From The Urban Dead Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Character Achievements ("final" version)

Timestamp: Pesatyel 07:50, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Type: Item improvement and character stats.
Scope: All characters.
Description: I’m borrowing this idea directly from Nexus War. The section BELOW the Google ads is dead space on the character page. In that space, the following would be placed:


  • Survivors Killed: 0
  • Zombies Killed: 0
  • Barricade LEVELS Destroyed: 0 (change from VS to QS, for example)
  • Generators Destroyed: 0
  • Radios Destroyed: 0
  • Damage Dealt: 0
  • Damage Taken: 0
  • Times Infected: 0
  • Damage Taken from Infection: 0
  • Times PKed: 0


  • Zombies Killed: 0
  • Barricade LEVELS Constructed: 0
  • Deaths (as Survivor): 0
  • Zombies Revived: 0
  • HP Healed: 0
  • Revive Syringes Manufactured: 0
  • Alcohol Drank: 0
  • Zombies Scanned (DNA Extractor): 0
  • Generators Installed: 0
  • Radios Installed: 0
  • Books Read: 0
  • Generators Fueled: 0
  • Rotted Zombies Revived: 0
  • Infections Cured: 0
  • Buildings Repaired: 0
  • Bodies Dumped: 0
  • Graffiti Tags Made: 0 (includes billboards)


  • Survivors Killed: 0
  • Deaths (as Zombie): 0
  • Suicides: 0 (I know this is, technically, “survivor”)
  • Generators Destroyed: 0
  • Radios Destroyed: 0
  • Survivors Infected (as Zombie): 0
  • HP Healed via Digestion: 0
  • Groans Made: 0
  • Gestures Made: 0
  • Buildings Ransacked: 0
  • Weapon Kills (as Zombie): 0
  • Weapon Damage Dealt (as Zombie): 0
  • Survivors Dragged Outside: 0
  • Successful Grabs (Tangling Grasp): 0
  • Times Grip Lost (Tangling Grasp): 0

Whenever a player performs one of the above actions, the tally on his character’s page increases by 1. Newspapers: As in Nexus War, reading a newspaper would give you the standard story AND a list of the top 10 players in one, randomly selected, category above (Top Radio Destroyers would list the top 10 destroyers of radios and the number they destroyed). The list may be a bit long and I wanted each side to have some stats that would apply only to them. I’m sure there are some thing such as, say Generators Fueled, that could be dropped, but I figure Kevan can keep/add what he wants to the list as well as decide the order (I put them in “generic”, “survivor”, and “zombie” order).

The ones in bold are candidates to be removed (especially generators and radios destroyed).

This would NOT be retroactive. Tallying would begin at some arbitrary point decided by Kevan and run for, say a week before the stats begin to appear in people's pages

Also, bear in mind, this works just fine in Nexus War and I see NO reason why this can’t work in Urban Dead as well.


I really, really like this idea, and of all the suggestions I have seen recently, I would most like to see this implemented. Those who are against a suggestion can use Spam as a strong kill. I would vote "Maps", as the opposite, for a strong keep. lol That said, I am still lobbying for fewer categories. Does anyone care how much alcohol was drunk or how many gestures were made?--Nosimplehiway 14:09, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I really like this too but i suspect some people are going to vote against this because it will identify PKer, GKers etc... Oh and the booze drunk is my favourite catagory; remove it and i WILL vote kill!--Honestmistake 14:14, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

