Suggestions/3rd-Jan-2007

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

A Possible Solution

Timestamp: ShadowScope 01:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Type: Game Mechanic.
Scope: Pkers.
Description: I understand the problems that both defenders of PKers and opponents of PKers has raised. To me, the reason that PKers are "effective" is that they are rare, and because they are rare, nobody would be willing to risk their lives to battle PKers and be bounty hunters. By not caring about others, PKers are powerful.

I came up with a solution that could get people to care about PKers, and therefore, when people care about PKers, then people in the metagame will organize and pose a challenge to PKers. Once that happens, then PKing will become a bit diffcuilt, however, I would like to emphazie this is not a nerf to PKing. I do not want to nerf PKers at all.

If a Human player kills 3 Human players without being killed in the process, then a hidden flag (hereby termed "PKer Flag") has been triggered. You do not know that you have this flag. Nobody knows you have this flag. The flag expires if/when you die or get killed.

A new stat is formed, called Bounties Claimed. If you PK someone with the "PKer Flag", you will receive a Bounty for killing the PKer, and the Bounties Claimed stat goes up by 1 point. You gain 10 extra XP as well for killing the PKer, to reward the Bounty Hunter for its work. Also, since you are killing a PKer, your killing of the Human player does not count to tiggering the "Pker Flag".

Q: How do you know who has the PKer Flag?

A: You learn someone is a PKer.

Q: How do I know?

A: How you always know. By listening to the rumors and spams on the radios. By seeing the graffti warning of certain people. By using the metagame. There are always many ways.

Q: Then what is the point?

A: The point is to provide players a reason to hunt down PKers, that is to gain more Bounties. This will allow players to have some vainty. XP is useless, and the Bounties does not help you, but it does make players feel better. Players may now finally start to organize better in order to defeat the enemy.

Q: This could help idenitfy Bounty Hunters...and allow us to differnate between PKers and legit Bounty Hunters...

A: Not so fast. A person willing to invest one AP can easily justify that he is not a PKer and is in fact a Bounty Hunter. A Pker, with a blank face, can easily state Bobby is a PKer, since I saw him kill a guy, so I Pked him! and won't get any flak because Bobby only "PKed" one person, and therefore, did not activate the Pker Flag. Also, the PKer can state Bobby destroyed my genny/radio! and people will be unable to call him on it.

Q: Will this nerf the act of PKing?

A: No. All it will do is just give players some sort of encourgment to turn Bounty Hunters and hunt down Pkers. You are allowed to PK, but you pay the consquences, and if you are unprepared, may meet a quick end. PKers, of course, if they plan ahead, can prepare and hide against Bounty Hunters, and continue to prey on their enemy, without worrying of the consquences. If the Bounty Hunters are idiots, then the PKers can just laugh at their pitful defenses. If the Bounty Hunters are strong, then the PKers will just grow more stronger to defeat them, and hopefully, it might be fun. It will not be Kevan's hands that will make Pkers weak, but, in its stead, bounty hunters that can be outwitted and outlasted. Playing against other players, matching your powerss against theirs, that, I hope, can cause fun.

Q: What if I accidently kill a PKer, during a PK run?

A: Lucky sod. You get the XP bonus and a bounty for targeting the PKer and you won't get the "PK Flag". But, to be fair, PKers are rare. It is unlikely you will kill a fellow comrade in arms. You probarly won't get that lucky again if you kill the next person though. :)

Q: Will this distract players from the zombies?

A: Prehaps. But PKing is a part of the game, and is considered by some intergral. Besides, while zombies play a role, the game is also taking place in an apoc. And Death Cultists are nothing more than combat revived zombies out for revenge.

