Suggestions/4th-Nov-2006

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to 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 Suggestions • Suggestions up for Voting • Clothes Suggestions
Cycling Suggestions • Peer Reviewed • Undecided • Peer Rejected • Humorous
Suggestion Advice • Topics to Avoid and Why • Help, Developing and Editing

Broken Glasses

Timestamp: Crazylilvietguy 00:13, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Type: Small Search Tweak
Scope: New Survivors
Description: For those of you who play Shartak, you know of the "broken knife" thing. For those of you that don't, you will "find a broken knife, which you discard" if there is nothing to be found in that square. Now, many people new to UD will search random areas, wasting too much ap. So, I suggest that we have a similar feature, but you rather find "a pair of broken glasses."

Keep Votes

  1. Keep: Author, yo. Crazylilvietguy 00:13, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. change - "You find a broken [something] - there is nothing of use here." --Funt Solo 12:05, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  3. I'm with solo. Sounds good otherwise. -Mark 17:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  4. Change - I like the idea but it's a little vague as it is. As Funt Solo and Wikidead suggested, the message should show the broken item you found, inform you that you chucked it away, and should tell you that there's nothing to be found in that square. --c138 RR 17:54, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  5. As Funt. --ExplodingFerret 18:13, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Kill Votes

You mean outside of buildings and things where you can never find any items? Nah. It's just as easy for noobs to look on the wiki and find out which areas should be searched as it would be for them to find out what the broken glasses thing means. ((Gah, messed up strikking this several times)) --ExplodingFerret 02:05, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  1. Kill - No offense, but you've got to be kidding me... --Wikidead 01:53, 4 November 2006 (UTC) I like Funt Solo's idea, and I will vote "keep" if you change it to "You find [something stupid] and drop it. There is nothing of use in this location." Be sure to include the dropping part, so new players will not be confused and wonder why their [something stupid] isn't in their inventory. --Wikidead 16:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. Kill Actually, saying that they found something broken might cause them to look further reasoning "Hey, if I can find broken things here maybe intact stuff is here too" --Jon Pyre 03:13, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  3. Kill as with pyre, a newb finding any items at all is more likely to continue searching --BBM 12:45, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  4. Kill - As Jon Pyre. I'd rather see something like "You search and find nothing. There seems to be nothing in the rubble." -- Nob666 13:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  5. Kill - I would vote spam, but this is just stupid. Okay. Imagine you're in a real zombie invasion. Would you really stop to think about broken glasses? Why do you need notifications about something that dosen't matter? --Joe O'Wood 18:27, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  6. Kill - It seems pretty dumb that they would always find broken glasses, and not other stuff too. More importantly, it would be better if there was a message saying that there is nothing useful to be found, as others have mentioned. --Reaper with no name 23:26, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. Spam - Is this supposed to be a joke, or what? --Officer Johnieo 01:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. What? - I think it is.--Labine50 MHG|MEMS 01:45, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  3. Spam Let em learn. --Burgan Burgan 02:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  4. Spam -I can't even think of a reason beyond this just being stupid. Do I need more?--Pesatyel 05:43, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  5. Spam - All aboard the stupid train!--Mr yawn Scotland flag.JPG 09:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  6. USELESS ITEMS BAD!!! - if you suggested that the find rates of newspapers be doubled, i think you might be banned, just out of irritation. --Kaminobob 08:05, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Command Structure

Timestamp: Jon Pyre 06:57, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Type: Skill
Scope: Military
Description: Malton has a military but they're just acting like ordinary survivors. Command Structure would be a military skill that allows people to choose their commanding officer and make more efficient use of current ways of communicating.

Upon taking the skill you'd have a new drop down menu listing all present mutual contacts that also have command structure: "Set Commander". From then on that person's name would have a little gold star icon next to it on your contact list. Clicking the star would remove it. Your commander's name would appear gold and any speech or radio transmission from them would be underlined gold, and their radio transmissions would list their name so you could see they sent it. This allows you to easily spot and recognize their instructions.

The commander would see their soldiers differently too. Anyone following you would have their name appear blue, and any speech or radio from them would be underlined blue and you'd also see their name next to their radio broadcasts. On your contact list their names would have a blue star next to them. Clicking the blue star once removes you as their leader and replaces it with an X, preventing them from following you again. Clicking the X makes it disappear, allowing them to set you as their commander again.

