Talk:Zombie spy

You Ass Ho

You ass who get cho ass oughta here. --Dr. Sinclair 19:13, 19 May 2008 (BST)

How does taking "by some" off of "their methods are considered a form of cheating by some" make it less POV? Clearly, not everyone thinks of Zombie spies as cheating. --Stankow 22:59, 18 Sep 2005 (BST)

As a registered user of this wiki, you are able to do this yourself, you know. --Katthew 23:20, 18 Sep 2005 (BST)

I felt it would be better to initiate a dialogue rather than making a presumptive and potentially unpopular reversion. This wasn't vandalism, it was simply a difference of opinion. --Stankow 05:51, 19 Sep 2005 (BST)

I've edited the page, since this isn't technically cheating. It could be considered metagaming, but that's not cheating. --SL 21:42, 21 Sep 2005 (BST)

Which zombie skills would be considered spying? I mean, Death Rattle, Lurching Gait, and Memories of Life aren't that dangerous at all, are they? Because, that's what I plan to do in the near future: get 300XP, jump out a window, and buy those three skills.--MikeGnz 05:31, 24 Sep 2005 (BST)

Have any of you guys had experience with humans who were paticularly liberal when defining the term "zombie spy"? Like, basically, they just killed whomever they felt like and called them a zombie spy when confronted about it. Maybe we need to come up with a wiki entry for that. As soon as I make up a witty name for it, that is. --Radoteur 08:22, 29 Sep 2005 (BST)

It'd probably fit in with the PK page, since that's basically what it is. --Raelin 08:43, 29 Sep 2005 (BST)

I wonder when certain people will stop shitting up this page with their biased crap and inability to judge what "neutral point of view" means. Probably when they also stop deleting pieces of information just because they don't think it's "appropriate" to be on there. After all, they are the ones who have final say in what goes in and what is deleted. Arbeit Macht Wiki! Seig Heil!--Katthew 14:07, 31 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I wonder that same thing every time you edit. --Matthew Stewart 17:17, 31 Dec 2005 (GMT)

That's because of your inability to judge what "neutral point of view" means. I believe I already mentioned this. --Katthew 14:10, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)

How to avoid looking like a zombie spy

By Matthew-Stewart

• Don't pick names that make you sound like a bot or a zombie
• Don't say things that might be interpreted as propaganda or apocalyptic phases, especially anything potentially seen as pro-zombie
• Avoid other survivors if your zombie skills outnumber your survivor skills
• Don't list that you work for a zombie group while dead or alive in your description
• Don't list a zombie group in your group affiliation
• Don't only have skills that are percieved as "PKer-friendly" or most beneficial to zombies
• Don't remain in the same location for several days while gaining no XP or taking no actions
• Don't brag about how many humans you have killed while a zombie when active as a survivor
• Don't participate in pro-zombie activities, or passively allow zombies to act around you
• Interact positively with survivors in ways that are visible to other survivors, such as information sharing, answering questions or going out of your way to be courteous.

I believe this avoiding this listed of behavior to be the best way to avoid being accused of being a zombie spy. There still may be Griefers but if you are a known proactive survivor player in a area, others will know the griefer is lying. --Matthew-Stewart 19:23, 27 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Groups "Using Zombie Spies"

Is it good practice to let people to accuse groups of using zombie spies without any sort of proof? As much as the whole zombie spy debate is stupid, why allow groups to be labeled with it if they're innocent? --Daxx 17:29, 2 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Hmm... you're right. Unless the group itself admits to doing so (as After the Flesh does), it's better just to keep it off. Slicer 17:32, 2 Jan 2006 (GMT)

That's what I thought. Admission is fine, accusation is not. --Daxx 17:33, 2 Jan 2006 (GMT)