Keep Votes
For Votes here

  1. For - Well, it's the best suggestion for this that I've seen. If anything, just make the Pking crap that's filling the suggestions page gtfo. --Joe O'Wood TALKCONTRIBSUD 01:42, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Keep - I got caught not understanding what you were suggesting. Still like the idea.--Labine50 MH|ME|P 01:45, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. Keep Ohh, a bounties collected stat just like # of times killed. Sweet. The XP grant kicks ass, but I'd suggest 5 XP for collecting a bounty.. cuz you only get 1/2 XP bonus for killing another human.. so this way killing a bounty is the same grant as killing a zombie. But even then +5 XP for a human, +10 XP for a zombie and +15 XP for a bounty... all good. At least you have to earn the xp. MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 02:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Keep - Not for the XP; the XP is essentially a secondary benefit, Pyre. People will do it for the bounty stat. I like it.--'STER-Talk-ModP! 02:38, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  5. keep not sure of the numbers but the concept is solid and close to what i have been discussing on the talk page. I would prefer it to need 5+ kills to be flagged and not drop as soon as you die! maybe if the PK count dropped 1 everytime you died? --Honestmistake 17:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Kill Votes

  1. Kill - Sorry but the problem in my POV is that zombies are weaker than PKers and this wouldn't address that issue, instead it would create MORE PKers (because that's what Bounty Hunters are). --Deras 01:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Kill I don't think xp is an incentive or disincentive for bounty hunters or PKers. Most of them have every skill and leftover xp. --Jon Pyre 02:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. Kill - This might have the reverse effect you so intended. --Wikidead 02:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Kill - I'm sorry, but I really just don't think this suggestion is very useful. --Zombie slay3r 03:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  5. Kill - It's not a terrible idea, really, its just I am afraid this will turn the game into shoot out at the OK Corral. I firmly believe the best strategy, given the current rules of UD, for dealing with PKers is for survivors to ignore them completely. When two children are playing cops and robbers and one wants to stop, what does he do? He just says he is tired and walks away. He does not keep chasing the other kid shouting, "I don't want to play! I don't want to play!" Now, as for the spam votes, well, may I point out that the wiki rules are very specific and clear? All votes, whether Keep, Kill or Spam, must have an actual reason attached. Also, the rules are very, very clear that Spam is not a "A Strong Kill" and it sure is not meant to be used frivolously with reasons like, "Um. No." or "it's just useless". If you don't respect this forum and your fellow posters enough to offer an actual reason, or even bother to read the rules of this page[1], then come back when you do. In the meanwhile, please stop wasting our time.--Nosimplehiway 05:19, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
    • I would like to reply to you about your comment on spam votes. I actually think that the Spam Votes on the bottom are okay. They are a strong kill in pratice, and they exist to get rid of what people see as stupid suggestions. Many of them do give out reasons, and while some say: "Just no", that may be enough reason, as they see the suggestion as so stupid that they won't even dignify it with a reason. The "It's just useless" also is very good...why waste Kevan's time implementing something that they feel is very stupid to begin with? I don't see it as a problem, and they do not need to "stop wasting our time". They actually provide a service, revealing to us their displeasure--ShadowScope 15:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  6. It ain't a good sign when you need such an extensive Q&A to promote your suggestion... However, this beats the other suggestions as it doesn't harm my attempts to kill fascists, and would make fellow members lvl up faster. On another note though, you are promoting PKing. -Certified=InsaneQuébécois 05:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  7. Kill - Nosimplehiway said it. -Cutlet 10:07, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  8. kill what if you are a vigilante who gets 3 clean kills on PKers in a row? Or, what if you are like me and does both PK and vigilante stuff, but only takes the other guy down to 5HP? Asheets 19:55, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  9. Kill - Fine the way it is.Waluigi Freak 99 00:32, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. SpamySpamSpam - Uh uh, this suggestion is just to me useless. Really just adds crap to the game that's not needed. I don't think this 'flag' thing is going to go anywhere. --Ducis DuxSlothTalk 01:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Spam - Um. No. --Aeneid 02:41, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. Spam - I don't like the idea at all, encouraging bounty hunting. Makes survivors lose focus of the real conflict of the game. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRCT+1 03:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Spam - It is a "possible solution" to a nonexistant problem. --Grim s-Mod U! 04:16, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  5. Spam - Just for the record I hate PKers when they target particular people/groups but I'd also assure you PKing isn't all that rare but the game can't have a system to track and 'bounty' whoever PKs because it doesn't fit into the game. This is about a bttle between zombies and survivors =not oh look its a badie he killed people- murderer! Take revenge. Its not a police game... --MarieThe Grove 09:44, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  6. Spam - Grim nailed it.--Gage 09:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  7. Spam --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 09:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  8. Man, last month was Spammy PKer suggestions galore. Don't start that this month, please... --Slice 'N' Dicin' Axe Hack 13:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  9. Spam - I have $33.60 in my wallet. Cyberbob  Talk  17:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  10. This is dumb. We already have a system for this, it's ran by the DEM as a metagame, and resensitized has a forum for it afaik. It's subject to human error, it has administration overhead, and it's basically ineffective. That's how it should be. You're suggesting making it into a game mechanic, forcing people to be recognised (whether internally or otherwise) as killers. Added to that is the simple arbitrary dumbness of it. Player A kills someone three times, so they get labelled a PKer. That player kills them back three times, and doesn't. Someone sees them do this and kills them three times, and they're a PKer. Someone sees them do that and kills that guy three times, and they're not a PKer. That's ridiculous. This is an artificial situation, but I'm trying to highlight the problem... you can't decide this simply that people are PKers or bounty hunters. In the game, it's just people getting killed. --ExplodingFerret 20:00, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Make More Things Visible

