Suggestions/7th-Jun-2006

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

Using Experience Points to Buy Items

Spaminated with 8 spam votes/10 total votes. Most voters thought that it did not fit with the game, and would make it too easy for characters with extra XP to create items. –Bob Hammero ModB'cratTA 07:50, 7 June 2006 (BST)


Attack Delay

Spaminated with 8 spam votes/9 total votes. Most voters did not like the idea of making the game slower. –Bob Hammero ModB'cratTA 09:44, 7 June 2006 (BST)


Lurching Gait Change

Withdrawn by author, I really need to work on the wording so it's more understandable. - Jedaz 09:56, 7 June 2006 (BST)


Vomit

Timestamp: 09:24, 7 June 2006 (BST)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombies
Description: I have seen several "Vomit" ideas before, this is different from them in how it works and only shares a name Please don't vote Dupe unless you can link to one that works the same way as this.

Vomit would be a Skill under Digestion. When the Zombie vomits it targets 1 person in specific, however because of the splatter there is a chance that the 2 nearest people could be hit as well. The 2 nearest people would be whoever is 1 above and 1 below in the "actives stack" Attacking the top or the bottom of the stack will not get any Splatter in that direction. Also note that the Splatter might be human or zombie depending on when they were active.

The Vomit Attack would do 1 damage to each person it hits for 20% ACC. That makes it .6 Damage per AP spent.

Another Skill under Vomit called Putrid Bile would cause the damage done to the selected target to become 2. Those hit by the splatter are not affected. This translates into .8 Damage per AP

One last skill also under Vomit called Forced Expulsion would add 15% to the ACC of the vomit making it 35%. This without Putrid Bile would turn into 1.05 Damage per AP.

With the whole thing maxed out it would do 1.4 Damage per AP. However it is spread out over the 3 people hit.

As far as gaining XP goes, I don't think Vomit would allow quick XP gain because you are spreading out your attack and unlikely to get the Kill bonus unless the they were near death when you found it.

Comparing it to Claws and Bite I feel it has its pros and cons. Claws average more Damage-per AP and provide the tangling grasp bonus. Bite does more damage, but it can heal the zombie and infect the survivor. Vomit would do as much overall damage as Bite (with the higher ACC), but it would not have a chance to kill a full health survivor due to its nature of spreading the Damage.

As far as the fun factor goes, I feel that this would quickly become a favorite among Zombie players who want to "Share the love" and hurt as many people as they can. The attack would be fun to use and still not be underpowered or overpowered.