People following the same commander would see each other differently the same way, except this time the color would be green. They would not need to be on your contact list. Only the commander and soldier need be mutual contacts. But if they were their names there would be marked with a green star. Clicking it won't do anything.

WHAT THIS DOES: It provides no attack bonus of any kind. It only allows players to establish a system of rank and easily give orders and receive responses and reports to each other. THIS IS NOT A PIED PIPER SKILL. You are not directly controlling other players in any way. They merely receive your orders and can choose whether or not to do what you say (since they elected you leader the idea is they normally would). It can be a simple group of four guys following a lone man. Or you can have complex chains of command where four men follow a commander, who in turn follows someone else with ten other five man platoons reporting to him and relays that person's orders down to their grunts. Heck, that person could even have yet another commander above them with two other people reporting to him, each with their own equally sized armies. There's no limits to the types of armies you could create with this skill.

This does not help zergers, bots, provide combat boosts, or any other kind of blunt advantage like that. It just lets you send and receive messages clearly with those in your self-made army.

Keep Votes

  1. Author Soldiers? In a city under military control? It just might work. --Jon Pyre 06:57, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. Keep - Convienient. Perhaps there could also be different levels of command?--J Muller 07:23, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Re An alternate version I toyed with but decided was too complex, for now, has it so that every person that was ranked either higher than you or lower than you had a +X or -X next to their name to show their relation to you. So your immediate commander would be +1. Your commander's commander to you would be +2. Your commander's commander's commander would be +3. Meanwhile your soldier would be -1. Their soldier would be -2. Etc. --Jon Pyre 07:42, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  3. The only thing I'd consider changing would be to require the "commander" be of a higher level than his subordinates. I mean the guy with the most experience is the most suitable to lead, right?--Pesatyel 07:48, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Re Not necessarily. Skills only represent, well, skills. You could imagine highly trained tough soldiers following a physically weaker and worse with a gun leader if he has a better grasp of strategy. I bet any Navy Seal could beat up several of their commanding officers back at HQ. --Jon Pyre 07:54, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  4. Keep - Meh, why not? Sounds pretty neat and would make running organisations easier.--Mr yawn Scotland flag.JPG 09:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  5. Keep - Sounds logical to me. Funt's has to be the lamest reason for a kill vote ever! So what if it's in the wrong category? Kevan will still read it anyway, and decide how to implement it! --Karloth vois RR 12:31, 4 November 2006 (UTC) "Kevan will decide" is of course meaningless- that's why it doesn't matter whether this gets into peer reviewed as a skill or a mechanic. I'm just saying killing a good idea because it's been categorised slightly wrong is meaningless. If need be, there can simply be a note reading "voters concerns would rather this was a mechanic" etc. Personally, I don't care! --Karloth vois RR 18:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  6. Keep - Reluctantly ok, but change the color coding a bit and make it so that a commander can also be someone else's soldier so that their can be a more complex chain of command (but don't let commanders choose for a commander out of one of his own soldiers). And also, this does seem like a game mechanic more than it seems a skill, but it is still okay is implement it as a skill if it requires both the soldier and the commander to have it. --Wikidead 08:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC) Sorry about before, but I was in a hurry and messed up the formatting.
  7. yes sir, right away sir. --Officer Johnieo 16:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  8. Very good. But as with Solo, a game mechanic, not a skill. -Mark 17:10, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  9. Like it. Definitely needs to be either a skill or an invisible profile option or something. I do think it would be nice if the names and wordings associated with this skill were generified to address Joe's spam vote concerns; specifically if all the wording could equally apply to a resistance and military commander then I think you'll have done a great job. (Btw, resubmit this as a game mechanic and my vote becomes kill... just so you know ;) --ExplodingFerret 18:23, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  10. Keep - Good idea, especially for people trying to form clans. --Joe O'Wood 18:30, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  11. Sir, yes sir! Awesome how simple does this work: Your UD faction will have a list of the Who's who of the upper enchelon of leaders.. you add those folks to your contacts list. Now, when radio messages are getting boinked around, you recognize the voice as a significant non spam radio message suddenly orders (order) becomes clear. Zombies could even do this, if one of their leaders is in human form and gets on the radio "All is losssst, Tollyton is ourssss now humanssss.." Every zombie with a radio on suddenly gets the message, zombie communication is now possible.. for those who spend some time as a human.. and get on the mike. Dammit man, that's sexy.MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 19:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  12. I like it. Organizing a largish group is hard, this makes it easier and makes radios more important too. Catriona McM 21:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  13. Good idea.--Labine50 MHG|MEMS 23:33, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  14. Utterly fluff, totally cool. So, in short, a keeper.--Sgt Toni Reyes Union Flag.png OMEGA 00:26, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  15. KEEP: It makes it easier for groups to communicate with each other and adds a little realism to the game, cool. --Tahoe 05:07, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Kill Votes

