Suggestions/3rd-Apr-2006

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Revision as of 12:08, 17 April 2006 by The General (talk | contribs) (→‎Deathly Moan)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigationJump to search

Closed Suggestions

  1. These suggestions are now closed. No more voting or editing is to be done to them.
  2. Suggestions with a rational Vote tally of 2/3 Keeps over total of Keeps, Kills, and Spams will be moved to the Peer Reviewed Suggestions page by a moderator, unless the original author has re-suggested the Suggestion.
  3. Suggestions under the 2/3 proportion but with more or equal Keeps to Kills ration will be moved to the Undecided Suggestions page.
  4. All other Suggestions will be moved to either the Peer Rejected Suggestions page or the Humorous Suggestions page.
  5. Some suggestions may not be moved in a timely manner; moving Suggestions to Peer Reviewed Suggestions page will take higest priority.
  6. Again, DO NOT EDIT THIS PAGE IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM. It will be used as a historical record and will eventually be locked.
Suggestion Navigation
Suggestion Portal
Current Suggestions • Suggestions up for Voting • Clothes Suggestions
Cycling Suggestions • Peer Reviewed • Undecided • Peer Rejected • Humorous
Suggestion Advice • Topics to Avoid and Why • Help, Developing and Editing

Bandoleer

Timestamp: 01:09, 3 April 2006 (BST)
Type: New Item
Scope: Shotgun Shell Storage Belt
Description: Bandoleer

Ever seen one of those mexican gunfighters in a cowboy movie? That thing across their chests with the larger rifle bullets & shells in it, that's a Bandoleer! They are used (in various shapes, sizes, styles and configurations) to make your ammunition "easy access" (especially if you're getting shot at and your hands are shaking and you don't want to drop anything while reloading.) Even in the modern day they exist, and can be found in hunting stores.

  • Game Mechanics:
  • Can be found in: Mall: Gun Store (3%) (Hunting Bandoleer); Police department 1% (SWAT Bandoleer), Fort and Armory 1% (Sniper Bandoleer.) The bandoleer type has no other effect it is just a bonus description as to it's appearance and color (or camoflauge) scheme.
  • You may only have 1 Bandoleer at a time. A Bandoleer can only hold up to 40 Shotgun shells. Item Weight: 1 slots, they're basically an over the shoulder belt with open loops.


  • While in your inventory, if you click on your Bandoleer and you have any single shotgun shells in your inventory: 5 shotgun shells (or up to 5 if you have less) will be "removed" from your inventory and added to your Bandoleer. (It will now read "Bandoleer (5)" indicating how many shotgun shells it currently holds. Each time you move 5 or less seperate shotgun shells to your bandoleer it will cost you 1 AP.
  • If you have no seperate shotguns shells in your inventory, and you click on your Bandoleer, it will reload up to 2 shotgun shells into one of your shotguns. If given a choice between a shotgun with 1 shell and 1 with 0 shells, it will put 2 shells into the one with 0 first. In this manner, the Bandoleer saves you AP for reloading shotguns making reloading them faster (when it counts the most is if the zombie you're fighting is online!) However this is not quite free, since you must spend some AP to load your Bandoleer to begin with, but in times when you need it those AP invested earlier will be a big help.
  • Having a Bandoleer does not prevent you from reloading your shotguns in the normal manner, by clicking on a single shotgun shell. It just stores them, saving room in your inventory (and making it easier to read your inventory!) You may reload the Bandoleer itself in any manner that suits you, but shells contained inside it cannot be removed, except to reload a shotgun.