Timestamp: Jon Pyre 01:44, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Type: Improvement
Scope: Universal
Description: It'd be nice to get some more information from the game than we do now. Seeing attacks while they happen could help both zombies and survivors focus their attacks on active players, or tell who enemies are even if they only succeeding in injuring, not killing. Seeing people heal could earn them reputations as great physicians. Seeing people set up and fuel generators would help us appreciate those that spent an entire day's AP for the benefit of others. it'd be nice to know who in your safehouse is doing work and who is just chilling out. However it's important to avoid spamming up people's screens. So I suggest displaying messages in the following space saving ways:
  • Attacks

All attacks would be combined into one message like so:

A zombie/SurvivorName attacked a zombie/SurvivorName X times for X total damage. (timestamp)

If the attacker eventually killed the person the kill message would be combined with the attack message:

A zombie/SurvivorName killed zombie/SurvivorName with X attacks for X total damage. (timestamp)

  • Healing

More or less the same thing:

SurvivorName treated Survivorname X times to restore X health. (timestamp)

  • Generator Set-Up and Fueling

A similar idea but without a numerical variable. Just setting up a generator would give this message:

SurvivorName connected an unfueled generator to the building's electric grid. (timestamp)

If they fueled it as well:

SurvivorName hooked-up a generator and fueled it. (timestamp)

And if they just fueled it:

SurvivorName refueled the generator and pulled the start cord. (timestamp)

Now obviously this is something of a wishlist and technical reasons may prevent some of them from being implemented. Obviously if server load prevents one of them Kevan won't implement them. So your keep vote is just an expression of support that if it can be done, and it isn't too much trouble, we'd like this added in.

This would make both survivors and zombies a little more powerful during sieges so I think it is balanced in that regard. Survivors could tell who to heal and which zombie to attack, but zombies could see which survivors were doing the healing and attacking and target them.

As for the beneficial acts there really is no downside to having other people know you're doing them. They'll respect you for your contribution and it'll build up "street cred".