You will likely get people spamming you because it can idenitfy Pkers and GKers, and this is not the point of the suggestion. Combine the "Suriviors Killed" and "Zombies Killed" into a singal "Killed" catogery, as well as get rid of how many radios, Generatros, and Barricades the person destroyed. Then, I will vote Keep. Oh, and I suppose Kevan will twist the list as he see fits, only implementing, say, 5 out of the many changes you suggest.--ShadowScope 14:58, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I doubt it could be used to identify PKers. There are folks who kill survivors while they are a zombie and don't when they are human. (Not to mention bounty hunters and those who kill PKers more informally when they see it happen.) This suggestion, as written, gives the total of kills regardless of the state of the killer at the time. Besides, if PKers and GKers really think they are adding something to the game, they should be proud of it and be willing to broadcast it. I do think, though, that this tally should not be retroactive, only counting actions after it is implemented. The more likely tack those who support PKing and GKing will take will be to ask, "well, how do folks know this info IC?" But that is specious at best, since we regularly get lots of info unavailable in real life, like date character was created, skills possessed, HPs among survivors, group affiliations and so forth.--Nosimplehiway 16:38, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
I believe the survivor kills and zombie kills SHOULD be seperate since some players play primarily survivors (and would thus have mainly zombie kills and few, if any survivor) while zombie-primary players would, probably, have more survivor kills than zombie (not accounting for ZKing, of course).--Pesatyel 19:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
As for the tally, my thinking would be (which I shoulda put in the suggestion...) was that the tallying of each character could begin, say a week before this suggestion were "offically" implemented (at least the Newspapers). At the beginning, everyone (regardless of level) would have 0's, thus when the change to newspapers appears in game, they would a weeks worth of stats.--Pesatyel 19:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

This would be true, ther are people who kill suriviors while they are a zombie and don't when they are a Human. But, I could still see people say, " kill one harman, DIE YOU BASTARD!" and we could have accidental PKing occurs. Some people play as you say, but other people play soley as a Human or soley as a Zombie or soley as a Death Cultist so these players, if they see someone else, will start being mad. It may cause people to think they are identifiying PKers, and I think it would be better to just say "Killed" as a statstic.--ShadowScope 16:41, 23 December 2006 (UTC) EDIT: Not just that, but as you said, GKers, Radio Killers, and Barricade Killers will be idenitifed, and they will then be killed because of this. It is best to take that out, because I see it as not really useful.--ShadowScope 16:42, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

As far as generators and radios, that was what I was thinking as well. My original suggestion had a seperate category for survivors killed as a survivor and as a zombie (as well as a seperate category for zombies killed as a survivor and as a zombie), but it was pointed out it would, of course, flag PKers. But the barricades destroyed one is in their primarily for zombie players. I originally had a LOT of categories, but most of them were survivor. Nexus War has 20 different categories, most of which don't apply (crafting, repairs, angels/demons killed, etc.). But the main thing is that ALL the players are, human (essentially) while UD has the distinction between zombies and survivors to account for. Especially considering how LITTLE zombies can actually DO (which is why the Tangling Grasp categories are there).--Pesatyel 19:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

The other idea I thought of was "group" specfic stats. That is, when they player is acting a a survivor, the stats would show the BOTH and the SURVIVOR parts (Barricades Destroyed would probably be moved to the Zombie section in this case). When they player is a zombie, the status would show the BOTH and the ZOMBIE parts.

That sounds good, Pesatyel. If you make those changes (Remove RK, GK, as well as Move "Barricades Destroyed" to the Zombie Section), then I will vote Keep. As for your suggesting of having "group" specific stats...I assumed that was how it was going to work.--ShadowScope 22:06, 23 December 2006 (UTC) EDIT: I am still a bit iffy of leaving it on Surivior Killed and Zombies Killed, but you couldd have it be "Zombies Killed" only for suriviors and "Suriviors Killed" for Zombies. I still am a bit worried about that Suriviors/Zombies stat, because of the fear PKers may be griefed.--ShadowScope 22:10, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't sure if it was going to be difficult to have it group specific or just list ALL the stats, but yeah, putting survivors killed under zombie and zombies killed under survivor wouldn't be a problem. And generators/radios destroyed could simply go under zombie. I think generator destruction, at the least is important enough to list. To be honest I really wasn't too worried about "PK/GK/RK griefing" in all this. In fact, if we could differentiate between a PKer and a Bounty Hunter, we could include the stats of PKs Made and Bounty's Collected (ie. PKer's killed). But the whole PK/GK/RK thing, while *I* think it should be included is probably a can of worms best avoided.--Pesatyel 07:02, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