That is an interesting question. I would say completely groundless accusations are a very bad thing. I do disagree with your thoughts that the "debate is stupid", but then I wonder why you bother with it if you feel that way. About innocence, zombie groups who openly support revived members preaching and spreading pro-zombie statements, with no policy against sharing information they gain with their horde members, is dancing tip-toe around admission. SEE Apostasy and Redemption--Matthew Stewart 17:45, 2 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Perhaps that is true - but in this case I feel it is enough that a group so mentioned is so mentioned (and nothing more). People can draw their own conclusions. Let's be honest, we know that some zombie groups use them and some don't. We know which groups are in which category. But it's only known tacitly, so you can't very well publish it as absolute fact. --Daxx 14:17, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Actually, Matt, the group says "Once protected by the Whole Armour Of God, the penitent are expected to immediately abandon the scientists in their Ivory Towers and make the leap of Faith back into the fold." Through the religious jargon, they're telling their revived members to get a flak jacket, maybe get some Body Building, and then go back to being a Z. Rather an anti-spy message if you ask me. --Slicer 23:38, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)

You forgot this part "Those who have Fallen may do pennance for their sins by using the Holy Spray Can and writing of the Church's teachings, or by standing amoung the unsaved so that Sinners can hear the Word." which is what I was referrencing. Standing among humans, spreading pro-zombie statement and no statement about not sharing what learn while there. --Matthew Stewart 23:42, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)

As a church of the reurrection member, I feel it needed that I say this. We do not incurrage the use of zombie spieing, We are not for nore against it.If our members do spy nothing bad will happen, but if they do not spy that is not bad either. - --ramby 16:48, 2 Feb 2006 (GMT)

The word "known"

Ok, I changed yesterday the vision about the larger hordes: it was written that was "widely known" that they don't use spies, and I didn't feel comfortable with the word "known". So I changed it to "generally believed". I didn't think it would have needed to be turned back to the previous point of view, but it seems that Katthew thought about it in a different way. I'm sorry for having not first discussed the issue here, I apologize. (Is it that sensitive topic?)
Anyway, I think that my point lasts. "Widely known" means that the most part of the players (humans and zeds) have the evidence that larger hordes never use spies. I can't believe that it is true... No, wait, I can't believe that this is possible: which evidence can be assessed about a thing like that? I think that it's about "trusting", not "proving", so I don't agree about the word "known". IMHO the word "believe" should be used instead (that or another similar and suitable one, such as "accepted" etc.)
I have also my little experience to share: some days ago I noticed a human with the MoA affiliation in a hospital; evidently a revived zed. Nothing bad of course. After a little time the writing "Minions attack here!" appeared outside that building; in less than a day the building was opened and looted by the MoA (not mistakable M!N!ANZ! rattle). Is that a mere coincidence? Maybe yes; maybe not. I'm not here accusing anyone (I have no evidences to bring); I'm just stating that many other players, upon facts like these, can have some doubt about the MoA (or some other horde, BTW).
"Known"?... I don't think so. If it's a matter of trust/faith it isnt' the right word...
Can we discuss it? --Danjar 20:20, 1 Feb 2006 (GMT).

Any resource building is pretty much guaranteed to have people inside, it doesn't take a "spy" to attract a horde. For all you know, that revived Minion could have been attacking the place before someone jammed a needle in his neck to try and get him to stop. The point is, all the large hordes (or at least the vast majority) don't use spies. The accusation is downright offensive to some, in fact. Now, considering the amount of survivor-only players who are more than willing to hyperventilate and kill anyone who remotely looks like a "zombie spy" (because everyone knows zombie spies exist and are everywhere and destroying generators) is ridiculously high, saying that the large hordes "maybe" don't use spies just incites more paranoia. And such paranoia! I've seen people practically frothing at the mouth, baying for blood when their generator disappears and seeking out anyone who has even a single zombie spill or just has a suspicious-sounding name. The worst part is that not only are the generators in such circumstances totally useless (being put in random buildings) but their very presence attacts zombies - drawn by the "lights are on outside" text. Plus it was me who destroyed it at the time, rather than the poor sap they PKed for being a "spy".