Keep Votes

  1. Keep Allows for a more tactical defense during sieges, aiding both sides. Also lets you receive credit for your work, and see if your allies are lazy bums or not. --Jon Pyre 01:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
    Keep - Yeah I'm all for this one, healers don't get anywhere the kind of recognition they deserve. --Ducis DuxSlothTalk 01:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC
    Actually, Jon, there is a downside to having other people know you're doing selfless acts...PKers can just target and greif them, seeing them as VIPs. Still, I like it, though I'll wait for others to speak. Maybe there is something I am missing.--ShadowScope 01:55, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Keep - I'm sure nobody would mind getting credit for keeping a generator going, day after day, throughout a several day long mall siege.--Labine50 MH|ME|P 02:44, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. Keep - Voting spam just because you don't want it to spam up your screens is a bit pathetic- don't want to read it scroll past it and don't read it. Problem solved. --MarieThe Grove 09:47, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. keep I'd like to get credit in a crowded mall, and I'd like to see who did various things. Plus, I don't really see how this has anything to do with PK. Asheets 19:53, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Kill Votes

  1. Kill - I'm changing my vote to kill because it needs a few little tweaks and such. Spamming would be a problem, but then you could have a system where you could select to only see people who heal others, people who refuel generators, etc. so it doesn't fill up the entire damn page twenty times. --Ducis DuxSlothTalk 02:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Re I don't think that could cause much spam. One person could probably cause more spam by talking than an entire score could cause by doing constructive actions. Plus...is it really spam if it's something you'd want to know? I'd rather see who healed who and powered what than listen to someone type out the entire lyrics to a song over the radio. --Jon Pyre 02:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Kill - Same reason as everyone else. You could revise this to put a limit on the number of messages received if there's a lot of of people around. --Toejam 02:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. Kill Re-tool it so you get only the most relevant messages, not so sound negative, but try to imagine what it would be like in a mall... MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 02:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Kill - Good suggestion, and I am tempted to vote keep. However, this would create way too much spam. As Gage has said, radios are bad enough. --Wikidead 02:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  5. Kill - The reasoning behind the suggestion is good, but the text generated would totally fill up the page. Imagine the amount of text on the screen during a seige... --Zombie slay3r 03:36, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  6. Kill - I like the change in reporting attacks. This suggestion could use some time on the discussion page to iron out the kinks, but is generally good. I look forward to it returning here for a vote once it is polished. Maybe instead of listing actions, note some of it in description: "There is a generator running here, set up by Character X and fueled by Character Z."--Nosimplehiway 05:26, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Re Nice idea! --Jon Pyre 00:32, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  7. Kill - It'd be all fine in unpopulated suburbs, but imagine coming back after 20 odd hours and reading through all the actions that people took in an active siege. No one is going to read all that, and you'd miss out on messages that were left for you by ignoring everything -- boxy T L ZS PA DA 23:23, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. Spam - This would create a ton of it. Radios were bad enough.--Gage 01:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Re The spam would be far less than radios. One person can broadcast fifty radio messages. Here every message would require an entirely different kind of action. And this would be far more useful than radios. --Jon Pyre 02:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Sorry for retracting my vote. The spam would be horrendous.--ShadowScope 01:58, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. Seiges! PK fuel! PK nerf! Oh my!! --Joe O'Wood TALKCONTRIBSUD 02:39, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Spam - The 3 reasons most actions are anonmyous is because 1)Prevent server overload 2) spam 3)and to stop PKers from killing the nice guys (I believe KEVAN himself removed the message ingame that showed "Player 1 healed Player 2" because of that...). --Aeneid 03:08, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  5. Spam - Matthewfarenheit presses the edit buton (3 minutes ago). Matthewfarenheit typed some text (3 minutes ago). Matthewfarenheit adds his signature with a button (2 minutes ago). Matthewfarenheit press the preview button (2 min ago). Matthewfarenheit looks at the preview (1 minute ago). Matthewfarenheit presses the save page button (1 minute ago). --Matthew Fahrenheit YRCT+1 03:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  6. Spam - Senseless PK nerf. Give it up already! --Grim s-Mod U! 04:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  7. SPAMstastic The only thing I would want to see that isn't shown now is people destroying barricades, and perhaps, at the limit, tagging, barricading, and fueling. Nothing else. -Certified=InsaneQuébécois 04:53, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  8. Spam - I'm afraid the gigantic amount of spam this would create outweighs any benefits.--J Muller 06:34, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  9. Spam - pretty much everything useful (and not game-breaking) is already here. --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 10:01, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  10. As all who spammed. --Slice 'N' Dicin' Axe Hack 13:55, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  11. LOL I have IDEA, let's play poker but show everyone all the cards all the time, FUNFUNFUN. --ExplodingFerret 20:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  12. And God said: "LET THERE BE SPAM!" --Axe27 21:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  13. Spam - What Aeneid said. and how exactly is this a PK nerf? if anything this would help PKers to grief more efficiently. --Gateking 02:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