  1. Kill - this is clever and should be implemented, but not as a skill - just as a game mechanic. --Funt Solo 11:53, 4 November 2006 (UTC) Karloth - I think it's a key point - this is a skill that only certain players would want- people that roleplay as loners wouldn't want it. Plus, why wouldn't a starting military player be able to do all this? This certainly wouldn't be high on their list of skill priorities. As for the "Kevan can decide" line of reasoning, it's just meaningless. --Funt Solo 13:27, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Re Actually, Kevan has done that with a lot of suggestions. Light Sensitivity, Call of the Horde, both of them were suggested as skills and implemented as features. --Jon Pyre 17:38, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Re Nevertheless, it's a poor line of reasoning as it could be applied to all criticisms of all suggestions. I would hate this to be implemented as a skill, therefore I'm voting Kill. --Funt Solo 17:42, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

Spam - I don't like how this is only for military. Some of my more internet savvy friends and I have started a 'mini clan', with me and another as co-commanders. The problem is this- we both started as firemen, because they're the best noob class. --Joe O'Wood 18:00, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Re It isn't only for the military class. It's a military skill. Anyone can take it. This skill doesn't require that you are in the army, just that you're learning how to organize like the army. --Jon Pyre 18:12, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Rere: Oh, yeah, that makes sense. Thanks for clearing that up. --Joe O'Wood 18:30, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

NecroTranq Syringe v3

Timestamp: 12:12, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Type: New Weapon / New Skill.
Scope: Scientists / Survivors.
Description: In attempting to capture and study zombie specimens, NecroTech scientists have had some limited success in developing a zombie tranquiliser.


  • New Scientist Skill: Undead Anatomy
  • Prerequisites: Lab Experience
  • Effect: Increases accuracy of an attempted NecroTranq syringe attack by 15%, but only against a zombie.


  • New Item: NecroTranq Syringe
  • Base accuracy: 15% (maximum accuracy vs. humans)
  • Maximum accuracy: 30% (with Undead Anatomy vs. a zombie)
  • Capacity: 1-use weapon (an attack attempt damages the fragile syringe beyond use, whether or not it was successful)
  • Inventory: 1 space
  • Locations: NecroTech Building: 6% (1% taken from DNA Extractor, 2% taken from GPS Unit).
  • Effect vs. Human: successful attack does 1HP damage to the target and provides 1XP to the attacker.
  • Effect vs. Zombie: successful attack does 1HP damage to the target and provides 5XP to the attacker. Additionally, the zombie is tranquilised (see below).


  • Tranquilised:
    • Movement between squares now costs 2AP (this essentially switches off Lurching Gait, and has no effect on a zombie without Lurching Gait).
    • Cure #1: A zombie that carries out a successful Infectious Bite is cured.
    • Cure #2: A zombie that dies (<1HP) is cured.
    • Cure #3: Once the zombie has spent 10AP, doing anything, the tranquiliser wears off.