The problem with the current strikes is that they remove most of the things anyone would actually care to know about. Saying that Survivors Killed should be removed because PKers might get griefed... well, ummm, if you were in a real live zombie apocalypse what would you rather know, how much booze drunk or how many people killed? If someone is PKing or GKing, they are griefing. And, instant karma, ya know? Plus, Kevan designed the game so that survivors can always see, even if they are asleep (or recently dead), who killed whom. He has stated that folks have free will and can PK, but has made no effort to allow this behavior to be done secretly, even when there are some very good in-game rationalizations (like the observer being dead) for doing so. Oh, and "how many times PKed" is like giving a PKer with a grudge a scoreboard to keep track of their progress. It will encourage PKers.--Nosimplehiway 16:26, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I didn't remove them. I reorderd them. The idea is that survivors killed would be listed under the zombie category and zombies killed under the survivor category. As I said above, I'd rather have it as I ORIGINALLY intended, indicating survivors killing survivors and killing zombies or zombies killing zombies and survivors. I don't particularly CARE about "griefing" PKers. They want it part of the game and unfettered, so why SHOULDN'T it be one of the stats on the list? Suddenly people think the griefers are being griefed too much? WTF (and no offense to you)? It wouldn't inhibit the actual act of PKing anyway.--Pesatyel 18:29, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Stop ripping off NW. --Grim s-Mod U! 06:09, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

And that's bad....why?--Pesatyel 06:10, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I hink that having seemingly non-sensical categories like "Alcohol drank" is the best part. That's why I suggested so many pointless ones in the original. Having "humorous" categories like that injects fun into it. I mean, what are you going to be more interested by, how many zombies a person has killed or how many AP they've wasted reading books? Most people are gonna look at the books/suicides/alcohol and laugh. It's flavor, man. C'mon, where's the "Useless items are an integral part of the game" crowd when you need 'em? --Reaper with no name TJ! 03:32, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I put it up for voting. Let see what people REALLY think.--Pesatyel 07:19, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Summoning Bellow

Timestamp: Rolo Tomasi 07:43, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombies
Description: I have a two zombie alts currently running in UD. With the current ratio of survivors to zombies @ almost 2:1, zeds need to play to their strengths. Numbers. Zeds, masses of them; are their best tactic. Stinking, putrid, shambling, rotting, stinky. A lone zombie is a lonely zombie, not to mention an ineffective one. Prior to these 2 zombie alts I exclusively played human characters. Now that I'm running zeds too I see how difficult it can be to try to have fun as a zed.

As such, as a new skill under the Memories of Life skill tree I'd like to suggest 'Summoning Bellow', similar to Feeding Groan and Scent Death. For a cost of 3AP a zed with this skill can 'bellow' to summon other zombies to him even if survivors aren't present. Sort of an, "I'm here, lets do lunch!" thing. "You hear a lonely and forlorn cry of a fellow zombie approximately 9 blocks West of here." for example. The range could be an 8x8 or 12x12 block area similar to Flares. By costing this @ 3AP it would cut down on spam 'bellows'. Tell me where I'm going wrong on this one if I am.