Votes

  1. Keep Author Vote. Hey, they work. Keeps things nice and tidy, kind of annoying otherwise... the guesswork as to what items you have in your inventory because of all those single shells in your pockets. Additionally, you may put in your character (or zombie) description that you're wearing one! -MrAushvitz 01:09, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  2. Spam - So according to this...I could have 88 to 90 shells on me at once. pick 24 loaded shotguns then take the bandoleer, then another loaded shotgun. That is totally okay in my book. Not having to search for shells for 2 days! Thats fantastic! Think of how many zeds will die from my OVERPOWERED shell carrying device. This would make all zombies die and never come back. Oh and if I have one shotgun, I can SPEED LOAD WOW! You just hate zombies dont you? --Dangermcjebus 02:31, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re You make not having to look for shells for 2 days sound like a bad thing :). As for speed loading, instead of loading a shotgun with 2 shells for 2 AP, it costs 1 AP for 2 shells. BUT, you had to spend some AP ealier on to get the shells into this device earlier to get that semi "speed load". And you have to put them in the item again later on, before you get your speed load again. To recap: 8 AP must be spent to "slap" all 40 shells in your inventory into the item (if you have that many, doesn't have to be all at once.) So if it saves you more than 8 AP in total by the time you reloaded all 40 shells.. let's see, it costs you 20 AP to load 40 shells, with this item (instead of 40 AP) after you spent 8 AP to load it. You save 16 AP under IDEAL conditions if you had 40 shells in your inventory.. not such a massive savings, just for reloading it helps, go nuts man! Doesn't make you shoot faster, just reload faster and makes your inventory less of a scream to look at. -MrAushvitz 23:54, 2 April 2006 (BST)
  3. Kill - no need for different types if they are all the same. How much would this item weight? How is it going to save inventory space? --Cah51o 02:35, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re Pardon me, I didn't put a weight, I added it, 1 item slot, no information was changed, the suggestion had to include a weight to be valid. Which isn't much.. you ask me a lot of items in this game should weight more here and there. Yeah the different types doesn't even matter really, I don't care if they include it or not. Just sort of a thing that people who know guns might appreciate. -MrAushvitz 23:54, 2 April 2006 (BST)
  4. Kill - Ridiculously overpowered, at least without a weight specified. (Which is rather important, due to the nature of the item - see Dangermcjebus' vote.) -Nubis 02:51, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  5. Kill - We don't need to break AP battery charge caps. --Zaruthustra-Mod 03:02, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  6. Kill Mexican Gunfighters are not in Urban Dead. --Jon Pyre 03:30, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  7. Spam I would play a game called DesperadoDead, but that is not what this game is called -Banana Bear4 03:46, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  8. Kill I have resolved to not vote spam anymore for MrAushvitz even when he posts gamebreakers--Mpaturet 04:49, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  9. Spam - Maybe "MrAushvitz suggestion" should be added to the list of valid Spam reasons. This would be horribly overpowered, except that the search mechanics make it useless. --Norcross 05:19, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  10. Kill - Do I even have to explain? The poor zeds already have a shotgun problem. Besides, if you have a shotgun (two slots) and one of these, AND an invintory full of shells, that's 40+48+2. If you have so many bullets that you can't use them all in a day, there is a problem.
  11. Kill - What others have said. - Asrathe 07:10, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  12. Kill - As I just said for your magazine belt suggestion. --Davedavinson 08:25, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  13. Spam - What Norcross said. I think MrAushvitz suggestion would be a valid spam vote. Maybe he'll get the message one of these days...--Mookiemookie 15:42, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  14. Spam - Horribly overpowered Timid Dan 15:44, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  15. Kill - Right its not a good suggestion but will people stop with the personal attacks it is clearly stated within the rules that you are not supposed to say anything like what I keep seeing here. Whitehouse 17:00, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  16. Spam - Speed-loading, 39 free inventory slots, and Mexican gunslingers. I have to wonder if this is deliberately broken. --John Ember 17:08, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  17. Kill - Overpowered. — g026r 17:45, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  18. spam - I think that this idea is possiblly has a potential, you could try to suggest something to devise the weapon, ammo, and other objects into different categories, just one minor problem though, because one can only carry around 50 weight units, if theres no clear indication of how this will affect the weighting system. If it makes carrying ammo without carrying weight, it will almost be certain that it will be seen as over powered. But if it does not affect the system, but simply just a devise to categorise, then I should be all for that idea. At the moment, I must say you should go back and plan it out again. Hope you will read my idea and overthink it again.changchad 17:57, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Thank you, hopefully this will make you improve your suggestion. Better still I shall post this suggestion myself:P.
    • Re Good point, my point of view is single shotgun shells don't weigh much and they shouldn't take up so much inventory space if kept together. You know maybe I should just make an "ammo box" that can hold 12 shotgun shells at a time, but you're only allowed to carry a max. of 2 of them, that wouldn't break the game, and doesn't seem unreasonable for weight considerations. Ultimately my true intentions are to make life easier for the players, human or zombie. -MrAushvitz 11:54, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  19. Kill - While not a dupe, I've seen similiar ideas. It has some merit but needs a lot of work. - DavidMalfisto 21:47, 3rd April 2006 (BST)
  20. Spam - Do you ENJOY making ridiculous suggestions or are you just good at it and feel like filling a niche? MaulMachine 21:54, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  21. Kill - Way over powered.--Bermudez 22:48, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  22. Kill - Overpowered. --Gene W! - Talk 05:48, 6 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 13 Kill, 8 Spam, 1 author Keep, 22 Total.--The General W! Mod 13:03, 17 April 2006 (BST)

Magazine Belt

Timestamp: 01:41, 3 April 2006 (BST)
Type: New Item
Scope: Pistol Clip Storage Belt
Description: Magazine Belt

This is usually worn around the waist, for keeping your pistol clips (or larger ammo magazines) where you need them most, right at hand, no fishing or dropping. The police and millitary use them a lot because a lot of combat situations involve a lot of running, taking cover and shooting.. and getting shot while you retrieve the ammunition you just dropped is a very embarassing reason to die. Pistol clips are not too large, however they need to be distributed in a manner that does not interfere with regular leg movement (or free running.)

  • Game Mechanics:
  • Can be found in: Mall: Gun Store (1%) (Hunter's Magazine Belt); Police department 2% (Policeman's Magazine Belt), Fort and Armory 2% (Soldier's Magazine Belt.) The belt type has no other effect it is just a bonus description as to it's appearance and color (or camoflauge) scheme. These kinds of belts are much more common to the millitary and police, than in hunting (you need that much ammo to hunt you're a very bad, or very illegal hunter. Or shooting the particular bird with the call you like the least in nature.)
  • You may only have 1 Magazine Belt at a time. A Magazine Belt can only hold up to 6 Pistol Clips at a time. Item Weight: 2 slots, they're actually reasonably heavy, to protect the ammo from damage!
  • While in your inventory, if you click on your Magazine Belt and you have any full individual pistol clips in your inventory: 2 pistol clips (or up to 2 if you have less) will be "removed" from your inventory and added to your Magazine Belt. (It will now read "Magazine Belt (4)" indicating how many full pistol clips it currently holds. Each time you move 2 or less pistol clips to your magazine belt it will cost you 1 AP.
  • If you have no seperate full pistol clips in your inventory, and you click on your magazine belt, it will reload up to 2 of your empty pistols, for 1 AP. It does not load pistols that have any ammo left in them. In this manner, the magazine belt saves you AP for reloading pistols making reloading them faster (when it counts the most is if the zombie you're fighting is online!) This is not free, because you invested AP earlier to have a readied belt so that you can reload 2 pistols at a time faster, when you need to.
  • Having a magazine belt does not prevent you from reloading your pistols in the normal manner, by clicking on any single clip, you reload an available pistol. It just stores them, saving room in your inventory (and making it easier to read your inventory!) You may reload the magazine belt itself in any manner that suits you, but full pistol clips contained inside it cannot be removed, except to reload your pistols.

Yes, you can have a Bandoleer (if it's accepted) and a Magazine Belt on at the same time. One goes 'round the waist, the other over one or both shoulders. But only one of each of the 2 storage units worn at a time.