New Starting Class: Vigilante

Timestamp: MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 03:09, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Type: New Civilian Character Class
Scope: Bad, tough, and you got a bat...
Description: New Starting Character Class: Vigilante

Starts with a Baseball Bat, Crowbar, Fuel Can, and the Bodybuilding skill.

Unlike the fireman who starts with a fireaxe and is skilled with that weapon, this starting character class is very open-ended, to start with. In that although it is not as easy to access fast XP as a fireman or NT Lab Assistant, this character class can go any route with their Vigilante character (search for any specific hand weapons, go for the firearms route.. etc.)

But, unlike the consumer.. and many firearms based starting character classes a starting player won't have to spend their first week or so searching before they can go after any zombies.

The premise for the starting skill of Bodybuilding is so that your character will be tougher to kill, and may not become a zombie quite so easily, until they get started up. (Or die outside a mall, screaming to be let inside.)

The starting equipment of the crowbar and fuel can, are mainly because they add to the feel of the vigilante (maybe you hunt zombies with a crowbar?) But these items also have their uses.

If nothing else, as a starting character if you're trapped outside, at least you have a crowbar to get inside before you get mobbed!

RP & Society: Vigilantes are often a helpful, but violent lot... usually most of them are the buddy we all have who is a "great guy" but loves the occasional barfight. With the coming of the zombies Vigilantes are basically "Free" to finally express themselves without having to go to jail, as often.

Not all vigilantes are even criminals, many of them are just revolutionary-minded, or a bit too "wild" for our society. To each their own.

Note: The Convict class in Peer Reviewed is very similar, however.. in all likelihood if the Convict were implimented into the game: chances are it would be given a Knife as a starting weapon, and probably Knife Combat ("Shank-Fu".) This being due to the enhancement of the knife's starting accuracy and locations to get it.

Keep Votes

  1. Author I feel the Vigilante is a nessesary starting class because, well, we need a bit more variety with starting classes. This starting class is hardly unbalancing, just another hand weapon goon, but an decent open-ended one. Either way, wouldn't hurt for both of these starting classes to be in Peer Reviewed, for comparasin purpouses. MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 03:09, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Keep - Pretty good idea. I like it. I like new classes. --Peterblue 23:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Kill Votes