Would this be audible inside buildings? Isn't nine blocks a bit large, or have zombies learned how to operate loudspeakers? Would zombies bother to respond... I know survivors usually ignore flares.--Nosimplehiway 14:17, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I didn't think about the inside/outside thing. To make things easier and to not spam the game, I'm inclined to say only able to be heard OUTSIDE of buildings. I'd even be willing to reduce the 'area of effect' to a 6x6 area. On a side note...As far as the flare point goes, don't survivors ignore flares because all they really do is bring zombies? I know z-spies use them, do any survivors actually USE flares? Rolo Tomasi 18:09, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I only use flares to attack zeds when i've stocked up like ten of em. Only time I use them. Yeah it seems like a good idea. Do you mean that it's just a seperate type of sound that zeds can hear, or can humans hear it aswell (meaning they would know where a group of zeds were amassing) Of course if it were set to just being outside, it would reduce the likelihood of Humans overhearing. I'd suggest upping the AP to 5 to reduce spam, or possibly limit the number of times it could be done per day. --Fistycuffs 22:56, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Good points, Fisty. I like the idea that humans can hear it also. Aside from flavor it is a risk/reward situation. You can get allies, or you get a foe. Of course in this game, foes can easily become supper. Heck, zeds can even use it as a trap...they act all alone and BAM!...they're @ almost full AP against a hunter that just spent 6 or 8 AP to get to them. I originally had it @ 5AP, but since AP = HP to a zed, I don't think many would use it if it costs too much. I also tried to keep it within the parameters of existing game mechanics by just using AP instead of use/day restrictions.Rolo Tomasi 02:02, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

The point about the flares was that all they do, now, is create spam. Only groups that have worked out some kind of code using flare guns even consider them, but I doubt it even works THAT far (defending a particular location, for example). If you see a flare...what does it mean? "Stay away! Zombies!" "Come help!" "I'm an asshole that likes to spam others!" amongst other things. There is absolutely NO way for ANYONE to know what the flares mean or why they are being fired. 3 AP per is okay, but it still wouldn't stop players from spamming with it. But, as with the flares...what does the bellow mean? Feeding Groan works because it basically says "Food here!" But this just says "I'm a zombie...just standing here bellowing!" There is no real context behind it.--Pesatyel 04:37, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I think all this talk of flares is taking us off topic. The point of this skill would be to 'round up' enough zeds to break into a building. The problem I found with Feeding Groan (especially for low level zombies) was that it relies on actually seeing humans. Even if a groan is heard in 'real time' often the building is re-barricaded by the time the zed reaches it or the survivors have already gone. Also, may take a lot of AP for a young zed (2AP per block) to reach the groan site. This skill is designed more to assemble a pack of zombies, then attack a target or move 1 or 2 blocks to do another target. It is important that it has a range so ferals and low-level zeds can hear it, so they know there are other zombies waiting to meet act in a co-ordinated manner. Summoning Bellow is designed to assemble a horde to a location for an action (like Feeding Groan) more than to give direction to zeds already @ a location ( Flailing Gesture, Death Rattle).
The VERY thing that makes Feeding Groan effective IS the fact it HAS a requiring limitation. THIS idea doesn't. Newbie zombies having 2 movement has NOTHING to do with it. Tell me, which would you rather do as a newbie zombie:
  • Follow a Feeding Groan where you KNOW there is food available (and thus XP) and the presumption you could partake, given your limitations. OR
  • Follow a bellow to some asshole who just want to call all the zombies to him with no guarantee of anything but that ONE GUY being there when you show up (presuming he doesn't MOVE AWAY after letting off a few bellows).

The comparsion to flares is PERFECT. People ignore flares because there is NO PAYOFF. What are you going to find if you go the source of the flare? ANYTHING or NOTHING. You have no idea. Could be 300 zombies. Could be one guy with too much time on his hands (and too many flare guns). Could be a trick to get you over to waste your time/AP or kill you. THIS suggestion is EXACTLY the same. What do you expect to find when you show up? How do I know the zombie doing the bellowing isn't just doing it because they can? Feeding Groan has CONTEXT. This does not. I can all but guarantee people will vote "this will just cause spam". Oh, and you might want to keep up on signing your posts.--Pesatyel 04:03, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