Votes

  1. Author Keep - I feel this will give Zombies more attack options and make things more interesting. From my Zombie ALTs point of view, I'd use this purely for the added fun of vomiting on my victims, as well as the chance to leave my mark by attacking as many people as I could. --Teksura 09:24, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  2. Spam - Multiply by a Billion. 'Nuff said. --A Bothan Spy Mod WTF U! 09:25, 7 June 2006 (BST)
    Re:I thought of that. but your claws are STILL more effective then the vomit. a horde of Zombies will get more kills if they all Claw then if they all vomit. Overall Claw is 1.5 damage per AP (not counting grasp) this maxes at 1.4 damage per AP. Doesn't matter how many Zombies are vomiting, they would still get more kills if they all Clawed. Can you please tell me how this fails Multiply by a Billion but the more dangerous and more effective Zombie Claws doesn't? --Teksura 09:30, 7 June 2006 (BST)
    Other comments moved to Talk:Suggestions#Vomit. Do not hold long conversations on this page.Bob Hammero TW!P! 10:29, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  3. Keep - I quite like the idea of having another attack for zombies, I mean, survivors already have about 7 or 8 ways to attack. - Zementh 09:41, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  4. Spam - Unless the Zombie Apocalypse is actually the result of acute food poisoning. --Jimbo Bob ASSU! 09:50, 7 June 2006 (BST)
    Re - I know I saw a bit of a Zombie movie once where they vomited at one point (wasn't paying much attention tho) This is mostly to give another attack option for Zombies. --Teksura 09:56, 7 June 2006 (BST)
    Re: Your citation system must be the envy of all the major universities. Anyway, regardless of what you may or may not have possibly thought you saw some indeterminant portion of at an unspecified time... this is very much out of sync with the character of the game. --Jimbo Bob ASSU! 10:09, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  5. Spam - What Cyberbob said. –Bob Hammero TW!P! 10:00, 7 June 2006 (BST)
    Re: As i said. Once you do Multiply it by a Billion its still less then claws. if you want to tell me on the talk page how you can get more kills by doing less damage you're welcome to. I'd also like to take this moment to ask everyone to explain why they are voteing Spam on the Talk page. I think this is one of those knee jerk things where you don't look at the numbers. --Teksura 10:04, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  6. Keep - Well tought and balanced, altough people are going to vote spam just because it has the word "Vomit" on it. Anyways, don't expect it to be implemented, most Urban Dead players panic at hearing of area damage, so much that they start to multiply by billions altough this game has less than 50 thousands players. Well, i must go *goes to play Nexus war* --Matthew Fahrenheit 10:02, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  7. Kill - I know that your maths is wrong. You were right for 0.6 Dammage per AP for Vomit Attack, but it's 1.2 Dammage per AP for Putrid Bile, and 2.1 Dammage per AP for Forced Expulsion. That is unless the mechanics of your suggestion change midway through the skill tree. - Jedaz 13:43, 7 June 2006 (BST) Edit - Accidently misread the suggestion slightly but you still did your math wrong. It was 2.1 Dammage per AP for Forced Expulsion and Putrid Bile together and 1.05 for Forced Expulsion on it's own which you did actualy get right. - Jedaz 13:47, 7 June 2006 (BST)
    • Re What math are you useing? Where I sit, 4 * 0.35 = 1.4 thats nowhere near 2.1, Can you please double check your math and reconsider your vote if you baised this vote off the math? I did a little extra math and see you tweeked my numbers to make it 6 * 0.35 = 2.1, Where did the 6 come from? --Teksura 00:06, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  8. Keep - But just by the skin of my yellow country teeth. The 'by a billion' comment refers to the fact that it it's an area of effect skill, which lots of people hate. Ten zeds, all breaking in at the same time, all using this skill rapid fire, could do a lot of damage to a lot of people. But you've balanced damage/AP and kept the area of effect down to three people. This provides a useful third attack for zed's. I think XP should only be gained for the one primary target's damage. And math is in fact correct; maxed damage/AP is 1.4 because the bonus damage only applies to the primary attack. --Burgan 14:24, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  9. Keep - The math looks fine to me. Note that with everything maxed the main target takes 1 more damage than the secondaries. 1.4 MBR is certainly not overpowered compared to current zombie skills, and AoE can be a balanced mechanic if there is a cap on the max possible damage (see Nexus War, which has plenty of capped AoE spells and such). Since there's a very strict cap of 4 maximum damage on this, which is equivalent to what bite does, I don't see a problem. The author is right that it would be fun to spread damage around indiscriminately. It's perhaps not the most strategically advantageous option, but I do like giving players choices. --Ember MBR 14:43, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  10. Kill - For now. This is actually one of the more well-thought-out of these types of suggestions, but I'm still weary of giving any player area damage. Now, if Kev goes kinda bonkers and implements a submachine gun (heaven forbid), then I'd say this is a definite keeper. NOTE: If this does get implemented, I suggest making zombies immune to avoid a Zking spree. SmartyMart 15:51, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  11. Kill - id vote keep if zombies were immune tho--xbehave 17:27, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  12. Kill - I'm a bit sceptical about area damage, but still quite well thought out. A good start for vomiting zombies \o/ --Nob666 17:37, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  13. Keep - I'm really on the fence about this... so I'll just igve you the benefit of the doubt. The mechanics are fine, but I don't really like the idea of constant vomiting. Do the zombies just have infinate stomache acid or something? I'd like it better if the attack was something else, but that's not enough to vote kill from me. --Rozozag 18:46, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  14. spam- how the hell does throwing up hurt someone, oh i know let's make it so that if a survivor uses 10 bottles of beer he throws up and causes evryone in the room to fall down and break their neck causing instant death Robbie the king 19:40, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  15. Keep- Good use of AoE, and who cares if the zombies get hurt? Even if yo manage to kill one, it is not a headshot, and only takes 1 AP if they have ankle grab to stand up. And as far as reality goes, Vultures use thier vomit as self defense on the plains of the Serengeti. Rationalize it as a corrosive substance. - Zizanie13 20:06, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  16. Kill Just No... However having seen a containment breach when someone Vomited after being diagnosed with Hemeragic fever, I can understand the idea of Puke=Area effect damage. Maybe if you retooled the suggestion as an alternative delivery of infectious bite... Conndrakamod T W! 20:08, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  17. Keep - Just because of this damn spamming wave. Zombies are no aliens. This skill is not overpowered. I can't see anyone using it when having the possibility to use fully skilled claws or bite. --Niilomaan 21:33, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  18. Kill - "Chance"? Ambiguous ftw. Tokakeke C4NT 21:50, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  19. Spam - Just what we need...anorexic zombies. Sonny Corleone WTF 22:23, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  20. Kill I don't like the flavor. I don't care where you saw it, I don't like it. Also, I dislike the fact that it can randomly hit your allies (and I don't think current game mechanics support this anyways). Also, I would never actually use it. --McArrowni 22:43, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  21. Kill - I don't want to get puked on randomly. Make them spend an AP to puke on me and no killy willy. --Spraycan Willy MalTel 22:45, 7 June 2006 (BST)
    Kill - I agree with the previous voter. Make them spend an AP to puke on someone and give it a chance of missing because it would be classified as an attack. Unsigned vote. –Xoid01:32, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  22. Spam - Its already been said. --Steel Hammer 04:23, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  23. Kill - I like it, but it needs work. First of all, to the spam voters, zombies are extremely limited in what they can do. As for the suggestion, what about limiting now often a zombie can vomit? Maybe they have to use Digestion first to "store" the vomit. And maybe limit the "splash" to either 1 additional target? And make zombies immune.--Pesatyel 06:02, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  24. Spam - Unless the attack description says something about the zombie turning their head all the way arround and the vomit being pea soup green. David Malfisto 12:50, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  25. Keep - might make playing a zombie more fun--Gage 05:42, 16 June 2006 (BST)
  26. Keep - AOE skills are often suspect, but I think you worked out a reasonable solution for it. --Ashnazg 0656, 17 June 2006 (GMT)
  27. Spam - Per spam botes above. -- Mettaur 19:04, 20 June 2006 (BST)

Tear Throat

Timestamp: 17:40, 7 June 2006 (BST)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombies
Description: Prerequisite Skill: Tangling Grasp

Exp Cost: 100

How it works: Tear Throat would be a new attack option available to zombies. It is only usable after a zombie has successfully grabbed hold of a target via Tangling Grasp. Once a grapple has been achieved, the attack drop down menu will now feature the option to Tear Throat. When the zombie loses it’s hold on a target, the option to Tear Throat will disappear from the drop down menu until a hold is achieved again.

What it does: Tear Throat has a base of 15% to hit, but since it will always be benefited by Tangling Grasp the true percent to hit is actually 25%.

Tear Throat will inflict 6 points of damage on a successful attack and thus reward 6 exp to the attacking zombie and half for attacks on another zombie per normal rules. This damage is not subject to reduction by flak jackets (as I don’t know of any flak jackets that cover the neck).