  1. Kill - I don't think this class of character is really needed or interesting. Please check your spelling too! --Zombie slay3r 03:41, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Kill - Seems a bit too narrow. I mean, how many vigilantes were on the way from the gym to a softball game, stopping along the way to get gas for the lawn mower and a crowbar at Home Depot at the exact moment the zombie plague started up? Make it a little broader and a little less contrived, and try again, though. --Nosimplehiway 05:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. Kill - I think the idea here is that they carry these things with them just in case they need them. But as for the class, it's not really necessary.--J Muller 06:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Kill - Who was it who said Bodybuilding as a starting skill was a bad idea? --Wikidead 07:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  5. Kill - We've got the differences covered, and does not need an extra civilian hth-character. If you made a military hth-specialist, I'd be inclined to change my vote. - BzAli 17:37, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  6. kill If you start with a firefighter, spend 2 days looking for stuff, and trade the ax in for a bat (why?), then this is what you have. Asheets 19:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  7. Boring, unneeded, and boring. --ExplodingFerret 20:07, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  8. Kill - Good idea but he is too powerfull, this would un-doubtly be one of the strongest characters in the game not to mention a death-sentence to zombies. There is no way Keven would even consider coding this in.Darkvengance 21:08, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  9. I know that "X should be implemented firs" isn't considred a valid reason, but I think, in this case, it is. All the classes are, effectively, the same after only a few levels, I really don't see the point of ANY "new" classes. What makes them different? Nothing, eventually. Boring. Besides, we already have people complaining about how hard it is for a class like Consumer to level up. The game doesn't need ANOTHER hard to level class.--Pesatyel 03:19, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  10. Kill Improved zerger meat-shields for mall defenses? No thanks.--User:Bassander 8:51, 4 January 2007
  11. Kill - I disagree that all classes are the same after just a few levels (scientists pay 150 xp for military skills, civilians pay 100 xp for all skills, etc), but this is too easily abusable by zergers. --Reaper with no name TJ! 21:29, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. Spam - Classes that are made just with the purpose of start with a cool background just annoy me. I was a firefighter before the outbreak, the guy next to me was a doctor, the gal in the corner was just shopping when the zombies came. NO ONE WAS BATMAN OK? Also, I think you give him too many items to start with: 2 useful or 3 useless items are OK. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRCT+1 03:35, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Re Might have been at home, watching TV, when the zombie outbreak started, and went outside.. bat in hand, to protest the zombie incursion. This is a vigilante after all. You don't have to be batman to beat some ass.. (could have been a looter as well, with the crowbar, gas may be from gas tank from their car.) MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 08:53, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Spam - Agreed with the above. --Grim s-Mod U! 04:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. Spam - worthless. No clear xp path.--Gage 06:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Re As opposed to the consumer, or the doctor & medic who can't even see who is hurt? This class is a lot better off than several classes on that there XP path, rather than starting somewhere off in the bushes. Let's be honest now...MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 08:50, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Spam - there are enough starting survivor characters, and this adds nothing special, except a bodybuilding zerg club. --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 10:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  5. Read Gage's vote. --Slice 'N' Dicin' Axe Hack 13:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  6. Spam - Starting classes are meant to represent the common ordinary people in Malton. You got the donut eating cop, looting civilian (consumer), ordinary grunt (soldier guy), etc. Vigilante doesn't cut it at all. --Aeneid 15:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  7. Spam - And the fact that Fuel Cans and Crowbars are among the hardest items to locate has NO influence on the "need" for this starting zer^h^h^h character class?
  8. Spam -it wasn't me who said that, but bodybuilding as a stsrting skill is bad for this reason: it's worthless. either your sitting safe inside a barricaded building, or your in an unbarricaded building or on the street, and dead in five minuts. --AlexanderRM 8:51 PM, 5 January 2007 (EST)

Assault Rifle

Timestamp: Rodwy 05:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Type: New Weapon/Skill Tree
Scope: Survivors
Description: I know these mostly get thrown to the curb, well mostly because they are overpowered and unbalanced.

A fairly large, small caliber, highly accurate rifle with a 10 round clip. It only does 4 damage but is more accurate than a Pistol, say 75% max? Takes 1 AP per shot and Flak jackets don’t affect it’s rounds. With the skills tree I made fore it, the rifle starts underpowered but passes the pistol and shotgun AP usage against 60hp enemies with flak jackets on max skill. This weapon is to be used mostly to kill people with flak jackets and probably wont be used much I know.

