User talk:Armareum/Suggestions

Areas for discussion?

• There is a bonus when healing another player in a powered hospital (surgery skill only). Should this be extended to self-heals too?
• Death/Revives clear the Necrotic Infection. Should it instead still be present after a revive?
• Earn XP for curing Necrotic Infection? This would also encourage healing of others.
• The warning message could be worded better?
• Do you see any additional effects on the game?
• Survivors who have a Necrotic Infection can be detected by the Scent Death skill?

Discussion

Looks damn good now and will get my keep when suggested. One slight niggle tho is that rather than death/revive automatically curing the necrotic infection could it not be regarded as having had medical attention from another survivor ie 75% chance to remove? Its not going to be easy giving someone this infection and that 25% chance of it carrying over will make it so much more worthwhile! I can see a fair few reasons why you might not put that into the final version but even if its a further improvement for later or even another skill "persistent infection?" I still like that extra threat. --Honestmistake 09:54, 18 July 2007 (BST)

The whole point of the Necrotic Infection is to have an AP cost to survivors, whether through finding those extra FAKs needed, or through having to revive them because they died. It wouldn't be a good idea to have a chance that the Necrotic Infection goes/doesn't go upon revive, you need to decide either way. I come down on the side of NOT because I think many players would consider it too powerful if it could continually kill a survivor - remember heals are not guaranteed. Not guaranteed means that you are held hostage to the RNG, which (as we know) string together a surprisingly long series of misses/failed searches etc.
What do you think to earning an extra 5 XP for curing a Necrotic Infection? And about survivors with Necrotic Infection being detected by Scent Death?'arm. 07:11, 19 July 2007 (BST)

Looks really good to me also. It seems weak, but the fact that curing a neecrotic infection leaves a normal one means it takes at least two FAKs. Not bad at all. I think a lot of high level zombies with "scent death" would seek out already infected survivors to inflict this on!
I don't think having surgery or being in a powered hospital should make it any easier to cure yourself, no. You'd already be getting 15 hp back and finding FAKs at a faster rate, so using an extra couple FAKs is no big loss. And chances are you'd just wait for somebody else to do the job anyhow- which is largely the point of the skill. _. ^. _{. swiers} 23:23, 18 July 2007 (BST)

I agree, survivors should only get 50% self-cure success rate regardless of situation. You said that you expect zombies with Scent Death to seek out already infected survivors. Does Scent Death give the position of survivors with the Normal Infection? 'arm. 07:11, 19 July 2007 (BST)

Nope, but any zombie with scent death can easily tell if a survivor in the same location is infected. Those infected survivors would be ideal targets for bite attacks if you had the Necrotic Infection skill, right? By "seek out" I meant more as in "hide and seek", not "heat seeking missile". _. ^. _{. swiers} 07:59, 19 July 2007 (BST)

Oh, you're actually thinking of Scent Blood. Scent Death is the one where revivifying bodies "smell strange", and clicking on Scent Death can tell the whereabouts local of large groups of zombies and dead bodies.
I'm actually thinking this suggestion is ready to be put up for voting. I'd hoped for some more opinions, but I think I should just bite the bullet. 'arm. 11:53, 19 July 2007 (BST)

Seems you are right on both counts. _. ^. _{. swiers} 15:09, 19 July 2007 (BST)

Old Discussion

Do not comment in this section. This is supplied for viewing purposes only.

I like the look of this but can see one or two serious problems. The main one is that after 9 or 10 bites and the accompanying claws to keep up the tangle bonus the survivor is near enough dead anyway ! Given that the infection drops back to normal after you die it hardly seems worth the effort meaning that it will probably only come into play by luck rather than design. This may or may not prove a good balance tho. What may be worth considering is raising the chance of the infection to %15 but not telling the zombie it has infected the target! --Honestmistake 18:08, 16 July 2007 (BST) As I've mentioned further down the page (in a fairly similar manner to this), the big problem with infection as it stands is the ease with which it can be got rid of, and the suggestions by which it can be improved tend to be a bit OTT.

Because the success rate is so low, it wouldn't really be effective to try to achieve a Necrotic Infection on a particular survivor. The way I see this working is that you'd just infect survivors as normal, and occasionally they'd give the more powerful infection to the survivor. Btw, if you are just trying to infect a survivor and then move on to the next one, it's more AP efficient to just bite, rather than claw to get the Tangling Grasp bonus.
How about the first successful bite give a Normal Infection, and a second successful bite give the Necrotic Infection. That works out to a 9% chance of Necrotic Infection after 2 bites, 47% chance after 5 bites.
You say that amendments to Infection tend to be OTT, but is this one OTT? You don't actually say if you think that applies for this suggestion 'arm. 22:28, 16 July 2007 (BST)

I've not done the math so you could well be right about the AP efficiency, however if you were aiming for the necrotic infection the tangle bonus would more than pay off. Of course as i tend to tangle, infect and then claw to very low HP b4 dragging the poor sod into the street to poke prod and yell at the bonus is very cost effective :)--Honestmistake 00:47, 17 July 2007 (BST)

Yeah, that it my tactic too. I just meant that if you only wanted to infect them, then you'd use less AP overall by just biting (twice as many bites is better than +10% to chance of biting). But how do you like the proposed change? First infection is always Normal Infection, second bite become Necrotic Infection. FAK cures also reduce the infection one step at a time (see reply to swiers below for suggested new cure rates) to Normal Infection and then another heal to cure that infection. Survivors can be revived and still have a Necrotic Infection. 'arm. 04:27, 17 July 2007 (BST)