Votes

  1. Keep Author Vote. Not as much of an AP savings as the bandoleer, and this is done on purpouse, the pistol is easier to reload currently, as opposed to the shotgun. This does add a "click click" element to the game, now it won't suck so much to have so damn many pistols on your character! That in and of itself may deserve a keep vote. Enjoy your "Laura Croft" zombie hunter. -MrAushvitz 01:41, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  2. Kill - We don't need to break AP battery charge caps. --Zaruthustra-Mod 03:02, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re It doesn't really save you much AP considering it costs the same AP to store 2 clips as it does to load 2 clips (basically 1:1), however it allows yout to not have to spend so much AP when you're in combat reloading (with the clips in the belt anyways.) Small price to pay for making the inventory just a bit easier to read. -MrAushvitz 23:59, 2 April 2006 (BST)
  3. Kill - As Bandoleer. If you want an easier to read inventory, download one of the Firefox Extensions. -Nubis 03:19, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  4. Spam - This is also not JohnWoo dead, although I would also play that. -Banana Bear4 03:48, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  5. Spam - Katanas, trenchcoats with body armor and "steely glares" that give you an extra 10 HP are next. Farg off and die.--Mookiemookie 04:43, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  6. Kill I have resolved to not vote spam anymore for MrAushvitz even when he posts gamebreakers--Mpaturet 04:50, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  7. Spam - MrAushvitz suggestion. Need I say more? --Norcross 05:20, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  8. Kill - No. - Asrathe 07:12, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  9. Kill - Overcomplex, not needed and very "trenchcoat" in flavour. Davedavinson 08:22, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  10. Kill - AP battery cap: How much AP you can store for later use, usualy in the form of ammo. This breaks this, meaning that a survivor can stand somewhere safe for days, loading this up, then come to the front with a humongous ammount of APs stocked. Excellent for pushing back zombies that make it past the barricades. --McArrowni 14:48, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  11. Spam - MrAushvitz suggestion, horribly overpowered. Timid Dan 15:46, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  12. Kill - Again, stop with the personal attacks. Whitehouse 17:01, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  13. Kill - The fact that it saves both AP (in combat) and saves inventory space is what makes this overpowered. --John Ember 17:12, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  14. Kill - Overpowered. — g026r 17:42, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Further commentary (regarding this and bandolier): the item system in use currently doesn't take weight into account. That's why 1 shotgun shell takes up as much space as a portable generator. From what I recall, the reason guns take up two spaces is because they register as two items: the gun itself, and the ammo contained. — g026r 18:58, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  15. Kill - I see some merit to the bandoleer, but this is typical MrAushvitz. DavidMalfisto 21:49, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  16. Kill - Just as bad as the one above.--Bermudez 22:48, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  17. Kill - Overpowered. --Gene W! - Talk 05:49, 6 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 12 Kill, 4 Spam, 1 Keep, 17 Total.--The General W! Mod 12:34, 17 April 2006 (BST)

A Tool For Managing Alliances: Seeing Your Ally's Allies

Timestamp: 03:10, 3 April 2006 (BST)
Type: Improvement
Scope: Groups
Description: A long suggestion but bear with me. Right now there's no way to control who gets into a group, which allows groups to grow quickly and avoids forcing the group founder to spend time and IP hits confirming people. Since group members don't know each other groups aren't a tactical alliance but more of a shared adherence to a common goal or philosophy. Here's a way to build on group mechanics to keep all the good of the current system but to also allow group officers of a sort to be created. This would also work with allies that are not in groups:

MECHANICS

I suggest that as part of a change to allow contact attitude flagging (marking your contacts as either the default normal, ally, enemy) it be made possible to see if you have common allies with other people. It would assume that you know of this person through your contact and are aware of your shared friendship. When you see a person who is mutual allies with one of your allies their affiliation is signified by a symbol before their name both in the room description and when they perform an action you can see. It would look like this:

♦MaltonDude(60) said "This building isn't safe."

It'd be the same when a zombies performs a visible action, but only then. Since zombies do not appear individually in room descriptions they would only be marked when they perform a visible action that gives their profile link.

♦A zombie said "Harman am mazz! bangang ha mazz!"

Clicking on the symbol would bring up a list in the normal game screen all of your allies whom "MaltonDude" (or the zombie) is a mutual ally of:

Of your allies you know that MaltonDude is aligned with:

  • Playerman
  • PersonGuy
  • MisterPerson
  • ZeldaNeo

Performing any action or refreshing the screen would get rid of this list.

Reasoning

What would this let you do? It would allow you to put more importance and trust on the words of people you don't know if you know that someone who you trust trusts them. Sounds complicated? Here's how groups/allies could use it:

I am Jon Pyre. Let's say I make a group called Best Group Ever, or am known as a person of authority within that group. Because of this leadership people add me to their contacts and flag me as an ally. MaltonDude is a valued member of the group and I want people to listen to him too. I flag him as an ally. He flags me as an ally. Then every person who considers me an ally even if they aren't on my contact list can see I place importance on MaltonDude, and that he considers me an ally as well, and assume that any commands he gives are sanctioned by me. I as group leader only need to flag my officers as allies and be flagged by them and then anyone who is an ally of mine can see this alliance.

Since this could potentially be exploited by a PKer to discern who to attack in a group structure any person flagged as an enemy by either the person present or by the connecting ally would not be able to see the symbol. This way while choosing to be high profile would incur a bit of risk you would be able to prevent enemies from exploiting it it once you know who they are.

I feel that this change would provide a elementary command structure for groups and non-grouped allies both zombie and human and result in a greater richer ally dynamic in Urban Dead. Note that an inverse system of that could also be created to allow you to see the enemy of your ally using similar mechanics, but I'm not going to suggest that here as Kevan could decide whether he wants to create an in-game functionality for bounty hunting or not. Personally I'd like it but I'm not sure if Kevan wants PKers to have a hard time or have it easy. The scope of this suggestion is just to improve on alliances.