  • Starting Skill: 5% Accuracy

Average Damage Per Clip: 2

Average Damage Per AP: .2

To Kill 50HP Enemy: 260 Attacks (26 Clips 285 AP) To Kill 60HP Enemy: 300 Attacks(30 Clips 329 AP)

  • Basic Firearms Training: 30% Accuracy

Average Damage Per Clip: 12

Average Damage Per AP: 1.2

To Kill 50HP Enemy: 44 Attacks (4.4 Clips 48 AP) To Kill 60HP Enemy: 50 Attacks(5 Clips 54 AP)

  • Rifle Training: 60% Accuracy

Average Damage Per Clip: 24

Average Damage Per AP: 2.4

To Kill 50HP Enemy: 22 Attacks (2.2 Clips 24 AP) To Kill 60HP Enemy: 25 Attacks(2.5 Clips 27 AP)

  • Advanced Rile Training: 75% Accuracy

Average Damage Per Clip: 28

Average Damage Per AP: 2.8

To Kill 50HP Enemy: 18 Attacks (1.8 Clips 19 AP) To Kill 60HP Enemy: 20 Attacks(2.0 Clips 21 AP)

Oh forgot to add: Found at armories and police stations only. Easy to find at armories and hard to find at Police stations. No percentages yet.

Keep Votes

  1. Keep The size of this weapon should be 3 or 4 inventory slots (shotgun takes 2.) But I like it cuz as with other more successful rifle suggestions, this one can't be found in malls. Excellent, don't give up, but carefully examine what voters are saying, even the whiners. If you re-submit, include them in mansions as well. MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 13:35, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
    I was thinking, if I ever resubmit this suggy to makes the accuracy similar to to other weapons and having it do 8 damage regular and 6 against flaks. And probably half the clip.--Rodwy 00:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Kill Votes