The thing is, healing an infection does have an AP cost in terms of finding FAKs as you said, but when you factor in the fact that the infected survivor is going to be blowing FAKs to heal themselves of the bite damage anyway, it suddenly becomes a lot less foreboding - if you've taken a beating you'll be using up to half a dozen to get yourself back into shape. I do agree with making the skill of the healing character a factor though - but given the low chance of the necrotic infection and the number of healing actions performed routinely just to repair the HP damage, I'd be tempted to lower the probability of successfully curing the infection to match the number of HP healed - otherwise, curing it is pretty much a given during the course of getting yourself back into shape. --Pestilent Bob 22:08, 16 July 2007 (BST)

A best it would take and average of 3 FAKs to self-heal (excluding running to a powered hospital). I disagree that survivors heal themselves up to full HP regardless - I certainly don't. If I am injured, I make rely on sleeping in a safehouse. Other players will see that I am injured an heal me. I'd only FAK myself if I had an infection. I certainly wouldn't FAK myself to full HP when someone else can do that when I'm asleep. This skill will cause a higher AP-cost by making survivors want to have more 'preventative' FAKs on them, and be more likely to cause death in assaulted and broken suburbs. 'arm. 22:28, 16 July 2007 (BST)

Hear, hear re: some of the above suggestions. I'd love to see an infection-alternative that actually had some teeth, as it were. Making the normal infection harder to cure, or creating a new condition that is hard to cure, either way sounds good to me. Grant 04:00, 17 July 2007 (BST)

Could we not just have necrotic bite as an add-on to the infectios bite, with a % chance that the bite will carry flesh eating bacteria, that the zombie can pick up the unique smell of. Tracking an infected survivor with little or no limitation?--Seventythree 00:12, 17 July 2007 (BST)

Er, that's exactly the case. What change are you asking for? Necrotic Bite is an add-on to Infectious Bite and has 25% chance of carrying the flesh-eating bacteria. Zombies are able to smell the Necrotic Infection. Oh, do you mean that the survivor can be detected by the Scent Death skill? That's an interesting addition. 'arm. 04:27, 17 July 2007 (BST)

I'm linking it, but it seems overly complex, and, as others mentioned, still a bit weak. Its not THAT hard to just kill somebody, and most who live do get nicely healed, unless they are in an area that is really getting pounded. _. ^. _{. swiers} 00:42, 17 July 2007 (BST)

The skill is more complex than any other skill, definitely. The nearest might be Construction, because of the different ways that barricades can be interacted with (barricades easier to construct than demolish, attack bonus when inside, all attacks get only 50% of normal accuracy except crowbar, some attacks do not affect barricades at all) The area which is most complex in the healing section. I think having a difference between healing oneself and healing others is a positive thing. How about just one success rate for each? Say 50% for self-heals, 75% for healing another? Surgery in powered hospital still gets a 100% success rate. That would clearly allow for a higher rate of infection. 'arm. 04:27, 17 July 2007 (BST)

Alternate
It seems like what you really want is an advanced infection that people can't cure on their own. So why not just make it that? Have is sot that when a survivor who is affected by the advanced infection tries to use a FAK (on themselves or another person) there would just be a straight 75% (or so) chance they fail (using up an AP, but not the FAK), with the message along the lines of "You fumble feverishly, to ill to accomplish such delicate work." Other survivors could cure them just fine, although I might say that anybody who has advanced infection gains less benefit from a FAK (heales 5 less hp, still has a normal infection, whatever).
These advanced infections would be inflicted by zombies with the appropriate skill (as you have above) although I'd make the mechanism much simpler; just say that only survivors who are already infected can get an advanced infection. And, as above, it would go away as soon as you became a zombie, meaning you won't have it once you get revived, though you would still have a normal infection. _. ^. _{. swiers} 15:50, 17 July 2007 (BST)

Yes, I did want a more advance infection that people couldn't cure on their own. Necrotic Bite 1.0 was just like that, but Vista made me realise that it would really suck to have to rely completely on a another player and not be able to do anything at all (at least Mrh? Cows can hit at other zombies to get at least some XP). So that's why survivors now can cure themselves, but success is not guaranteed. Your suggestion would only require survivors to use a few more AP to apply the FAK. Not only would that make this suggestion highly underpowered, the positive incentive the cooperate isn't as powerful anymore.
Regarding your second part, that was how I suggested it in the amendment - the more powerful infection can only be given to someone who already has the normal infection. It in the first bullet point. I'll consider making the Necrotic Infection disappear on death though, reducing to the Normal Infection. 'arm. 20:35, 17 July 2007 (BST)

Hmm, I though the mechanic you suggested above also allowed people to heal themselves just by spending a few more AP. Its really hard scrolling around in this gignormous text mess, is I can't really dig out the specifics- that's one problem with long suggestions on the talk page. You could potantilly make this a suggestion with its own page, you know, and then pull it from the current suggestions category and use its talk page...
The intentiaon of my version was still to encourage survivor co-operation; a survivor that gets an advanced infection saves some (granted, not a lot) of Ap if they let somebody else heal it. The effect there may be a bit weak, but its SIMPLE. _. ^. _{. swiers} 21:47, 17 July 2007 (BST)

Re-Post this with all the proposed changes (after locking the first discusion) It is different enough to be worthwhile and would really help with clarity. I pretty much like the way its looking but a nice fresh presentation would bring it all into focus. --Honestmistake 19:48, 17 July 2007 (BST)

Okay, will do. 'arm. 20:35, 17 July 2007 (BST)