Keep Votes

  1. Author - version three FTW. --Funt Solo 12:03, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. Keep - Sounds good. I'd suppose you'd want to cure it after a successful digestive bite, though. --Burgan Burgan 18:29, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    Re - D'oh! That's what I meant to put - Digestive Bite, not Infectious Bite. My bad. If it gets anywhere near PR, I'll add a note about that. --Funt Solo 20:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  3. I really like it. Imagine that a medium-sized zombie horde has emerged at the end of your suburb. A couple of guys with an inventory full of these thing, a DNA scanner, and a lot of action points could really slow them down, and get something close to half of the in-combat XP/AP of a pistol. This is also what all high-level revivers will be using versus rotters at revive points, since they'd have to drop them otherwise. --ExplodingFerret 18:33, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  4. Keep Scientist version of headshot, but not as viscious or brutal as headshot... all good. injecting zombies with drugs is fun.. would be cool to watch even. Doesn't nerf zombies who don't give a crap cuz they aren't going anywhere (seige) they'll just ignore it. MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 19:12, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  5. Keep - Nothing I could see wrong with this, except of course for that typo of yours. Great job otherwise. --Reaper with no name 23:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Kill Votes

  1. Kill - Funt Solo, you always have the best ideas. However, I think you still need a fourth version on this one. --Wikidead 16:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    Re - Please provide some reasoning. --Funt Solo 16:57, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    Re to Re: Traditionally, attacks that dealt damage always rewarded with XP equal to that of the damage, and so I recommend removing the 1hp damage and make necrotranq ineffective against humans. Contrary to what I see of Pesatyel's belief, it doesn't tranquilize humans, so what's the point of letting it hit humans? I also think that the search rate for it be reduced, because it would really annoy people looking for revivification syringes and finding tranquilizer darts. I'm also uncomfortable with "AP Counters," but I guess I'll just have to live with that. --Wikidead 08:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. Kill I'm sure what the point is. It certianly isn't defensive because this doesn't do squat to the zombie bashing outside your door. I guess to increase the AP cost when zombies follow a groan? Still seems like it wouldn't be that useful, and I'm not sure more AP draining skills are the way to go. --Jon Pyre 17:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    Re - A survivor might use this on a zombie to reduce the chance of it catching up with them after contact (via Scent Trail), or it could be used as part of a co-ordinated attack to slow down an approaching horde. So, there are uses, but I think you're voting kill on the AP draining aspect mainly, so I'll shut up now. --Funt Solo 18:12, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  3. I don't really liek this idea.--Labine50 MHG|MEMS 23:44, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  4. Leave other people's AP alone/Leave other people's skills alone - I believe that is the vote you use against AP/skill-nerfing auggestions. This is just nasty. We already have headshot, which is bad enough. --Pinpoint 01:59, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
    Re Well, it's hardly a nerf. --Funt Solo 02:44, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  5. I was tempted to vote spam because of this (don't mess with other people's skills; headshot/ankle grab are necessary game functions, this isn't). The XP provided is too high. PKers would LOVE this weapon. To be honest, I don't see the point of this suggestion. I mean, if it reduced hit % or something to make DNA extraction easier, maybe but the reasoning behind the suggestion doesn't make a lot of sense for what the suggestion actually DOES.--Pesatyel 06:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
    Re - I totally agree with most of what you say - but I'm not sure why you think a PKer would like this. They get a 15% chance to do 1HP damage for 1XP. Am I missing something else? (It's happened before.) --Funt Solo 10:44, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
    Actually, I misread. I didn't realize the tranquilizer part ONLY applied to zombies. If the PKer could tranquilize a victim it would make their work easier since the target couldn't get away so easily.--Pesatyel 21:12, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  6. Kill - I decided to change my vote after consideration. If this is implemented without adding similar effects to infectious bite for brain rotten zombies I can't vote yes as it would disrupt the balance too much. --Carl Panzram 17:53, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes
Knickers!

Selective Hearing

Timestamp: Zeek 18:26, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Type: Game Mechanic
Scope: Survivors who use radios.
Description: This is a means by which radio spam can be reduced for those who opt to do so. It has two parts;

1) Player's contact lists may be divided into separate categories. This may be as simple as “friend/enemy/neutral” or as comprehensive as allowing players to create their own categories for greater specificity. note: This part of the suggestion is for the purpose of convenience only, and it would not be significantly changed with it's exclusion. So please do not use it as the basis of your votes.