Votes

  1. Keep Author vote. I know it's long but if anything isn't clear just ask and I'll try to clear it up for you. --Jon Pyre 03:10, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  2. Keep Should cut down on "fake" leadership problems, to some significant degree. BTW I voted "Keep" because I read the whole thing, unlike some people who can't (or won't) read a suggestion before they vote. --MrAushvitz 03:10, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  3. Keep - We could use some more active group mechanics. --Norcross 05:21, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  4. Kill - I dont like it. If it gives profile links it violates zombie anonymity, and it is way too easily abused by zergers (Who through multis boost themselves up to astronomical levels of "allies") if it doesnt. It sounds like an awful lot of work for minimal return. I honestly dont think this would be better for the game or improve it in any meaningful manner. All it would lead to is a lot of meaningless "allies" and others just ignoring them, as before. All it would be useful for is declaring the winner of an E-Penis swinging contest. --Grim s 06:01, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re It does not violate zombie anonymity because it will only add the symbol to profile linked names when they would naturally be displayed. For survivors this would include the room description and visible actions. With zombies this would only occur when they perform an action that is visible to others as they do not appear individually in room descriptions. As for zerging characters to increase your number of allies there wouldn't be much point to anyone doing that. This doesn't track the number of allies someone has, it tracks which of YOUR allies someone is mutual allies with. It would allow people to have proof of mutual alliance through a third party, a useful tool for any group that is more than 5 friends that chat on aim anyway. You wouldn't want to make everyone your ally, that would make the system useless for you. Allies would not be for every survivor you are friendly with, that's what the normal contact setting is for. A contact who is an ally is someone who you actively and strategically work with and you thus feel confident letting them use your reputation. Part of knowing which ally's mutual allies to trust is how picky your ally is when selecting allies. --Jon Pyre 06:25, 3 April 2006 (BST)
      • Re Then it is even less useful and more complicated than my poor sleep addled brain initially thought. --Grim s 06:46, 3 April 2006 (BST)
        • Re You have to pick your allies carefully in the zombie apocalypse. You'll add any friendly face to your contacts but choosing who to depend on is an important decision. --Jon Pyre 06:59, 3 April 2006 (BST)
          • Re - Current system works fine. --Grim s 07:04, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Urban Dead is fine. It can be improved which is why we have this page. This would keep the current system but also allow people to make public their alliances. It would result in strong group leaders and improved social interaction. --Jon Pyre 12:38, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  5. Kill - What Grim said. Also, MrAushvitz voted Keep; that should tell you something. - Asrathe 07:14, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  6. Kill - I just can't see it being very useful or used often... And MrAushvitz will vote keep on 99.9% of the suggestions here. It's when he's the only one voting keep that you have a problem. ;-) -Nubis 07:19, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re Actually there are two non-author keeps. --Jon Pyre 12:41, 3 April 2006 (BST)
      • Re - It was more of an all-encompassing statement, rather than specifically applying to this suggestion. Cheers. -Nubis 20:18, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  7. Kill this suggestion is uber complicated with little return.--Deathnut STRIKE!|RAF|W! 08:11, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re Simplified version: You can see if other players are mutual allies with your allies. --Jon Pyre 12:33, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  8. Kill This is overly complicated. If you cared enough that you had in-game allies, you probably metagame and will have a group listing of profiles on your forum or whatever to add to your contacts list. I don't think something this clunky is needed.--Mookiemookie 14:30, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  9. Kill Requires change of contact list system. --Cah51o 14:40, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re That's right. I am suggesting a change. --Jon Pyre 22:57, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  10. Keep - This could easily be incorporated into the Peer Reviewed Contact Categories. (Note to Cah510: Contact Categories would also require a change of the Contact List system.) --John Taggart 14:52, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  11. Keep - Could be usefull, again I see an attack on MrAushvitz, Asrathe its against the wiki rules. Whitehouse 17:08, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  12. Keep - Your Death Rattle is atrocious, but I'm willing to overlook that. ;) One thing you didn't expand on much is the effect of flagging someone as an enemy. Is the only effect to prevent them from looking up your allies? Others can't see that you've flagged PKerDude as an enemy? --John Ember 17:18, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  13. Kill - Typically I like Jon's ideas. From a gameplay POV I like this. From a RP point of view... doesn't really make sense. Gotta vote it down - no rules sanctioned metagaming. DavidMalfisto 21:52, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re Actually I have an RP reason. It can be assumed that as part of having someone in your contacts you know something about them. Since this is a game we only get a name and profile link but you could assume your character knows how tall they are, what their voice sounds like, what brand shoes they're wearing, some people they associate with...this just takes the RP common sense of knowing something about your contacts. --Jon Pyre 23:00, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  14. Kill - While I agree that the contact list should be revamped, I don't think this is the best idea that has been put forward to fix it.--Bermudez 22:48, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 6 Keep, 8 Kill, 14 Total. --Agent Heroic 04:15, 4 April 2006 (BST)
  15. Kill - While the penalty of "friending" a "contacting fool" is sane, there's the "enemy factor" which John Ember raised. The "enemy of my enemy" isn't necessarilly one's friend, and shouldn't be invisable. --Gene W! - Talk 05:59, 6 April 2006 (BST)
  16. Keep - Excellently simple. --Cyberbob240CDF 12:41, 17 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 7 Keep, 9 Kill, 16 Total.--The General W! Mod 12:47, 17 April 2006 (BST)

Taser EX

Timestamp: 09:07, 3 April 2006 (BST)
Type: New Item
Scope: Defense weapon
Description: This is a defensive weaapon. It costs 1 ap to reload with 10 shots with a battery. each shot does 1 damage. It has 20% base accuracy and is affected by firearms training. HOWEVER, the Taser does double damage when used in a building with a powered generator. It can be found in armories, malls, and any place you can find guns. The ammo, Batteries, can be found in malls and can be recharged with a powered generator. It also does double damage to zombies because of the moist skin. It is weaker than a pistol, so it isn't the weapon of choice for zombie hunting, but it is good as a last resort weapon.