Tear Throat is not specifically a bite attack and will not cause Digestion/Infection to take effect.


Ok. Now before I see cans of Spam thrown at me for daring to suggest a zombie inflict big damage, let me throw out some numbers I crunched to show how this skill would fit in.

For a zombie with 4 skills: VM + DG + RF + TG 50 AP x .60 = 30 x 3 dmg = 90/50 AP = 1.8 Average Damage per AP.

For a zombie with 3 skills: VM + NL + TG 50 AP x .40 = 20 x 4 dmg = 80/50 AP = 1.6 Average Damage per AP.

For a zombie with: VM + DG + TG + Tear Throat 50 AP x .25 = 12.5 x 6 dmg = 75/50 = 1.5 Average Damage per AP.

Granted these averages are skewed high because the TG bonus to hit isn‘t active on every strike, but it still demonstrates the relative effectiveness of each attack. Tear Throat is actually a little less effective than biting, but its advantage is providing a chance to inflict bigger damage.

What this does provide is a more powerful attack option for zombies without overbalancing the game in their favor. These numbers could always be tweaked if they work better in a different way. And since the skill creates a brand new attack, it could always have an additional skill added on later to enhance it (say Improved Tear Throat does 1 more damage which using the above calculation would be 1.75 Average Damage per AP). If this is a dupe of another idea, please let me know! Thanks!

Votes

  1. Author Keep - I'd like to see zombies have a stronger attack option that isn't overpowering. I think this works. --DirskoSM 17:45, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  2. Keep - Honestly, I think that f***ing b**** RNG will make this skill basically useless, but I'm willing to give it a shot anyways. Although, I very much doubt that everyone else will. --Rozozag 18:36, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  3. Kill - I think the zombie should lose it's hold on a successful throat attack. I still dislike the no flak, though it makes sense for the throat; I'd rather that suggestions didn't circumvent flak jackets, as they only help vs human attacks right now. --Burgan 18:40, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  4. Kill A zombie is better 25% to do six damage is worse than 60% to do 3 damage. In that regard it's more or less pointless. Also it seems unfair that flak jackets do not affect it considering that flak jackets also protect from headshots. --Jon Pyre 18:48, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  5. Keep - Nice suggestion. Flak jackets do not protect from headshots. I have been "headshot" many times, and my zombie wears a jacket. --Pinpoint 19:10, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  6. Keep - Good idea. It should possibly apply to flak jackets, to give them a use, but Tear Thoart might be a good way for Zombies to gain EXP, by attacking other Zombies and gaining 3 EXP per attack.--ShadowScope 19:14, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  7. Kill - I agree with Jon Pyre, the skill is utterly pointless. Unless you include a sub skill that ups the hit rate to about 40% which will make the skill more useful. --John Z. Delorean 19:15, 7 June 2006 (BST)
    Re - A 40% to hit at 6 damage would have an average damage per AP of 2.4. That would be far and above a zombie's most lethal attack and would likely get shot down for unbalance. I did mention a sub skill could always be added to this in the future, perhaps increasing the damage or giving a small bonus % to hit (maybe both?). --DirskoSM 19:32, 7 June 2006 (BST)
    Re - I don't know about you but tearing out someones throat sounds leathal, if Tear Throat Became A Skill it should be the Zombies Most Powerful skill, So Long as It's had it's upgrades --John Z. Delorean
  8. Kill - 25% to hit is frustration incarnate (see: attacking barricades). I never use any attack with less than a 40% hit rate if I can help it. (In fact, as a zombie I always Grasp before biting to get the hit rate up to 40%.) Note that since this attack confers fewer benefits than Bite (no digestion, no infection), you can probably get away with more damage per AP. --Ember MBR 19:18, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  9. Kill - 25% for 6 damage sucks. Shotguns do twice that much damage, and have 65% to hit at max. Be more daring with your hit percentage. SmartyMart 19:36, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  10. Kill - As above. Should do more damage, then I'd keep. Tokakeke C4NT 19:53, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  11. Keep As I've said before I'm pro survivor but this seems like a balanced skill for Zombies, and like the author said its a step similar to "Basic Firearms" and could always be upgraded by further skills later on. Conndrakamod T W! 20:04, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  12. Keep - It's at least a start. –Bob Hammero TW!P! 20:08, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  13. Keep - Yay, a well balanced, interesting zombie skill, that could be upgraded over time. And YES, it is less effective than using claws or bite, but the fact of the matter is its something NEW and INTERESTING for zombies. If something isn't done fast, the whole game is going to drop back down to 80:20 or whatever ridiculous ratio it was before feeding groan and 10AP rev cost was implemented (And now nerfed thanks to those bloody generators) ...Rant over. As you were. --McDave 20:45, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  14. Kill - It doesn't seem well balanced, just a bit underpowered. It needs something else, then it's a keep. --Matthew Fahrenheit 22:20, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  15. Keep - It's always nice to have more attack types, and great to have high variance options like survivors Ybbor 22:25, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  16. Keep - I would make it 7 damage, to be 1.75 average damage per grasped attack, only a hair less than the current 1.8. But it's ok at 6. --Dan 22:26, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  17. Kill - Pointless as written. It needs to be stronger. It's only potential worth as written is a high variance attack, which I hope is what you meant by "more powerful attack option for zombies without overbalancing the game"... The problem is it's still too low on accuracy to even be a high variance attack. The best way to do 6 damage in 2 AP is not to try to go for the throat twice but to claw twice (36% to hit twice with claws as opposed to 25% to hit once with tear throat), as opposed to the best way to do 4 damage in 2 AP, which is to bite (40% to hit once versus 36% chance to claw twice). --McArrowni 23:06, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  18. keep - a high dammage attack would add abit of variation imo--xbehave 23:35, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  19. Kill - Great. Flares for zombies without the massive damage. --Jimbo Bob ASSU! 23:36, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  20. Kill - tough call for me. I killed baised off the low Acc. If you made it do 5 damage in exchange for a higher % to hit. I'd probally vote keep --Teksura 00:12, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  21. Keep - i see this as an interesting extra option for Zed players, i would however say that 5 damage would be preferable to 6, as 6 is greater damage than a pistol bullet, which seems unlikely. It is enough that this attack(understably) by-psses flak jackets, however i think 5 damage would be more accurate. --Grog 00:43, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  22. Keep -ME NEED BLOOODDDDDDDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(yes keep a new attack would be nice.)--LCpl Mendoza 02:58, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  23. Keep -- Give the Flak Jacket a reason to exist. Almafeta 05:40, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  24. Keep-I'm inclined to think it SHOULD be affected by flak, but I think it works as is. And the comparison to barricades is stupid. My zombie just got through a VS+2 barricade with 12 AP (I missed twice). The point is that the high damage has to be balanced with a low hit chance. Unless it were to use "ammo" like a gun.--Pesatyel 06:08, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  25. Keep - Hilarious! This will pose zero threat to survivors. Please implement this, Kevan! Ah ha ha ha ha! --A Bothan Spy Mod WTF U! 08:44, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  26. Kill - No more useless skills, please. And if a Zombie Hunter who goes round shooting people in the head has their damage reduced by flak jackets, I don't see why this should be different. David Malfisto 12:54, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  27. Kill -This is way over powered and would be so un-fair to survivors it's not even funny. You already only need 1 ap to stand up and we need 20 ap, what are you trying to do??? Further un-balance the game?
    Re - 1. Sign your comments, 2. You don't need 20 AP to stand up. -- Ashnazg 0659, 17 June 2006 (GMT)
  28. Kill - Not much point in having an attack that is less effective than the existing ones. There's that thing about variability, but that's not so important to zombies. -- Ashnazg 0659, 17 June 2006 (GMT)