2) The radio's retune menu would be amended to include the following: The option to acknowledge/ignore 'all' transmissions, followed by a list of exceptions, each with the same option (acknowledge/ignore). The exceptions are thus: 'category' (one for each from contact list), 'group' (meaning any player-group the player has listed), & 'player' (one for each player on the contact list). At the end are three buttons marked cancel (self explanatory), accept for this radio, and accept for all radios (also self explanatory). This allows the player to keep separate settings for different radios/frequencies. If the operation is performed on a public radio (ie. a powered transmitter), or if “all radios” is selected then the settings apply to all public radios.

The settings function as such; 'all' covers the general populace of the game, and it's setting dictates the treatment of any message not covered by an exception. Each 'category' supersedes 'all' and covers any player contained in a given category of the contact list (any new players added to a category would have their individual option set to that of the category for each radio). 'Group' supersedes 'category' and covers any player who lists the same player-group as the receiver. And finally, each 'player' supersedes 'group' and covers individual players in the contact list. Transmissions are only displayed if the sender falls into one of the lists set to “acknowledge”, and not superseded by a contradictory setting of “ignore”.

Example: A player may opt to ignore 'all', while acknowledging their 'friend' category as well as their 'group', and both acknowledging and ignoring some select individual players. The result would be that they only see transmissions sent by their friends and groupmates (regardless of what category they are in) as well as a few select others, with the exception of those friends and groupmates who are set to 'ignore'.

note: for ingame/roleplaying purposes, this is not a function of the radios themselves, but rather of the players themselves listening for certain people, while ignoring others.

Keep Votes

  1. Selective anti-spam feature? Saves on server load, oh hell yeah.. not a problem. Many will just want to hear only from those that "matter" and it will be used, and save on excessive blah blah messaging. MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 19:15, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. Not Really Needed - but seems well thought out. --Funt Solo 20:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  3. Keep - Especially since, theoretically, you would be grouped with your friends. I feel like someone on the opposite side of a building should NOT hear something I just said. As well, decrease server load is good. --Ev933n 21:30, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  4. Keep - I could care less about radio spam, but I like the idea of being able to place my contact into categories. Useful! --Uncle Bill 00:00, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Kill Votes

  1. Kill - I was thinking on voting keep, but one of the struck spam votes brings up an excellent point: you don't know who the person at the sending end of the radio is unless he brodcasts it from your location, so therefore, it is illogical to filter out individual comments. Also, I don't remember, but is this suggestion a dupe? --Wikidead 08:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. Kill - Not quite a Dupe, but you are thinking of this http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/User_Interaction_/_Contacts#Ignore_Function with a side order of five million well received "Sort contact list" suggestions --Gene Splicer 13:02, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. Spam - Erm, unrealistic. How would you know that it was spam before hearing it IRL? --Joe O'Wood 18:33, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Re I dont think it's all that unrealistic, you're not listening for spam, just people you recognise and ignoring the rest.--Zeek 21:18, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Re - Arguing for realism is one of those things we are not supposed to do, right? --Ev933n 21:30, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    Note - non-author comment struck. --Funt Solo 22:06, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. It's a radio message. Unless you're really good at working out voices, you shouldn't be able to work out who it is (if they want you to know, they can sign their messages; if you want security, then use encryption or simple checksums of some kind). While most of us don't particularly like radio spam, it goes away in one click/refresh, and it goes away even better by getting rid of the radios. I think the extra UI complication here would annoy me many times more than the radio spam does. Too much extra crap for one minor benefit. ((blah... forgot to sign)) --ExplodingFerret 00:57, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Ruins Of The Damned

Timestamp: MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 19:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Type: Zombie Skill
Scope: A very, very slow rate of regeneration (healing) when at a graveyard, wasteland square OR inside of a ransacked building
Description: Ruins Of The Damned:
  • Zombie skill, appears as a sub-skill of Ransack. Adds no benefits to your human character.

Your zombie has a limited form of regeneration (healing). You heal 1 Life every 12 hours. This rate of healing is 1 Life every 6 hours at a graveyard, wasteland or ransacked location.