Votes

  1. Kill - Just because I'm tired of Tasers coming up. A couple other things you should know, first, new suggestions go on the bottom of the page, not between other suggestions. Second, when putting the time in, using five of the tidle marks (these things: ~), will put up the time, not your name and the time. Velkrin 09:34, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  2. Kill - Actualy I'ld say Zombies would have drier skin because they have been rotting in the sun for a few days... plus it's pointless, Axe, Taser, Axe, Taser, I know what any sane person would choose. - Jedaz 09:46, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  3. Kill Maybe I'm getting grumpy in my old age, but I hate this suggestion. Why would having a powered generator affect the damage a taser does? Thats got to be one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. Why create a new way to do an old thing (kill zombies) that sucks in comparison to the existing ways of doing it? (less damage, more complex reload scheme)--Mookiemookie 12:54, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  4. Kill Even with no skill prereq nobody would use this. Terrible XP gain and almost zero value as an actual weapon. Scientists would be better off running than picking this thing up. --Zaruthustra-Mod 14:10, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  5. Kill What's this? A punch you need to charge up? Not very useful at all I'd say.BuncyTheFrog 14:40, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  6. Kill - Sorry its just not usefull, when you can do more damage with a pistol and you need a generator to actaualy make this worthwhile you would choose the pistol. Whitehouse 17:12, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  7. Kill - 20% = Never used. --John Ember 17:19, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - So I have. Tell you what, I'll give you a Keep if you take out the bonus damage against zeds next time. --John Ember 22:22, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  8. Kill - It's not useful.--The General 19:48, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  9. Kill - Mostly worthless. -Nubis 20:10, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  10. Kill - The suggestion is, for the most part, well thought out, but it's just not terribly useful. At most 45% for a possible 2 damage? No one's going to use it. — g026r 20:49, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  11. Kill - Generators power tasers now? What kind of freaky police do you have? DavidMalfisto 21:54, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  12. Kill Can you plug a taser into the wall? I think taser's aren't alternating current. -Banana Bear4 22:00, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  13. Kill - I've seen many like this before, the all died painful deaths--Bermudez 22:48, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  14. Dupe - Another_Taser_Suggestion, Taser_EX. There have only been THREE actual taser suggestions I could find since November (couldn't find the first, even though it was listed in the table of contents in November). There was also a "stun gun" listed, but it was spamminated, so I couldn't find it either. I don't see it as useful as it really isn't meant to be a weapon. If it had some other affect besides damage to make it unique, that would be better.--Pesatyel 02:49, 4 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 13 Kill, 1 Dupe, 14 Total.--The General W! Mod 12:46, 17 April 2006 (BST)

Another Gun loading suggestion(now called Lock and Load due to suggestions.

Timestamp: 12:37/2nd April/2006
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombie Hunters(Players above Level 15)
Description: I've read all the other suggestions and the critisistion that they got, I hope this suggestion is ok. The zombie hunter skill tree is a bit dull at the moment, and only focus's on damaging zombies(which I'm not complaining about) but I think there should be a skill to enhance the Zombie hunter as well. The Gun loading skill could only be purchased by a player who has headshot and is over level 15. This would make sense, as they would be used to preserving his bullets. Anyways, the actual skill would allow all bullets in all guns to be relocated to the guns at the top of the list, costing 10Ap. The Ap cost is justified, as the player would have to take each bullet out and relocate it, taking time. Sorry if anythings wrong with the set out of this suggestion, its my 1st one.

Votes

  1. Keep - Author Vote~ Well I'm not going to vote against it am I? Seriously though, I think its balanced. --MajesticNinja 12:53, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  2. Kill - Throw away your pistols, boys and put those dark sunglasses on over your steely glares. We're loadin' our 50 shotguns strapped to our back next to our katanas for 10 AP instead of 100. Whoops. Jumped all over that one a bit too fast :) --Mookiemookie 12:58, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - I don't mind what you say or how harsh it is, I just want to know what you think. --MajesticNinja 13:02, 3 April 2006 (BST)
      • Re I misread the suggestion at first, thinking that it was a "reload all guns for 10 AP" suggestion. I am ambivalent enough about the real suggestion that I will abstain from voting.--Mookiemookie 14:21, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  3. Keep Maybe its the pain killers I'm on right now, but somehow this tickles my fancy. Probably a bad idea since we're trying to fix this problem already without making people pay for it, but meh.
    --Zaruthustra-Mod 14:14, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Really? What are you on? I am currently ingesting ibuprofen. You? -- Andrew McM W! 19:27, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  4. Keep I'd say it's justified, and only serves to organize inventory, so there shouldn't be a backwash of complaints from people saying that the game is way too unbalanced. Good idea BuncyTheFrog 14:25, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  5. Keep - I don't see any problems with this one, good work - Jedaz 14:33, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  6. Keep - People really get into the "clean up your ammo inventory" thing, and I don't quite get it. I just keep shooting until I run out. But if you want to burn 10 AP on this, I'm not going to stop you. Thanks for making your first suggestion a small one, that's the best way to go. --John Ember 17:22, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  7. Keep So far this is the least complicated suggestion, and id gladly pay 10 AP to fix my Ammo problems. the best part about organizing ammo is it lets you search for more without havign to toss half full weapons. --Kirk Howell 17:51, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  8. Keep I think this is indeed a great idea, I suffered from this problem several times, I had to finish all my shots then reload in order to achieve my maximum use of ammo, which is not very convinent. ---changchad 18:06, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  9. Keep You got my vote. Might I suggest the skill name: "Lock And Load". -MrAushvitz 11:54, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  10. Keep - Why not?--The General 19:27, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  11. Keep - Although simply emptying your guns into the nearest zombie would be a much better use, I can see why it could be used. -Nubis 20:17, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  12. Keep- Amongst a lot of overpowered suggestions, this one is almost underpowered. Still, an underpowered skill can't hurt anyone. --Rozozag 20:23, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  13. Keep -This is a great skill as rather than hurting zombies it helps humans. Zombies aren't really bothered if the human has his ammo spread across 20 guns or 5 and humans will probably use this occasionally. Plus it enhances the zombie hunter skill tree--Mpaturet 21:35, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  14. Kill - Totally useless skill. And I realise I have a reputation for voting down skills. Lets face it, anyone who wants to organise their inventory uses a firefox extension. Allowing your top guns to be reloaded is only useful if you want to drop the empties. ZOMG! I GET TO SPEND 10AP TO DROP A COUPLE OF GUNS! Adding useless skills to the peer reviewed page just dilutes the good suggestions. DavidMalfisto 22:00, 3 April 2006 (GMT)
  15. Keep - I have the UD tool, and I would still use this after a mall run, it helps people who don't like to camp Caiger.--Bermudez 22:48, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  16. Keep I think 10AP is a little high but I'm going to lend my support to any sensible suggestion to bring order to inventories. --Jon Pyre 23:02, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  17. Kill -There's nothing wrong with it, but niether does it add much. I'm just not that impressed. But on the whole best suggestion we had today.--Vista W! 23:42, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  18. Kill - What Vista said. It's good, but a bit overcosted. I've no idea how high is high enough myself, though, but this seems a bit much--McArrowni 03:23, 4 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 14 Keep, 3 Kill, 17 Total. --Agent Heroic 04:13, 4 April 2006 (BST)
  19. Keep - All toghether now: Neat inventories are good. (Besides, not everyone can use Firefox extensions; e.g., the guy who plays UD on his lunch break at work, and doesn't have the user permissions needed to install software.) --John Taggart 14:48, 4 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Just want to say thanks for not insulting my idea to much. Who thinks the Ap is too much? --MajesticNinja 11:42, 5 April 2006 (BST)
      • RE - The AP does seem a bit high... --Gene W! - Talk 06:05, 6 April 2006 (BST)
  20. Keep - I think the cost is a little too high, but otherwise good. --Blahblahblah 18:00, 9 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 16 Keep, 3 kill, 0 Spam. --MajesticNinja 8th April 2006 12:53
  21. Kill - I would spend these APs searching for ammo--Cah51o 01:59, 11 April 2006 (BST)
  22. Keep - Only really necessary for the pistol as the shotgun you reload 1 shell at a time. But being able to consolidate pistol bullets would help. --Lordofnightmares 17:18, 12 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 17 Keep, 4 Kill, 21 Total.--The General W! Mod 13:00, 17 April 2006 (BST)