Barricade Message Change

Timestamp: 19:25, 7 June 2006 (BST)
Type: A Slight change to barricade attack messages
Scope: Zombies and survivors
Description: Ok I have always known that biting and shooting at barricades does nothing but only recently I have found out that when you bite or shoot at a barricade it doesn't tell you that it does nothing. What I propose is that whenever you bite or shoot a barricade instead of the message:

"You Bite At The Barricade" or "You Shoot At The Barricade"

It changes to:

"You Bite At The Barricade, It Doesn't Appear To Do Anything" and "You Shoot At The Barricade, It Doesn't Appear To Do Anything"

This small change will stop newbies from burning all of their ap trying to do something that does nothing. Please note that this dosen't change the ap cost of shooting or biting a barricade, the ap cost will remain at 1ap.

Votes

  1. Keep - I actually thought that the 'creaks' message indicated that nothing happend. This would be a good clarification. --SirBlastalot 22:28, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  2. Keep - Author Vote --John Z. Delorean
  3. Keep - Seems like a decent idea. What seems obvious to you or me might be totally missed by a newbie. SmartyMart 19:37, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  4. Keep - Hooray. Tokakeke C4NT 19:38, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  5. Keep - Good call. These are things I had to find out from the wiki/forums, many moons ago. --Ember MBR 19:40, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  6. keep meh i see no problem Robbie the king 19:41, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  7. keep - Simple change that helps newbies out. Works for me! - DirskoSM 19:51, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  8. keep - I'm all about helping new players figuring stuff out... I dont know how many shotgun shells I wasted trying to blow my way into a building when I first started. Conndrakamod T W! 19:59, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  9. Keep - Absolutely. I know that I wasted a lot of time biting barricades with my zombie alt when I first started. –Bob Hammero TW!P! 20:09, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  10. Keep To this day I was not sure if they did anything. This would help the noobs. HamsterNinja 20:26, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  11. Keep - Very good suggestion. It adds flavor and helps people out that may think biting or shooting barricades has any effect. --ZedKilla 20:29, 7 June 2006 (BST) W!
  12. Keep - Bravo! --Burgan 20:49, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  13. Keep - After biting that barricade for least dozen times. --Niilomaan 21:16, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  14. Keep - Would definatly help noobs. --Zementh 21:20, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  15. Keep - I actually bited barricades once =P .--Matthew Fahrenheit 22:19, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  16. Keep The truth shall set you free. --Jon Pyre 22:24, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  17. Keep - Liberate newbie zombies from the tyrany of the million bites barricades--McArrowni 23:07, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  18. Keep - Hellz yeah. --Jimbo Bob ASSU! 23:41, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  19. Keep - Perhaps even add in a few more messages just so you don't feel sad. "You tear a useless chunk of wood off of the barricade with your bite" or "You fire at the barricade and miss completely, Greedo" -- Tirion529 01:25, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  20. Keep - GREEDO FTW!!!! Sonny Corleone WTF 01:28, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  21. Keep - It's always nice to know if things do something --DJSMITHCDF 02:34, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  22. Keep - Or better yet, "You bite the barracade, it does not taste very good" Monkeylord 02:44, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  23. Keep - This could have saved me from wasting an entire clip on a barricade. It's too late for me, but not for others... Agent Heroic 05:12, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  24. Keep - The idea is sound. Hopefully Kevan can come up with some good flavour text for an 'alternate' hit. (Sort of like when you whack a regular barricade, there is the regular version and the 'It creaks.' version. But… better.) – Xoid 06:28, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  25. Keep - Good one. --A Bothan Spy Mod WTF U! 08:44, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  26. Keep - Good suggestion - Egglord 11:07, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  27. Keep - As above. David Malfisto 12:55, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  28. Keep - A useful suggestion indeed. I applaud you. John the Quicker 16:12, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  29. Dupe - proud to be the first dupe vote: Kevan just put it in! I accidently bit a barricade and got the message "you bite at the barricade. It doesn't seem to have any effect" or something like that. Ybbor 15:20, 10 June 2006 (BST)
    Re - When I suggested this, it wasn't implemented, but now it is! Woo my suggestion got implemented!!!!!!!!!!. --John Z. Delorean
    Re - I know, that's why I said "just put it in" ;) Ybbor 21:46, 12 June 2006 (BST)
  30. Keep / Close as already implemented (Yes I know that's not a valid vote) -- Mettaur 19:06, 20 June 2006 (BST)