  • Your zombie only gets this healing if they are still standing at that location when the healing timer goes off. To simplify this timer is set for regular intervals during the day throughout Malton (just like when you recover AP.) So 2 times a day at regular locations: zombies gain 1 life, and 4 times a day at graveyards, wastelands and ransacked buildings, zombies present gain 1 Life. (Max. 2 Life a day at any other location, and max 4 life a day at the better ones.)
  • This healing is weak in the extreme (it doesn't cost you any AP or inventory items, that's why)! But it has to be, survivors have to be able to kill zombies to get XP.. but if survivors don't keep the pressure on zombies.. they'll keep getting up.. and for those who haven't even been gunned down.. heal up all battle damage, eventually.
  • This skill allows for a new zombie tactic of being able to hold locations, especially ransacked buildings. But your zombie has to remain standing to do so, so this skill is offset by survivors who get out there and drop the Z's! So zombies with this skill can just stand there and you can focus on your other chacters for a couples days, checking in on this zombie periodically to see if they got taken down... Zombies are patient, dead things, this is something they can do, forever if they have to.
  • This skill is a reflection of "Time being on their side" survivors who don't make efforts to control the standing zombie population, and take back ransacked buildings will find that now even the zombies can be hard to cleanse from a suburb once they've gotten a foothold! Even survivors turned zombie may desire this skill, so when they're stuck at a revive point hopefully they won't get headshot every single day they check in on them.. so they will get that damn revive, eventually.

Why?: Survivors have so many options available to them when it comes to tactics: barricades, free running, searching, generators.. grouping up, etc. Zombies don't really have much in the way of taking and holding territory except ransack (which is effective, until cleaned up) this skill is meant to work in tandem with that (subskill of ransack, so it takes a while to earn it!) Zombies just standing there, holding a building, forces survivors to have to put a little more effort into removing those zombies, so they can dump the body and clean up their suburb.

It allows the zombies greater latitude to "punish" survivors for failing to keep a suburb, or work together. Zombies don't need/give a crap about their Life totals, but survivors will! As a survivor you will not like to almost kill a zombie one day, free run back to your safehouse, go back the next day and find out that same zombie has healed back a bit of Life.. you'll like it even less if several zombies are also healing. But miltiply it by a thousand or a million.. those zombies are only healing 2 or 4 Life per day (each, if they have this skill).. hence the very very low healing rate to prevent that being a problem.

It means you're going to have to use up a bit more ammunition the more time you waste not dealing with zombie hordes in your area. Headshots are still good, shotguns are still good.. hiding from zombies forever hoping they just go away, not good.

Keep Votes

  1. Author Keep It's a very small rate of healing, but it sets a presedent for zombies to better hold (control) suburbs, if and when they can. And if you don't like that, too bad, zombies are in the game too.. and they want to ransack your resource buildings, you have to work to keep zombies out of them. it's that simple! It's all about control... MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 19:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. Keep I think this is a good idea, however, zombies with Ankle Grab have little to worry about when it comes to death. In fact, dieing as a zombie is more efficient then standing still for days healing. However, you can't force a living zombie out of a building, which goes back to your element of control. So for that, I vote yes. Schizmo 21:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  3. Keep Sounds good to me. Chronolith 03:20, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Kill Votes