  1. Kill - When we ask for balanced items it's because we mean it: where's the drawback of carrying this gun? As I read it it makes pistols go to shame with 10 bullets clips and being unaffected by flak jackets. If it's drawback is "you can't find it in malls", then may I remind you that rare doesn't mean balanced? Resubmit with changes. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRCT+1 06:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
    Dude, its only benefit is that it's better against flak jackets and is weaker elsewhere, didn't you check the stats? It takes longer to kill even with the extra ammo.--Rodwy 06:26, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
    You have to remember that EVERYONE has a flack jacket nowadays! It's as I said, the same as a pistol with better accuaracy and more bullets on a clip. Overpowered. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRCT+1 07:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
    Dude do you even play? Not everyone has a flak jacket, I take zeds down all the time that don't have flak jackets. But survivors may have a lot of flak jackets, but everyone? Come on. --Rodwy 07:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Kill - We don't need a new weapon. Also, this is essentially a pistol that's slightly better against flak jackets. Meaning it's less versatile. Also, it's not good enough to justify taking up the space in police stations and armories.--J Muller 06:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC) EDIT: Someone fix the numbers here, I don't know what's wrong with it.--J Muller 06:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
    Lets see. Crowbars are good for taking down barricades, Fire axes cut trees down. The Baseball bat, pipe, and knife are basically useless. So something that kills people with flak jackets easily sucks? Wow.--Rodwy 06:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
    It's only slightly better, so I'll keep my pistols and shotguns. Also, I'd like to point out here that it's not exactly realistic. An assault rifle would most likely do damage comparable to a shotgun at the ranges dealt with in the game.--J Muller 07:26, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. Kill - The game has no need for new complications or items. --Wikidead 07:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Kill Ok.. being an American, I do have a fondness for high powered, privately owned assault rifles but this is one of those situations where you just have to abandon any form of realism and say that the military style rounds (of whatever caliber...) have been expended and that the more common pistol and shotgun rounds are still plentiful... (or simply the Military and Necrotech never allowed for, or permitted assault riffles into the perimeter before, during or after the initial outbreak... who knows maybe they don't have enough stopping power to be effective to begin with....) but for whatever reason.... NO Conndrakamod TDHPD CFT 13:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  5. I second that Conndraka's. -Mark 16:53, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  6. kill if only for the reason that the search odds haven't been outlined yet. Asheets 19:51, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  7. Overpowered as hell for survivors. At the moment, against a FJ'ed target, I can fire a pistol with a clip of six rounds at 65% accuracy for 4 damage. With your rifle I can fire from a clip of ten rounds at 75% accuracy for 4 damage. It's (a) too good a weapon and (b) not interesting enough to add appeal to the game. --ExplodingFerret 20:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  8. Kill - Badly designed weapon. A military assault rifle should be able to do more damage than a pistol, as rifles generally have stronger caliber ammunition and higher muzzle velocities. --GhostStalker 20:19, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  9. Kill - We zombies already have enough problems. There are 39% standing zeds to 61% survivors already, and most of the zombies are 'Mrh?ing'. Don't make the survivors overpowered. --Slayerofmuffins23:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  10. Incomplete Come back when you have some SEARCH PERCENTAGES for this (and be adviced, rare doesnt equal balanced). Beyond that, these SEEMS overpowered. MOST zombies were flak jackets (THEY need them more) if they can so the effect relative to pistol is minimal. Besides the fact that the greater ammo capacity alters the AP savings for survivors. There are MUCH better assault rifle type suggestions in Peer Reviewed.--Pesatyel 03:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  11. Ridiculous- I'm going to assume here that you don't know anything about assault rifles, so let me tell you a few things. First off, assault rifle caliber bullets are MUCH stronger than pistol bullets. Even .357 and .44 magnum rounds aren't as powerful as a single assault rifle round. At the very least this would have to do 10 damage (8 against a flak jacket) in order to make sense. And an assault rifle that only holds 10 rounds? No. Try about 30. You could get away with 10 rounds if this was one of those civilian models, but it clearly isn't because then it wouldn't be found in PDs or armories. The 75% accuracy WOULD make sense if this was a fully-automatic weapon, but it only seems to fire one round at a time (if it was assumed to fire several each time it was used, then the damage would have to be that much higher). And an assault rifle in semi-auto would have much more than just a 10% edge over pistols in accuracy. Overall, this just makes no sense, and this is a game where things make sense. Assault rifles don't fit in here because assault rifles are by their very nature far superior to pistols and shotguns. --Reaper with no name TJ! 18:19, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. Another rifle suggestion, another spam.--Gage 07:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Spam - we have two firearms, each with their own skill tree. Why do we need a third? This would dilute my ability to collect ammo, making it worse than it already is to load my shotguns and pistols. --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 10:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. Spam- Yet another Rifle, yet another Spam. To introduce this you would have to 1/3 nerf both other guns. No thanks. --Grim s-Mod U! 11:45, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Overpowered and "rare". --Joe O'Wood TALKCONTRIBSUD 12:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  5. As Funt. --Slice 'N' Dicin' Axe Hack 13:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  6. Spam - Wayyy overpowered. And not realistic giving 4 damage each hit. --Aeneid 15:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
    What in this game is realistic? This game is anything but realistic.--Rodwy 00:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  7. Spam - I have an idea. Let's create a gun that %100 accurate, shoots through barricades, Insta-kills, and kills everyone in the suburb, except the owner. Sound like a good idea? --Axe27 22:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  8. Spam - ok how many zombie movies have you seen where assault rifles are very effective? ALL! but that's because it's pop-culture wich everyone knows is nothing but a lie! This is just a stupid suggestion. no way is it going to be coded in.Darkvengance 21:11, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  9. Spam - another rifle suggestion. Police Officer Jesus 23:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  10. Spam - Read the rules before you try submitting suggestions.
* Don't Knowingly Post Unacceptable Ideas

    If you feel you must start your suggestions with a statement like "I know this will get shot 
down" or "This isn't the best idea," you're right. Don't post it. The purpose of the suggestion page
 is to vet suggestions for possible inclusion in the game. If you know your idea will be a failure,
 you're just wasting everyone's time by posting it. 

And how did you start your suggestion? I rest my case. -- Goron40 11:57, 10 January 2007 (EST)


Personal tools
advertisements