Blood Trail

Timestamp: 19:57, 7 June 2006 (BST)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombies
Description: This skill would go into the skill tree as follows:

scent death -> scent fear -> scent blood -> blood trail

It would add a new command to the zombie menu: "sniff blood", and return the location of the nearest wounded survivor (less than 25 hp) within a 5 block radius (same range as NecroNet). This skill would allow a zombie to sniff out a wounded survivor even if they are hiding inside a building.

The message required would be something like:

You smell the scent of fresh blood 5 blocks to the North and 1 block to the East.

or

You smell nothing unusual. if there are no wounded survivors within a 5 block radius.

Even with feeding groan, it's still tough for a zombie to find a honest meal around here. With the addition of radio to help survivors communicate and coordinate, I think it's only fair the zombies get a new radar skill as well.

Because "sniff blood" will only display the location of a single survivor, and only if that survivor has been wounded, I don't think it's overpowered. Heck, the survivors have NecroNet to show the location of ALL zombies nearby. Also, the zombie would still have to crack open the barricades to get at their meal.

If survivors are worried about wounded survivors giving away the position of their safehouses, they can just heal the poor saps.

Votes

  1. Keep - Author Vote --SmartyMart 20:14, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  2. Keep - Good deal. Tokakeke C4NT 20:21, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  3. Kill - I really want to vote keep, but I think giving the exact location makes this fail the multiply it by a billion test. Change the message to something like "You smell the scent of fresh blood about 5 blocks to the Northeast" and I'll vote keep. –Bob Hammero TW!P! 20:22, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  4. Kill/Re How Would it determine which survivor to return as the "Target" the Most wounded? Most recent? I'm not to worried about the specific location since "Scent Trail" does the same thing more or less (just in re: to a differnt medium) but there is a LOT of blood in Malton... Conndrakamod T W! 20:25, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  5. Kill - It's too similar to an earlier suggested suggestion and besides it just isn't that good of a suggestion. --ZedKilla 20:26, 7 June 2006 (BST) W!
  6. Kill I just don't like radar suggestions. Dummy Barricading is as acceptable as brain-rotters clogging up revive points. This is just an uber feeding groan. HamsterNinja 20:29, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  7. keep hell survivors can co-ordinate easily so why can't zombiesRobbie the king 20:31, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  8. Kill - Scent Death and Feeding Groan are already better than this. Looking for one wounded survivor is likely to put you in front of an XHB building that you have no hope of cracking on your own. Zombies should go where the mob action is -- hence SD and FG. --Ember MBR 20:44, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  9. Kill Yeah, uber feeding groan is overkill. --Jon Pyre 22:25, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  10. kill- what Conndraka said, problems with target--xbehave 23:51, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  11. Kill - I think this will probally be far more effective then you think. It is over-powered becasue survivors will never be able to hide as the Zombies will never have to look for them. Try making the directions more vague. On the other hand people might call "X-Ray skill" (Shocker they haven't already done that) --Teksura 00:15, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  12. Kill - Would maybe be useful if it only sensed the wounded survivors outside, on the street, or in wide open buildings --Boxy 05:48, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  13. Kill - Potential X-Ray vision. --A Bothan Spy Mod WTF U! 08:45, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  14. Kill Long range Xray vision. David Malfisto 12:56, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  15. Kill Empty barricades are frustrating, but it's a legitimate survivor tactic. X-ray vision isn't good either. Ashnazg 0703 , 17 June 2006 (GMT)
  16. Kill - 5 block Radius (100 blocks?) is too much. -- Mettaur 19:07, 20 June 2006 (BST)

Generator Explosion

Spaminated with 10 spam votes/13 total votes. Most voters thought that the penalties imposed by the suggestion were vastly overpowered. –Bob Hammero ModB'cratTA 23:46, 7 June 2006 (BST)


Moltov Cocktails

Spaminated with 7 spam votes/8 total votes. Most voters thought that the suggestion was incredibly unbalanced. –Bob Hammero ModB'cratTA 23:50, 7 June 2006 (BST)


Self-Immolation

Timestamp: 22:50, 7 June 2006 (BST)
Type: New Action
Scope: Surviors
Description: Survivors carrying a fuel can and a flare gun have the ability to set themselves on fire. Possession of these two items would create a new action button, "self-immolate". Pressing this button would bring up a "Are you sure you want to set yourself on fire? Doing so will kill you. Press the self-immolate button again if you're serious" prompt (similar to jumping out a window). Pressing the button twice will cause you to pour the gasoline over yourself then shoot yourself with the flare gun, setting yourself on fire. This is immedietely fatal.

Self-Immolation costs 1 AP, and has the follow effects:

  • It kills you.
  • It uses up 1 fuel can and 1 flare gun.
  • It lets all nearby survivors know you've just set yourself on fire. (i.e. SmartyMart doses himself with gasoline, then sets himself ablaze).
  • It automatically deposits your corpse outside the building. This is rationalized as you running outside the building in your last crazed spasms of pain. (This is to prevent the "death abuse to circumvent barricades" problem).