  1. Kill I've always wanted a regeneration skill for zombies. Just I think it should involve biting or killing, not standing around doing nothing. --Jon Pyre 22:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. Kill - First of all, I'm assuming you mean 1 HP when you say 1 life. Now, I've always wanted zombies to have some sort of weak auto-regen, but this doesn't make sense. Why would they be able to heal from standing in a ransacked building or cemetery but not anywhere else? And does it really make much difference? 2 HP per day is practically nothing. It'll still cost the same amount of shotgun blasts to kill the zombie. --Reaper with no name 23:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Re You still will regenerate in all locations but you regenerate better at graveayards, wastelands and ransacked buildings (call it a zombie "nesting" instinct, kill all the living, wreck everything else.. then they feel more "comfortable".) You heal 2 points a day at all locations, 4 points a day at best at the ones listed. MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 23:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
      • Re - All right, but that still doesn't explain the better regeneration at those places. Fix that and I may vote keep. --Reaper with no name 23:44, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
        • Re No prob: (maybe better, because better "dirt nap" conditions at these locations) graveyard - "I'm a zombie", wasteland - "It's outside, we're stuck outside, I'm a zombie.." (wasteland actually matters for map purpouses), ransacked building - "I'm a zombie, I hate the living, I feel better when I destroy their shit because I hate to be reminded I was alive once." MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 23:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    Note - invalid comment struck. "Comments are restricted to a single comment per vote" --Funt Solo 00:14, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  3. Kill - Kill for so many reasons that I don't feel like listing them all. My apologies, but this suggestion is so awful that I feel dirty for not voting spam. --Wikidead 08:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. Spam - doesn't this nerf the sacred ground policy? And isn't this magic? And isn't this all reward for no risk? --Funt Solo 20:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Re Totally legit concoerns, glad you brought it up so I can address it: Sacred ground policy is that they are considered revive points.. therefore zombies are free to enter them and get revived, if they so choose. But a lot of humans (and other zombies) hunt at these locations, and a lot of times your zombie dies a number of times before they get revived.. this skill means if yo're standing there waiting for that damn revive.. you're healing while doing so.. so hopefully this can save you some AP standing up again and again... and again. Until you get revived, finally. #2: As for magic, living beings heal, it isn't magical, it's a biological process, the dead healing.. well it's just dead tissue reataching itself, to itself.. it's a chemical process, but real slow.. hardly magic.. more like.. how a virus replicates more of itself.. the zombie is a host for infection, so it heals itself so it can deliver, that infection. #3: Piddly award, but there is risk, you're a zombie, there's a big assed target on you for being a zombie, survivors have no problems finding and killing your ass. And you have no faks.. and can only heal with digestion by biting the living..MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 23:49, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
      • Re - It's still reward for no risk, all things being equal. I agree that zeds could do with another way of gaining HP - but it shouldn't just be for standing around doing nothing. --Funt Solo 00:16, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. CAN O' SPAM!!!1 - As Funt Solo said, (The third point) Survivors who go out of thier way to heal others have a target on thier back half the time they are active. Zombies in a graveyard or wasteland aren't seen as a threat. Zombies in a ransacked building are going to be killed and headshotted mercilessly, but a graveyard or wasteland?--Labine50 MHG|MEMS 23:39, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  3. Spam Doesn't make sense. Zombies can regenerate, but survivors can't (based on the response to Funt). Also, in the same response, how does this "save AP" standing up? Doesn't this nerf Digestion?--Pesatyel 06:26, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  4. Useless waste of time skill. zombies don't care about healing particularly, and this is far too weak. I didn't even bother reading past the synopsis, if it has 'ooh amazing clever' things to 'balance' it later in the suggestion then I'm using the reasoning in the Do and Do Nots about such. --ExplodingFerret 00:59, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Custom attacks

Timestamp: Wheresthefun 21:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Type: gamemechanic(ish)
Scope: Everyone
Description: For roleplaying purposes you may change what the message whoever you attacked recieved, for instance you could replace "soandso punches you for 1 damage" with "so and so backhands you for 1 damage shouting, 'TAKE THAT'." This would mostly just be to make things more interesting, and would not be required. It would show up when you chose to edit your profile.

Keep Votes

  1. Man... - I like this idea, but no one else seems too.... though it does make sense that it might get stupid after a while with people adding stupid things. Maybe they could let you have a choice of weapons from a list, like: "soandso attacks you with a sword" instead of an axe so there is a few choices for each weapon. ThreeSided 23:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Kill Votes