Deathly Moan

Timestamp: 11:34, 3 April 2006 (BST)
Type: New Zombie Skill
Scope: Survivors cannot search at same location as your zombie!
Description: Deathly Moan

Appears on zombie skills tree just under "Feeding Groan." Does not apply any bonus to your human character.

Your zombie has a hideously disturbing moan whenever survivors are nearby. Survivors may not search at your zombie's current location.

  • When survivors attempt to search at your location, cancels search (no AP wasted) survivor reads: "There is a horrifying moan, making it impossible for you to concentrate on searching!"

Note: This effect does not apply if your zombie is a dead body, only while standing does this skill interfere. This skill only applies if you are at the exact same location as a survivor (indoors, or outdoors at same place.)

  • This zombie skill is intended to allow zombies to "cancel" a survivor's most crucial game advantage whenever possible: Items, weapons and equipment! Survivors will be forced at times to have to "deal" with the zombies rather than ignore them for a time, and then gun them down.

Votes

  1. Keep - Author Vote. A lot of people have voted against the "Larger AP searching" skill suggestions saying a zombie at the same location should interfere with mega searching, to make it more fair in close combat (no survivor search advantage during combat, makes sense.) I think this skill would be an excellent zombie tactic, forcing survivors to have to "deal" with the zombie before they do their searches. If a zombie screws up what survivors are doing in their safehouse, then, they're doing their job (Job #2, Job #1: Kill and eat survivors.) --MrAushvitz 11:34, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  2. Kill - I have no idea what the larger AP search is that you reference, but I'm not a fan of preventing people from doing valid actions. Besides, what's the effect if a survivor comes into the place after the groan? — g026r 19:06, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Furthermore, what's with your timestamps? The history says this was only posted three-quarters-of-an-hour ago, yet the timestamp (before I fixed it, along with your vote timestamp, which was also hours off) would lead me to believe that it was posted at the same time as Another Gun loading suggestion (which was posted almost 6 hours before you posted this suggestion). Are you copying the timestamps from other suggestions and/or entering them manually or something? — g026r 19:11, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Cut and paste man. Is that a problem? To answer your question, as long as a zombie with this skill is standing, there is no searching there.. it is a constant thing, no AP cost, just there while you're there. Bullet in the head cures it though. --MrAushvitz 14:34, 3 April 2006 (BST)
      • Re: It kind of messes up people trying to figure out when suggestions were made; especially when using five tildes (~~~~~) will enter the time for you just as easily. Moving on: I may have misread this initially. Is this a case of a "free" ability that occurs automatically in any area you're in, or is this only occurring after you've done a feeding groan? — g026r 22:02, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  3. Keep - I voted keep on a MrAushvitz suggestion, the worlds gone mad! Anything that helps zombies is desperately needed. It might hurt the server, but that's not a valid vote reason.--The General 19:25, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  4. Keep - Oh my god... I liked this idea, then after I saw the author and went back to re-read it in case I missed something, but I still like it. It is ridiculous how survivors in a mall seige can empty their guns, then go off and search for ammo and FAKs, then heal and reload, and then finally start fighting the zombies again. We need something to make them bother to fight the zombies first, then replenish supplies afterward. --Norcross 19:37, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  5. Kill - I'd rather see search percentages drop instead of removing the option altogether. -Nubis 20:12, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Not a bad variation idea, if this one doesn't make it I'll resubmit it with a % deduction.. but that would have to go up per zombie with this skill at same location (eventually reducing search chances to near 0%.) A whole lot of moanin' goin' on. --MrAushvitz 14:34, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  6. Keep- This could really add some much needed balance to the game. I hope Kevan gets a chance to see this one. Good job. --Rozozag 20:21, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  7. Kill Combined with sponging and the ?rise move this too grief prone. --Zaruthustra-Mod 20:34, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  8. Kill - you people will vote Keep on anything that hurts survivors. --Arcibi 20:36, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - We're desperate to get zombies back into the game.--The General 20:39, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  9. Kill - Close to a Keep vote from me. I like Nubis' suggestion about the reduced search percentages.--Mookiemookie 21:08, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  10. Kill - Believe it or not (and you probably won't), but zombies actually have it fairly well as it is. (I can find survivors daily with my zombie character and kill at least one, and only kill one in total with my survivor after I deal with all the survivor tasks.) All in all, punishing survivors further for letting their safehouse be infiltrated after they have to deal with the zombies, barricades, and preventing other zombies getting in, this is too much. BuncyTheFrog 00:46, 4 April 2006 (BST) Unsigned votes are bad m'kay? When you come back click that little icon of a signature in the toolbar and remove the tags--Mpaturet 21:39, 3 April 2006 (BST) --Oops, forgot to add that before I clicked (I was rushing out the door you see)
  11. Kill I would rather you change it to a search % but MrAushvitz may soon get a pass on his hands--Mpaturet 21:39, 3 April 2006 (BST) EDIT: This could work in the sense that "As you dig through the "X store" you experience difficulty concentrating as you hear the zombie's unearthly moan"
  12. Kill So basicaly you want something for nothing skill wow. What did survivors ever do to you gee.. not only od we have to search but now you can prevent us from searching 100% Grossly overpowerd on the fringe of spam. How about survivors get a skill where if there arnt any zombies they can find whatever they want 100%? sounds like a fair balance to this suggestion. --Kirk Howell 21:58, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  13. Kill - Think of the hordes, won't someone please thing of the hordes? Now one Z in a Hospital stopping people looking for supplies is fine - it's an element of terror in the game. A hundred Zs in a mall, locking down the supply lines AT NO COST TO THEMSELVES is frankly broken. A great idea, needs some work. DavidMalfisto 22:04, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  14. Kill - This is something for nothing, and the fact that it would stop survivors searching indoors while a zombie is outdoors seems overpowered to me. -Banana Bear4 22:07, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Um, that's not how it works. I specifically wrote it so people wouldn't think you can screw up indoor survivor searching with an outdoors zombie, reread it, you have to be at the exact same location as the survivor inside, or outside. --MrAushvitz 14:34, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  15. Keep - Yeah, it's pretty silly that survivors can keep on looting right in the midst of a big crowd of zeds. This would give survivors more incentive to clear a building out. Pace DavidMalfisto, I think there is a definite cost to getting a zombie into a barricaded building, esp. one as actively defended as some malls. --John Ember 22:19, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  16. Kill - To much. also, it was made by MrAushvitz.--Bermudez 22:48, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  17. Kill Counterpoint skill: "Lively Music" The survivor has a boombox that plays loud music that distracts zombies. Zombies in the same room are tempted to dance and cannot use feeding groan, tangling grasp, infectious bite, or any other thing that makes the game worth playing. --Jon Pyre 23:05, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  18. Kill - Ransack: the best suggestion that isn't implemented yet... Deathly Moan? Terrible...--Vista W! 23:35, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  19. Keep - I like this idea, the element of fear can both relate to balancing and flavour to the game. However this is not made clearly, is this skill used when a zombie is inside the building or outside? I can vaguely tell that it will be inside, however I need a clear indication of such. changchad 23:45, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  20. Kill - balancing measures are not needed atm, im sure with the removal of cmbat revive survivors will find life harder (the current gap is only 10%, add this and youll kill survivors--xbehave 01:29, 4 April 2006 (BST) edit: erm sorry i dont know how to link but heres the source from which i quoted 10% http://www.urbandead.com/stats.html
  21. Kill - How does it work? Does the zombie use the skill and cancel out a single search? Does the "Death Moan" last for a certain amount of time? More often then not, players interact at different times. It might be better if it reduced the search percentage by, say 5% (non-cumulative), instead of completely. What, really would stop an organized horde from hitting a resource building and continually using this skill (say the infamous Caiger, for example)?--Pesatyel 03:10, 4 April 2006 (BST)
  22. Kill - Near a keep. Maybe a search reduction instead, and/or use of the skill required. --McArrowni 03:54, 4 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 16 Kill, 6 Keep, 22 Total.--The General W! Mod 13:08, 17 April 2006 (BST)