I see this as an alternative means of suicide if you want to be a zombie but can't find a convenient window nearby. It's also a way to make one hell of a statement to nearby survivors (for added effect, the self-immolatee can shout out a few last words or a political message before doing the deed). Depositing the corpse outside the building will prevent folks from killing themselves then automatically standing up as a zombie inside a safehouse.

During a siege, combat-revived zombies could also step outside and do this in the middle of the horde as some kind of morale booster, I suppose.

P.S. yes, this is pretty freakin' dark, but the game already lets you hurl yourself out an open window.

Votes

  1. Keep - Author's vote. Inspired by all the fire-related suggestions lately. SmartyMart 23:01, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  2. Keep - Usually I spam these but this is too damn funny. OMG BUDDHIST MONKS ON FIRE!!! Sonny Corleone WTF 23:07, 7 June 2006 (BST)
    Re: - Thanks, Sonny. You should get some credit for this. Your sig was, after all, the primary inspiration for the suggestion :). SmartyMart 00:00, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  3. Kill - A good way to kill yourself, and return yourself to the land of the dead. I like it, but I'm voting Kill since if you just stand outside and wait, someone will kill you anyway, saving you AP. (Standing outside in the middle of a zombie-infested city is a GREAT way to die, plus it gives the new Zombies EXP, helping out Zombie-kind in general) It is a great idea, however. Also, a vote for it to be sent to tthe Humorous Suggestions.--ShadowScope 23:21, 7 June 2006 (BST)
    Re - It's true it's better ettiquette to wait for a zombie to get you (EXP for them), but I can think of instances when you wouldn't want to wait (i.e. there's an inactive survivor locked out of a safehouse standing next to you, or a wide open safehouse nearby just dying for a feeding groan). SmartyMart 23:26, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  4. Keep - Just for the hell of it, as well as the sheer hilarity. I'd never do it, but then again, I don't want to be a zombie.--Sgt. 20m813 (MPD) 23:22, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  5. Keep it with fire : ) --Rozozag 23:26, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  6. Keep Awesome and hilarious :) --Grim 11:49, 7 June 2006 (GMT)
  7. Keep - Why not? –Bob Hammero TW!P! 23:56, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  8. Keep - This is just too hilarious. Tokakeke C4NT 00:03, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  9. Keep - The sole reason is that others see it. I would use this a lot with my DOA alt. I normally end my revived day by PKing untill I AP out, but why allow them to shoot me when I can put on a big show for them? This seems to be more of a "for fun" and "For RPing" idea rather then a "For gameplay" thing. But I really want to set Teia on fire now. Flameing Death cultist nun of DOOM --Teksura 00:22, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  10. Kill - Wet blanket! No, I mean I'm being a wet blanket, not that survivors can use a wet blanket to stop you. I'd of spammed this if it didn't have this ridiculous support; fine for humor but not for function. If you say this will save you AP are you proposing you'll spend time as a survivor so that you can search fuel cans and flare guns, just to have them on you when you need them? --Burgan 00:25, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  11. Kill - Very complicated for what it adds to the game. --Toejam 00:27, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  12. Keep - OMG, Sonny's dream come true, everyone RUN!!! --Matthew Fahrenheit 01:08, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  13. Keep - A zombie apococlypse is meant to be dark. It's meant to include crazies. Plus… this would be so fucking cool! (I'm positively giddy with fanboi lust for SmartyMart. Uh, disregard that.) –Xoid01:26, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  14. Keep - I want to burn myself. --Ember MBR 01:53, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  15. Keep - I will SO do this at every special day... --McArrowni 02:04, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  16. Keep - Burn the unbelievers! Oh wait... I don't believe... Erm should I burn myself? Yes! --Etherdrifter 02:21, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  17. Keep - Heh, real funny ;) --DJSMITHCDF 02:38, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  18. Keep - Because people burning to death is hilarious. --Jimbo Bob ASSU! 02:39, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  19. Keep- BWAHAHA! I can picture it now! Monkeylord 02:49, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  20. Keep- I will not let you f$#6455 kill me zed! I'll burn before you bite me! Your cool suggestion= hilarious --revoso 03:06, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  21. Keep - If you want to commit suicide who am I to stop you. --Steel Hammer 04:25, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  22. Keep - I love this one! I reckon a text box should come up too, so that the nearby players can hear one final dying message from you as you run outside screaming! edit: Maybe it should be only allowed inside a building though, to prevent those locked outside from denying zombies a feed? --Boxy 05:42, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  23. Kill -- Action buttons should be added sparsely, and there's no button allowing you to swallow a bullet or shell, or cut your own throat. Almafeta 05:45, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  24. Keep ooohhhh something else to do on the Extravaganza Conndrakamod T W! 06:00, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  25. Kill Meh, no big deal either way. I'm voting kill because it doesn't seem complete (the "kind of a moral booster, I suppose" for example).--Pesatyel 06:14, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  26. Kill Adds nothing new to the game and clutters up the screen by adding a button few will ever use. --Jon Pyre 06:29, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  27. Keep -- Something to add some spice for all the players fleeing from this game like rats from a sinking ship. furtim 07:13, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  28. Kill -- See, they listen to the rap music, which gives dem the brain damage. So, they don't know the Urban Dead is all about. See, Urban Dead is like a pudding pop...Uh, no, no, Urban Dead is actually more like the New Coke: it'll be round forevr', anck, anck, anck... -- November7 07:28, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  29. Keep - Perfect for all those emos out there. --A Bothan Spy Mod WTF U! 08:46, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  30. Kill - It's pretty easy to suicide as a survivor. Like you said, "the game already lets you hurl yourself out an open window." Failing that, just stand outside. --Raystanwick 11:41, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  31. Kill - Because "SmartyMart" reminds me of my ex girlfriend... and the immolation message assumes everyone in Malton is male. David Malfisto 12:59, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  32. Keep - Oh very good! Click on my name to see something funny! John the Quicker 16:34, 8 June 2006
  33. Keep - I do like more options to commit suicide, hah. It fits with the theme of most of the zombie movies out there. While it's a shame there's no option to waste a bullet on yourself (yet) hordes of people setting themselves alight in a cult-type mass suicide would be something to get excited about. Not sure how you'd get outside of a fully barricaded building though, lol. Gosunkugi 19:43, 8 June 2006
  34. Kill - Wastes fuel. Hard to belive so many keeps for flaming centaurs oh, well. --Spraycan Willy MalTel 23:02, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  35. keep - love the idea but it works best for me as a one off suicide option: ie no coming back as a zed or a harman cos u r all burnt up. i mean it would make a spectacular retirement option for death cultists and might work as a method to retire maxed out characters of that bent. --Honestmistake 20:32, 11 June 2006 (BST)
  36. Keep - I hate it when I can't enter a building to jump off and there are no zombies in sight. I'd also like to shoot myself and chop off my own head with an axe, but that's just me. It'd be too overpowered anyway, unlike this suggestion, in which the components are rarer and one-use. --Ashnazg 0711, 17 June 2006 (GMT)
  37. Keep On Dope Wheels! --John Taggart 22:55, 19 June 2006 (BST)
  38. Keep - What you do with your own inventory is your own business. -- Mettaur 19:09, 20 June 2006 (BST)