If you want evidence, just ask anyone in a large horde if they'd ever "spy" - whatever that oh-so vague definition entails. Most will say no, those that say yes will probably get kicked out for admitting it. As many say, there is no purpose to spying. A heavily barricaded resource building have humans in, nine times out of ten, and the vast majority of those people with zombie skills and zombie group affiliations are actually just hanging around trying to gain human skills because (maybe just maybe) they're bored with getting headshot and combat revived all the Goddamn time.

It's not a matter of faith, or even of trust. Next to nothing can be proven one way or another about this game, and I know this well, so it's simply taking things at face value. Sure, they could use spies, but if they did why would they treat it as such a laughable concept? Why would the vast majority of zombie players - me included - think that "spying" is a massive waste of time and even go so far as to completely ignore anyone who claims to be "spying"? Having to rely upon survivors and survivor skills in order to accomplish anything isn't what zombie players want, even though it might make life a little easier. If you're going to say it's generally believed that the larger hordes don't use spies, then you might as well say it's generally believed that the larger human groups don't zerg constantly. --Katthew 12:51, 2 Feb 2006 (GMT)

I agree with katthew here, as the RRF Warmaster (Second only to Petrosjko in the command structure) we have a strict NO SPY policy. Anyone who spies gets their post deleted by a mod or Admin on our forums, and issued with a single warning. If they defy that warning i look up thier character and remove it from the RRF member list. The fact i chose "Widely known" when i created that comment on the page is because all the larger hordes have publicly stated they do not tolerate the use of spies, and eat them as a matter of policy. If the word of the horde leaders isnt good enough for you, then you are nothing but an extremist, and your opinion on the matter can be safely disregarded. --Grim s 13:16, 2 Feb 2006 (GMT)

First of all, let me thank you for answering me. I agree with most if not all of what you wrote, with the exception of the point in discussion.

I don't think that the main hordes spy, even if with some notable exception among the medium-to-big sized zombie groups ¹. My example about the MoA was just to show how easily people can become unsure about hordes' "fair play".

My point isn't and wasn't about those hordes spying: I believe they don't and I believed it from before. The issue about the word "known" comes from a skeptical attitude, as I can't myself say that I know about it; I'm convinced, but I can't prove anything.

I think that the word of the hordes' leaders is good enough, but I don't think that this my attitude is so widely shared among the players: you're yourself saying that there's a lot of hysteria about zombie spies among survivor-only players. If this is true, how can you in the same time say that it is "widely known" that that hysteria is unjustified?

It's not a matter of right or wrong, it's about what people think. People can think wrong things, and they (we) often do it. A wiki has to explain things: it should stick to the proven facts or, when expressing someone's point of view, be clear about its being a point of view. If the hordes' leaders say their word that is a fact (the fact that they spoke), and can and should be wrote here. We can know a lot of players that believe that the main hordes don't use spies, thus the trust in this can be considered a fact (the trust but not what the people is convinced of). This also can and should be wrote here. What shouldn't be wrote is that something that we're convinced of is "known", even if we think that writing it will have positive effects and even if we think that writing it in another way may cause damage. These pages should be informational thus, as far as possible, correct and complete; they should not be propaganda-like, not even for some "good" purpose. Anyway I don't see the need to be that much worried that the word "believe" wouldn't stress enough this or that aspect of the matter: if you feel that there's something that needs to be underlined more you can add some lines in that direction.

For example we could write something like this:

It is widely believed that none of the larger hordes (such as the Minions of the Apocalypse, the Ridleybank Resistance Front and the Pwotters) use spies. In fact, most if not all of the largest hordes have publicly stated they do not tolerate the use of spies, and "eat them as a matter of policy". Many smaller groups have followed the example set by the others, but not all.

It is argued that as the game has progressed and the population grown, it is almost certain that there will be food hiding in any given building and so spies are useless. An heavily barricaded resource building is considered to have humans in, nine times out of ten, by probably most of the experienced zombie players.