  1. Kill - How does this makes things more interesting? There is no reason for something like this to be in the game. --Reaper with no name 23:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. Kill - Not interesting enough. Mabye if it said "User custom attacked you with weapon used", but that would have a larger server implementation. --Joe O'Wood 23:26, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  3. Kill it with fire - I can see it now, people will start posting things like "User attacks you for 2 damage with his large penis!" And we just don't need that. Schizmo 23:42, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  4. Kill Good idea, but I can currently talk trash to someone after I just killed them anyways (talking to body.) So I can say "(bitch slapped zombie) then says "yeah! You betta have muh money next time, bitch" So you know, it's all covered, just use some quotations and ()'s from time to time.. I know I do. MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 23:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
    • #Kill - Can very easily kill the flavor of the game. --Reaper with no name 00:09, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Note - You must know which suggestions you've already voted on? Duplicate vote struckJonny12 Talk 00:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  5. I can see having a SET response for each weapon (I like the diversity flavor of it), but being able to decide WHAT the response says? No.--Pesatyel 06:29, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  6. Kill - Once again, I actually agree with Pesatyel. If you want to make things more interesting, just spend 1AP to say something after the kill (do dead people hear conversations?) --Wikidead 08:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. Spam - If anyone can change what the message anyone they attacked recieved, you would recieve "Player player beats you to death with a steel dildo for 1 damage" with "Player bitch slaps you for 1 damage shouting, 'where ma money bitches'." This would mostly just Fucking ruin the game!--Zbmainiac 22:22, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. SpamConfused - what, I set what someone else would say when they hit me? If it's the other way around, then maybe. Clarify. --Funt Solo 22:16, 4 November 2006 (UTC) On the basis of Zbmainiac's eloquent diatribe. --Funt Solo 22:33, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  3. See Zbmainiac's vote.--Labine50 MHG|MEMS 23:43, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
  4. As Zbmaniac. Personally, I'd go for "$p1 hits $p2 for $amount,000,000 damage" --ExplodingFerret 01:04, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Sewers (essentially, a hiding place for zombies)

Timestamp: Schizmo 23:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Type: Balance Change?
Scope: New Zombies
Description: This applies mainly to new zombies, but can be taken advantage of by older zombies as well.

This suggestion was previously modified, and in accordence with the rules, has been re-submitted with the changes.

The idea is that, much like Malls and Power Stations, the Zombies need a place to hide out away from the human assaults, the same way the humans hide from zombies. Everyone knows that the main goal of the humans is to hide out in barricaded buildings and avoid the zombie hoards that lurk on the city streets. But when one of those humans happens to get themselves killed because they're new to the game, or even if they become PK'd by another human, it's tough to adjust to the life of being a zombie.

I propose that the empty, and otherwise useless blocks of land (streets and alleys) become spotted with entrances to Sewers that zombies can use to hide out away from humans.

WHAT IT DOES:

  • Gives new zombies a place to build up in numbers and hide out from humans.
  • Sewers can be entered by humans, however the amount of waste and corpses would automatically infect the human (infectious bite, except, no bite). In addition, the cost of movement to humans in a sewer would be 2 AP per block. This is a way to deter, but not prevent, human access to sewers, as a way to protect new zombies from being killed and constantly having to spend 10 AP to stand.
  • Should the Ruins of the Damned suggestion be considered and/or implimented, the Sewers could also be a place for the added regeneration.

WHAT IT DOESN'T DO:

  • Zombies would NOT be able to drag humans into the sewers, but should a human be IN a sewer, zombies would be allowed to drag the humans out onto the streets, with the Feeding Drag skill.

Open to any and all suggestions for improvement.

Keep Votes
For Votes here
Kill Votes
Against Votes here

  1. Need clarification - There's one thing I'm wondering about. Are the sewers only under the street areas, or do they extend under all the buildings, only having entrances at the sreet blocks? The wording of this implies that there may be sewer areas under buildings since it says you can move from one sewer block to another. --Reaper with no name 00:05, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  2. Kill - it's too harsh on survivors - 2AP to move and auto-infection. (There are already sewer tunnels built into the Peer Reviewed The Underworld suggestion, and they cost 2AP to move for survivors.) --Funt Solo 00:10, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  3. Kill - Like I said before it was removed, better than Lurching Gate AND Free Running --Ignatz 19:35, 5 November 2006 (EDT)
  4. Kill - I like the idea of alternative layers to Urban Dead, but this particular suggestion is just too harsh on survivors (infection and 2AP walk? that's just too much) --Wikidead 08:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  5. Kill - Add a hazmat suit for humans so they'll quit complaining but make it more difficult to find than a flak jacket. With this on they could enter the sewers without infection but they'd still suffer from the movement modifier. Reaper with no name, having a sewer under a building would not imply sewer access to the building. I wanted to vote for but it will not pass like this. Low level zeds need a safe place to hide. --Carl Panzram 19:53, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
  6. As Funt. --ExplodingFerret 01:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes
Spam/Dupe Votes here

Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Suggestions/4th-Nov-2006&oldid=601337"