Construction - Expert

Timestamp: 23:45, 7 June 2006 (BST)
Type: Skill, improvement
Scope: Applies to survivors
Description: In the city of Malton, survivors are able to gain the skill "Construction (Player is able to barricade buildings.)". Many times during my stay in the city I have seen tags from players saying barricades VS+2. My suggestion would be to add another skill under the construction tree that would allow players to see at what level the barricades are at. Sometimes the barricades may have been put up at an earlier time in the day to VS+2, but later due to zombie attacks those barricades may be down to just VS. An expert in construction would be able to determine those levels and adjust them accordingly.

Votes

  1. Keep - Author vote Drban
    • Unsigned vote struck. You must sign your votes.Bob Hammero TW!P! 23:53, 7 June 2006 (BST)
      • No longer relevant, since the vote is now signed. –Bob Hammero TW!P! 00:02, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  2. Kill - No. Sonny Corleone WTF 23:52, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  3. Kill - nah its a risk you take when barricading, i think the current warning is too nice anyway--xbehave 23:54, 7 June 2006 (BST)
    • Keep - Author vote. Didnt know how to sign my post. Drban
      • Second vote struck. I unstruck your original vote, since you signed it, but you're only allowed to vote once. –Bob Hammero TW!P! 00:02, 8 June 2006 (BST)
      • re: use foru tildes ~~~~ Ybbor 00:07, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  4. Spam - Considering all you have to do is actually look at your screen where it says, yes, right there, "The barricades are at *X* level." Tokakeke C4NT 00:00, 8 June 2006 (BST)
    • re: but you don't know to what degree of X level. It could be VS, but just barely, or VS where adding another chair will prevent survivors from entering Ybbor 00:07, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  5. Kill - It's a risk you take with barricades. –Bob Hammero TW!P! 00:05, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  6. Keep I'd almost want to always be able to see baricades, but adding a skill probably makes it more balanced. Maybe engineering would be a better name. Ybbor 00:07, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  7. Keep - I fail to see the problem with this. I like it, but only if it requires a skill. We do need more zombie skills before we get more survivor skills though. --Burgan 00:17, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  8. Kill - Barricades are more than fine. Barricade related skills are more than fine. This is not fine. --Mookiemookie 00:41, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  9. Keep - In the long run I doubt this makes barricades that strong. Sure, barricades are already strong, but that should be remedied with an appropriate zombie skill/modification, not by blocking survivor-helping suggestions even if they are decent. --McArrowni 02:09, 8 June 2006 (BST)
    Keep - As a survivor, it does get frustrating... make it to where only if you're inside you can tell the stregnth, and as that non-author re said: You can't see the level of barricading Unsigned vote. –Xoid 06:23, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  10. Kill - You already get to know when it's at VS+2. If anything, Barricades need to get brought down in power a little. -- Tirion529 04:26, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  11. Kill - Simply because you are excluding zombies from seeing the barricade level. They were human once, they should be able to see if the door/windows are somewhat full, full, or bulging at the edges.. --Steel Hammer 04:28, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  12. Kill - I'm inclined to agree with Steel Hammer that this should be a crossover skill...if it fit into the game. I don't believe it does. And, to the above, NO you CAN'T see the "level" of the barricade. If you walked up to a building at Quite Strongly level, is it 8, 9 or 10? The whole point of the suggestion is to tell you just that.--Pesatyel 06:20, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  13. Keep - Do NOT make this a crossover skill. Do NOT. It is fine as is. --A Bothan Spy Mod WTF U! 08:47, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  14. Keep - Fine as it is. -- Mettaur 19:12, 20 June 2006 (BST)

Refuse Revive

Timestamp: 23:49, 7 June 2006 (GMT)
Type: Balance change
Scope: Zombies
Description: Random revives are too much of a problem. Not only does it constantly annoy zombies, but it's also bad for survivors. What's more dangerous? A full level zombie, or a full level survivor? Definately a survivor. But unfortunately, we have too many people doing random revives that it's throwing the game out of balance. Zombies should stay zombies unless they WANT to become a survivor.