Group Member Recognition

Timestamp: 2:51, 4 April 2006 (GMT +8)
Type: Improvement
Scope: Groups
Description: Well its not really a skill, but more of a added feature for the humans. Players would be able to distinguish other players from a group of zombies as long as they belong in the same group/clan. This is like the human counterpart of the recent change on the zombies feeding groan. This way revivers doesn't have to add every single group member into their contact list.

For realism concerns, it could come out as "You recognized your fellow member (name)!.

Votes

  1. Kill - So I could just change my group to "Mall Tour '06" and be able to recognise an entire hoard?--The General 19:45, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - I haven't thought of that. Maybe we could make it work on human groups only? Or you could only segregate your teammates on the syringe dropdown menu. That way if you did change your group into a zombie one, you won't be able to kill them. As for combat reviving... Thats up to the player.--ToRsO_bOy 3:00, 4 April (GMT +8)
    • Re - Difficult to code, but, yes, if it was human groups only I would vote Keep.--The General 20:11, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  2. Kill - UDTool Lists. -Nubis 20:08, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • On further reading, it seems to me that in 99.9% of the time a group isn't going to be large enough to make 'having too many contacts' a real excuse. And for the few groups where it would, they all Metagame to the point where it wouldn't make a difference. -Nubis 20:15, 3 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - I'm using the UDTool, and it doesn't work on zombies unless the player is already in your contact list. As for the group sizes... yeah you're right. Perhaps when we get more players in the future. --ToRsO_bOy 3:30, 4 April (GMT +8)
  3. Kill Hooboy, I'll just change my group to "RRF" and start griefing away! --Zaruthustra-Mod 20:37, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  4. Kill - Might I recommend group "Uniforms" as an item.. you have to go to your groups "base" to get them and group leaders with the appropriate skills "make" them for AP and choose a player at the same location who gets that item added to their inventory. The larger your groups "legit" member base the more bases your group is allowed to make uniforms at.. not a bad idea! Then anyone who sees your character sees the (GroupTag) next to your character's name because of your uniform (wear them colors with pride soldier!) --MrAushvitz 13:34, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  5. Kill - That said being able to change my group to RRF could be useful... Wait did MrAushvitz almost come up with a good idea? DavidMalfisto 22:07, 3 April 2006 (GMT)
  6. Kill - how about revived zombies who take shotguns and start killing CMS waiting at revive points?--Cah51o 22:40, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  7. Kill - As I said before, the contact list needs fixing, but this won't help much.--Bermudez 22:48, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  8. Kill - I like the idea itself but it has too much potential for abuse as is. Perhaps if there was a two week or a month waiting period before you recognized other members of that group (and they recognized you). this would not only represent the time it takes for you to "Get to know" your teammates to the point of reconizeing them, but it would also make it a little harder to abuse. --Teksura 04:58, 17 April 2006 (BST)

Extreme Endurance

This suggestion has been Spaminated with 8 Spams and 1 Keep. Don't. Mess. With. AP.--The General 22:15, 3 April 2006 (BST)

IP Hit Modification

This suggestion has been Spaminated with 9 Spams, 1 Kill, and one author Keep. Leave the anti-zerging measures alone.--The General 23:38, 3 April 2006 (BST)

Overweighted

Timestamp: 23:53, 3 April 2006 (BST)
Type: Improvement
Scope: All players
Description: One thing I find odd is that you can carry a certain number of items, and not a single item more, but the amount of stuff you carry has no effects at all. I also find it odd that 20 pistols and 40 generators apparantly take up the same amount of space/weight, but that's not important right now.