As a zombie player, I can't imagine I'd pay any attention to a Summoning Bellow message. What's the chance it would lead to something good? With "Feeding Groan", you know the chance is decent, at least if its a recent message. With this, you'd never know what to expect. Most times when my zeds are logged in, I'm looking to spend all their AP not go somewhere and stand around hoping something will happen later on. Besides, consider how easy it would be for a dead survivor to buy this and spam it up while waiting for revives. Feeding Groan is specifically designed to NOT allow that to happen. Hell, the most likely effective use for the skill would be for dead survivors to bellow out "please, come revive me" - which means its not really a ZOMBIE skill at all. -Swiers 00:10, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

New Zed Classes

Timestamp: 09:23,5 January 2007 (UTC)
Type: New Classes
Scope: Zed heads
Description: Well, when a newbie goes and creates a character, s/he sees the human choices: doctors, firemen, soldiers, scouts, scientists, ect. Full of interesting choices, characters and possibilities. Then they look at all the amazing Zombie choices, and find only one:Corpse. They then think "WTF D00D", or just miss it altogether, and join Survivor, because more choice equals more fun. So, to remedy this, I think we should have more zombie classes. They could just be corpses with extra starting skills, or have trees to pay less and more from. Here are some example classes, having skills like:

Burly Zombie: Vigour Mortis, Bodybuilding.

Fast Zombie: VM, Lurching Gait.

Frenzied Zombie: VM, Death Grip.

Diseased Zombie: VM, Infectious Bite.

People didn't like VM plus skill. Any ideas on classes, VM replacers, ect. would be appreciated. (PS. Thanks for the constructive criticisms, everyone who voted on the original.)


How about a zombie that started off with memories of life? --Uncle Bill 07:47, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

How's "Aware Zombie?" Starts with MoL Pays 85xp for the MoL tree, but 125xp for Scent tree. Cap'n Silly 13:38, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I like the extra skill. As I said in the voting suggestion, it provides incentive for new players to play as zombies. I guess we could have one zombie class for each tree. -Mark 01:48, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I identified the page problem. Sorry, Cap'n Silly, I will now put this back in a way that won't break the page. -Mark 04:13, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Sigh.* It keeps messing up, this time by another person.. I'm just not going to deal with it again and again. There it is. -Mark 04:45, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I removed it again. Cap'n Silly 13:38, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, there ARE "zombie classes" in Peer Review. Other than having them all start with Vigour Mortis AND one other skill, these are basically the same (why I didn't vote dupe). All this really does is "name" a zombie with whatever skill and while that's okay (Hungry Zombie: starts with Digestion), thats already been done. The suggestion that ALL players automatically have Vigour Mortis is a much better idea.--Pesatyel 04:42, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

This isn't a dupe of any Zombie class suggestions, the XP costs and trees are different. Cap'n Silly 13:38, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Zombie Classes. The ONLY difference is that YOUR suggestion gives them Vigour Mortis AND another skill (Body Building or whatever) and several of the voters (not just myself) said that was a bad idea. So, if you take out the Vigour Mortis part, this IS a dupe of the Peer Reviewed suggestion.--Pesatyel 07:03, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

So I'm screwed with this no matter what. Cap'n Silly 15:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Yup, you are screwed, because the wiki voter's won;t allow improvements for zombies in general, and specifically not for starting zombies (om6, teh z3r60rZZ2!!!11!). Realistically, "vigor mortis" should be the basic zombie attack (given to survivors who die) and "corpse class" characters should just get (for free) one of the zombie skills available to a new zombie. Because honestly, dead survivors without vigor mortis are SCREWED if they want to play as a zombie and don't have XP stored up. But again- that would never fly here, it has in fact been suggested before and shot down. --Swiers 23:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. That's why those ideas are ALREADY in Peer Review.--Pesatyel 04:04, 7

January 2007 (UTC) I hate being screwed. Cap'n Silly 14:25, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Me too. Any suggestion that even slightly increases a zombie's odds will be shot down. One thing I have never understood about UrbanDead is why anybody cares much about new starting classes since no skills are strictly class-restricted.--SporeSore 18:21, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Personal tools