A quote from Big Vic on the Brainstock.tk forum: "One of my zombies is in a horde and it seems like everyday six or more of us have been combat revived, and a buddy of mine once said well it is the most ap effcient way to take care of zombies." There have been numerous other complaints on the forum regarding how annoying being randomly revived is.

My suggestion is to allow zombies the choice to be revived or not. Just one more button at the bottom of the screen saying "Resist the revive," and have the player remain a zombie. For flavor text, Kevan could work it in that the virus has made regular zombies more resistant to the revive, or that the virus has amped their brains, etc.

Votes

  1. Keep - Author vote --Grim 23:49, 7 June, 2006
  2. Keep - I think this is a good idea, with one major caveat. The attempted revive should still drop the zombie to the ground, it's just he'll get up as a zombie instead of a survivor when he stands up. Otherwise, zombies would get the benefit of brain-rot (immunity from combat revive + being able to clog revive points) without the cost, resulting in a "something for nothing" problem. -- SmartyMart 23:54, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  3. Keep - Grim speaks da truth. Sonny Corleone WTF 23:55, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  4. Kill - Part of the game is not knowing who you revive. Are they a PKer? You never know. Part of the game is also living as a zombie without brain rot and flinging yourself from towers. Also, no passive auto-defenses lolz! Tokakeke C4NT 23:57, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  5. Kill - what's the point of brain rot then? There has to be some way to completely neutralize zombies for a short period of time. If survivors have to wait 'x' long to be revived, surely zombies can take the effort to jump out a window Ybbor 23:59, 7 June 2006 (BST)
  6. Spam - If only there were a skill that already did this. --Jimbo Bob ASSU! 00:01, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  7. Spam - Agree with Jimbo. Sorry Grim. Kill-Just read SmartyMart's idea...It seems good but it still invalidates the need of Brain Rot somewhat...and it has the unintendted effect of making random revives more likely to occur. After all, it's not grieifing if the person decides not to get revived, right? I dislike it, but I'm going to change my vote to KILL instead of SPAM.--ShadowScope 00:05, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  8. Kill - Jimbo Bob FTW. –Bob Hammero TW!P! 00:09, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  9. Spam - Hello there! Being combat revived is much more of a bother than, say, dying as a survivor! We should also have a button so survivors can click 'resist the reaper' and just stand up for 10 AP as a full health survivor after dying!--Burgan 00:13, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  10. Spam - Thats a keeper, but lets make it a little more flavorfull. Lets say their Brain is starting to rot, we can say that revives are not possable becasue of a dammaged Cortex. However if they did want to be revived they could be revived in a powered NT building if the revivor has Necronet access... Where have i seen this before? It might be a dupe of something but for the life of me I can't find it anywhere :) --Teksura 00:33, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  11. Spam Buy brain rot, imposter grim --Mookiemookie 00:42, 8 June 2006 (BST)
    • Re Imposter Grim? What, two people can't use the name Grim? I was using the name Grim long before I came to UD, and long before I knew who Grim S was. --Grim
  12. DupeSpam If you want to split hairs, then why not be fair and go with Burgan's idea? If we can resist any detrimental effects, then it won't be much of a game for long, now will it? --Arcos 01:22, 8 June 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Brainrot only makes revives harder. You can still get them when attacking an NT building. Sonny Corleone WTF 01:11, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  13. Kill - I have found the best answer to combat revives is Advanced Shotgun Training, if you catch my drift. --Ember MBR 01:57, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  14. Kill - Unfortunately, I dislike this. Whilst I also dislike the 100% successs revive attack, I think a 50% or 75% chance to resist when willingly resisting the revive would be better, unless you have brain rot. --McArrowni 02:14, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  15. Spam - It's called brain-rot --DJSMITHCDF 02:41, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  16. Spam - As stated above, just get brain rot. Don't like it? Then tough. I also agree with Mookiemookie. - Jedaz 03:21, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  17. Kill - IMPOSTER!!! --Grim s-Mod 03:30, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  18. Kill - Sorry man, but I don't see it as feasible. I'd say resubmit with the change to revives I suggested on brainstock. And Grim s, mods really should be above spam... --Torvus 03:50, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  19. Kill - I have to agree, that is what Brain Rot is for. --Steel Hammer 04:32, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  20. Kill - My first thought - "What?! Why would Grim suggest such a stupid thing? Doesn't he know all about Brain Rot? Grim, why you...uh...OH!" It's Bizarro Grim, and thus, a bizarro suggestion. --GuavaMoment 04:57, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  21. Kill - Combat revives are a pain in the arse... but then so is getting eaten while you sleep and having to go find a revive --Boxy 05:28, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  22. Kill -- If you don't like being revived, then eat the humans. Almafeta 05:48, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  23. Spam - Geez, Grim, do we go back in time two months? Wasn't this the point of the increased cost to 10? Not to mention Brain Rot.--Pesatyel 06:26, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  24. Kill There's already brain rot. --Jon Pyre 06:31, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  25. Spam - Aw diddhums. Poor zombies want to be able to turn Brain Rot on and off. Would you like me to call the waambulance? --A Bothan Spy Mod WTF U! 08:49, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  26. Spam "If only there were a skill that already did this" Jimbo Bob speaks the truth. Heed him. David Malfisto 13:01, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  27. Kill - That would make it immpossible to 'win'. Everyone could be zombified, but it would be immpossible to revive everyone. --SirBlastalot 19:00, 8 June 2006 (BST)
  28. Spam - what everyone else said: buy brain rot.--Bulgakov 16:38, 10 June 2006 (BST)
  29. Spam - 1. Brain Rot 2. Revive AP to 10. -- Mettaur 19:15, 20 June 2006 (BST)

Personal tools
advertisements