The recent addition of Feeding Groan to the zombie skillset has meant that zombies can inform others of nearby survivors without needing to use flares or any other survivor abilities. For these reasons many say that there is no purpose to spying, and that the vast majority of the surivors with zombie skills and zombie group affiliations are just hanging around trying to gain useful human skills (like Body Building or Diagnosis).
--Danjar 16:16, 2 Feb 2006 (GMT).

1 The Ars Requiem, for instance, have a map of East Becktown, kept updated, with the location and number of humans and barricades. It's on their wiki. They claim to have 70+ members and, actually, have 53 recorded in stats page; not a major horde, but anyway the fifth biggest horde (not counting the On Strike and the feral "groups"); to set a benchmark about the group's size, note that the Ars Requiem affiliated are even more than The Undying Scourge's ones.

Furthermore, the Church of the Resurrection (saying they're 50+, actually 47 recorded in stats, thus being the 7th biggest horde) admit the use of spies; quoting from their their wiki "Complaints Page":

"We do use our members when alive, to spy and to break barricades from the inside".

(click here to go back to main text.)

If you don't want zombies to spy, don't revive zombies. Our allegiances don't immediately change just because our breathing returns. We do frown on zerging and "forum spying," but there's nothing in the game IMO that precludes a group from containing both zombies and humans with common goals. See Zombie-Human Alliances. (I suppose AR could be recategorized as a Z-H alliance. We started out as a pure horde but have adopted more human help as time has gone on.) --John Ember 00:18, 3 Feb 2006 (GMT)

Er, John, please pay attention not to split the foot notes, or the page will be messed up! And I'm glad to know more about you, but actually I wasn't (here) saying that "I don't want zombies to spy"; the discussion was about another (completely different) thing: if it is "known" that the biggest hordes don't spy, regardless of the fact that is right or wrong. Another time, anyway, I say that reviving unwilling zeds (aka "combat reviving") is a silly and wrong thing to do. --Danjar 00:42, 3 Feb 2006 (GMT).

Oops! Thanks for the fix. I'm not arguing your immediate point and thus probably appended to the wrong section. Something else to think about, though: A highly tactical zombie horde (or z-h alliance, whatever) like the Requiem or Zombie Inc probably makes things much more interesting for the humans. Part of why we took the approach we did was simply to keep up with the PLEB, who are also very organized and use scouting heavily. The PLEB forced us to hone our tactics, and the current model is what we've come up with. As a horde coordinator, I feel it is my primary duty to keep the game as fun as possible for everyone -- both my own zeds and those we fight. I feel our intelligence networks add value to the game for both sides. --John Ember 02:08, 3 Feb 2006 (GMT)

Added a note to our wiki page about this. --John Ember 21:23, 3 Feb 2006 (GMT)

Widely known: It is not widely known, it is not widely believed. In fact, "the amount of survivor-only players who are more than willing to hyperventilate and kill anyone who remotely looks like a "zombie spy" (because everyone knows zombie spies exist and are everywhere and destroying generators) is ridiculously high". But conjectures about what most people know or believe are unsupported and irrelevant. Get over the revert wars already and put the Facts out there for all to judge: many of the largest zombie hordes have strict no-spying policies, and players who attempt to spy are deleted from their group. --Tycho44 21:32, 9 Feb 2006 (GMT)

Revert wars?? There was no such thing here. A revert was done once and a (polite, interesting and mature) discussion then started about it. Nice point your one, though; your edit is ok for me (thanks). --Danjar 22:24, 9 Feb 2006 (GMT).

Being a Survivor now is like being a politician during the Red Scare...

...Except, during the Red Scare, people wouldn't hack you to death with axes... Standard Zombie 01:04, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Not getting any better dude. I hate zombie spies BTW.--Airborne88^T|ZC|MI|E! 02:20, 13 March 2008 (UTC) 04:57, 13 March 2008 (UTC)