically (there are corpses everywhere). I think that it's overpowering, at least as it is now. --Signal9 05:16, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Cool... Grant Page 7:39, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- P0p0 08:49, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -Digestion and ankle grap take away a lot of the need. if they are still around, wait untill they leave or attack them. You're a zombie, you're not supposed to flee, you're supposed to make them flee, and as signal9 said it's overpowered.--Vista 12:20, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - "A message stating that it's stomach is satiated?" Zombies are always hungry! Also, they don't eat corpses, they eat the flesh of the living. Also also, the Digestion skill is good enough. --Dickie Fux 18:02, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - --Fullemtaled 18:35, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Zombies regenerate quite well enough with Bite and a little thing called Ankle Grab, which restores ALL your HP for a mere 1-6 AP. Bentley Foss 20:20, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Yep, Ankle Grab + Digestion. --Brizth 21:37, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Not necessary for zombies. --Nov 03:37, 12 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Tally - 19 votes 9 Keeps 10 Kills -- 16:48, 15 Jan 2006 (GMT)

New Skill: Regeneration

Timestamp: 20:45, 29 Dec 2005 (EST)
Type: New skill
Scope: All
Description: Regeneration (If you have 24 HP or less, you gain 1 HP every 30 minutes.) This wouldn't allow you to heal all your HP but gives those seriously injured, not near a hospital and perhaps on the outskirts of a map, a way to recover some HP without FAKs.


  • Kill - There are doctors and digestion for a reason. Learn to use them. --Daednabru 01:54, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Zombies fighting humans without death?! Running out of AP in the middle of nowhere with few HP induces fear... no reason to take that out of the game. This suggestion seems to be rooted in concepts that many other RPG's implement... but considering those games focus on leveling up and getting items (and dying is often counter to the point of the game) it has little benefits to Urban Dead (where killing and being killed is the point of the game). --intx13 20:54, 29 Dec 2005 (EST)
  • Kill - Em... negates infection. --Shadowstar 02:02, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam - If this is meant to be a human skill, it's just plain silly. If its meant to be zombies only, change my vote to a kill. Rhialto 02:37, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I banish thee to the bowels of hell, crappy suggestion. --TheTeeHeeMonster 02:38, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam - whit Rhialto --hagnat 02:50, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - And no, this isn't because I'm still bitter. - KingRaptor 02:56, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam - It's either silly (in the case of humans) or a bit unecessary and out of theme (in the case of zombies) - Catwhowalksbyhimself 03:25, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Well, cells do divide and replace dead cells. It's how our cuts heal, it's how we get over sickness. If not for that, first aid kits would be useless. This suggestion makes perfect sense, we get better when we are hurt! --Horje 03:33, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Yes, living things do heal themselves when they're hurt as Horje pointed out, but when someone is severely hurt they can't heal themselves and need help. That's why we have FAK's. Notice that with this you can prevent yourself from dying of infectious bite by just sitting alone in an overly-barricaded building - where's the sense in that? And as for zombies - dying isn't much of a problem for zombies. --Signal9 05:24, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill While this makes some sense, it unbalences the game too muh. As shadowstar said, it negates infection, which is supposed to make someone under the 25 HP mark begin to worry! If this is actually intended for zombies... Well, I still don't think it's all that useful since zombies are better off just dying and standing up again to get to full HP. --Volke 05:31, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -It's overpowered to the max.--Vista 12:22, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Jirtan 15:06, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Makes infection pointless, and makes the low-level Medic class redundant. --WibbleBRAINS 16:23, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - "Those seriously injured, not near a hospital and perhaps on the outskirts of a map" are supposed to die. --Dickie Fux 17:57, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Deal with it. All the kill reasons have been listed above. Bentley Foss 20:21, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - This isn't a superhero game. How does one get the wolverine factor? --Nov 03:40, 12 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Kill - This suggestion further reduces the already dwindling fear factor and eliminates the need for forethought and planning by survivors. --DocDiva 04:00, 12 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Tally - 4 votes 1 Keep 14 Kills 3 spams-- 17:43, 15 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Zombie Booster

Duplicate of Peer Reviewed Small XP Compensation for Barricade Attacks, which is a good idea, but already accepted. --Jack-Swithun 03:12, 30 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Personal tools