What I propose is simple enough. Any player, human or zombie, can carry as many as five (this number is not set in stone, it may be too high or too low for some people's tastes) items more than the limit usually allows. However, going over the limit causes that player to become encumbered, requiring them to spend 2 AP to move instead of 1, or 3 instead of 2 if they are a zombie without Lurching Gait. This has no effect on anything other than movement. If you want to carry five more first aid kits, or two more guns and some extra ammo, or 5 more generators, you can, but obviously you will need to plan better to get back to your safehouse before running out of AP.

Sure, it's possible that it could be abused. Anything can be abused, if someone put their minds to it. But I've tried to balance it out as best I could, and it seems strong enough to hold up.

Votes

  1. Keep - Author's vote. I see nothing but good here. --Truec 23:53, 3 April 2006 (BST)
  2. Kill - Just not needed. Overly complicates AP budgeting. --Mookiemookie 00:14, 4 April 2006 (BST)
  3. Kill- Hey Leave my Ap alone it says so in the do's or do not Drogmir 00:51, 4 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - If you'll read closely, you'll note that I haven't done ANYTHING to the way AP is already handled. This only taakes effect under certain circumstances, otherwise, everything stands as per normal. --Truec 21:15, 5 April 2006 (BST)
  4. Kill - What Mookiemookie said. -Nubis 00:58, 4 April 2006 (BST)
  5. Kill - Hey, if they want to carry 50 generators, let them. Realism does not equal fun. Velkrin 01:06, 4 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Realism can be fun sometimes. For instance, I think that the thing somebody a few votes down mentioned about soaking bodies in fuel and igniting it with a flare sounds fun, if there was a good way to implement it. But this is nice, simple, and could be useful without being a hassle. --Truec 21:15, 5 April 2006 (BST)
  6. Kill - zombies cant drop thier items if thier killed with extras so its unfair, also guys please read the suggestion, the AP rule doesnt aplly here at all nor is he asking for realism.--xbehave 01:23, 4 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re: As far as I know you can, in fact, I'm sure you can. BuncyTheFrog 01:27, 4 April 2006 (BST) Only authors are allowed to "Re".--The General W! Mod 12:41, 17 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - As a lifelong zombie (gnur gnur gnur) I can confirm this. We may not be able to operate doorknobs, but we can drop shit like crazy. --Undeadinator 01:58, 4 April 2006 (BST)Only authors are allowed to "Re".--The General W! Mod 12:41, 17 April 2006 (BST)
    • Comment - Non-authors should refrain from using Re, unless you're responding to a re made by the author on your vote. See the [1] section for more information. Velkrin 03:44, 4 April 2006 (BST)
    • Rehmpf, well i still dont like the idea, but i have no valid reason to vote --xbehave 17:56, 4 April 2006 (BST)
  7. Kill - "My High School: The Video Game". --Undeadinator 01:58, 4 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Meh, it's been done. --Truec 21:20, 5 April 2006 (BST)
  8. Kill My survivor wears a backpack full of guns. Plus he's like really strong n' stuff and can bench press a cow. Realism != fun. Reasonably a survivor could spread some fuel over a bunch of bodies and throw a flare onto them to permanently destroy them but we don't allow that because realism != always good. --Jon Pyre 03:19, 4 April 2006 (BST)
  9. Kill- First rule about suggestions... Leave my crap alone. first off guns already count as 2 items. 2ndly if i could only carry 20 guns then combat would be unballanced seeing as i have to search so much i dont wanna spend all my time searching for ammo everytime i fight 1 zombie. no seriously i think we should be able to carry more crap if we organize it right. PS when was the last time an item has been added to the game? generators? --Kirk Howell 03:30, 4 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - ...if only we could organize our crap right.., if only someone on Wiki would suggest items to help make room in our inventories by storing our ammunition more easily.. oh wait, there's 2 such suggestions just up there! --MrAushvitz 00:34, 4 April 2006 (BST) Only authors are allowed to "Re".--The General W! Mod 12:41, 17 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Kirk Howell, I'm not proposing to change the way anything is currently done. If you wanted to play the exact way you do now, this proposal would have no effect on you at all. MrAushvitz, this really is not the place to talk up your own suggestions. I rather liked the ideas you proposed, but they need some work. --Truec 21:20, 5 April 2006 (BST)
  10. Kill - Hey! Truec! Leave AP alone! DavidMalfisto 11:11, 4 April 2006 (BST)
  11. Keep - Going against the grain, yes. However, AP/inventory planning isn't all that complicated. We all know what the inventory "weight" of certain items are. And a penalty for "being greedy" seems fair. --Gene W! - Talk 06:10, 6 April 2006 (BST)
  12. Kill - Hasn't the author ever played an RPG? This would totally mess up balance. Not to mention realism is not a factor when the name of the game is fighting zombies. Tokakeke 03:04, 15 April 2006 (BST)
  13. Keep - I actually like this idea. Why do people act like this would be implemented, and then their characters would drop like flies, their spines breaking 'neath the load they once hauled so easily? If y'don't want to deal with the encumbrance, you'll be able to carry as much as you can now. If you want to carry just a bit more, then you can... but at a cost. --ThePastor 20:50, 16 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 10 Kill, 3 Keep, 13 Total.--The General W! Mod 12:41, 17 April 2006 (BST)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Suggestions/3rd-Apr-2006&oldid=203066"