Developing Suggestions

Developing Suggestions

This section is for presenting and reviewing suggestions which have not yet been submitted and are still being worked on.

Nothing on this page will be archived.

Further Discussion

• Discussion concerning this page takes place here.
• Discussion concerning the suggestions system in general, including policies about it, takes place here.

Please Read Before Posting

• Be sure to check The Frequently Suggested List and the Suggestions Dos and Do Nots before you post your idea. You can read about many ideas that have been suggested already, which users should be aware of before posting what could be a dupe: a duplicate of an existing suggestion. These include Machine Guns and Sniper Rifles.
• Users should be aware that page is discussion oriented. Other users are free to express their own point of view and are not required to be neutral.
• If you decide not to take your suggestion to voting, please remove it from this page to avoid clutter.
• It is recommended that users spend some time familiarizing themselves with this page before posting their own suggestions.
• After new game updates, users are requested to allow time for the game and community to adjust to these changes before suggesting alterations.

How To Make a Suggestion

Adding a New Suggestion

• Copy the code in the box below.
• Click here to begin editing. This is the same as clicking the [edit] link to the right of the Suggestions header.

• Paste the copied text above the other suggestions, right under the heading.
• Substitute the text in RED CAPITALS with the details of your suggestion.

{{subst:DevelopingSuggestion
|time=~~~~
|name=SUGGESTION NAME
|type=TYPE HERE
|scope=SCOPE HERE
|description=DESCRIPTION HERE
}}

• Name - Give the suggestion a short but descriptive name.
• Type is the nature of the suggestion, such as a new class, skill change, balance change, etc. Basically: What is it? and Is it new, or a change?
• Scope is who or what the suggestion affects. Typically survivors or zombies (or both), but occasionally Malton, the game interface or something else.
• Description should be a full explanation of your suggestion. Include information like flavor text, search odds, hit percentages, etc, as appropriate. Unless you are as yet unsure of the exact details behind the suggestion, try not to leave out anything important. Check your spelling and grammar.

Cycling Suggestions

• Suggestions with no new discussion in the past two days should be given a warning notice. This can be done by adding {{SDW|date}} at the top of the discussion section, where date is the day the suggestion will be removed.
• Suggestions with no new discussion in the past week may be removed.
• If you are adding a comment to a suggestion that has the warning template please remove the {{SDW|date}} at the top of the discussion section to show that there is still ongoing discussion.

This page is prone to breaking when the page gets too long, so sometimes suggestions still under discussion will be moved to the Overflow page, so the discussion can continue.

Please add new suggestions to the top of the list

---

Suggestions

Compound Bow, Quiver/Arrow Bundle

Timestamp: Lucifer210 07:11, 5 April 2010 (BST)

Type: Weapon

Scope: Survivors

Description: A new ranged weapon for survivors a bow found in schools and mall sport shops. Base 5% accuracy, with damage 4 per hit. 15 arrows a pack, 3% encumberance per bow, 2% per pack. Due to bows and arrows being quiet projectiles, people hit by arrows will not be informed who shot them, due to the lack of gun smoke and lower sound output. PS. I'm open to disregarding the added effects of fired arrows EDIT: Also thought to include skill to improve accuracy. Basic Firearms Training (Prerequisit Only) Archery Training (+10% Accuracy) Advanced Archery Training (+25% Accuracy)

Discussion (Compound Bow, Quiver/Arrow Bundle)

Base 5% accuracy...does it ever improve? What does the math look like for damage/AP? —Aichon— 09:11, 5 April 2010 (BST)

I was under the impression that weapons and new skills had to be made under seperate suggestions --Lucifer210 04:29, 6 April 2010 (BST)

Ok, time for some quick math here. Let's assume that you have one Pistol and I have one Compound Bow, and that we each are loaded up with ammo. You'll be able to make 43 Pistol shots and would have to reload 7 times with your 50 AP for the day, yielding an average of 139.75dmg against a not Rotted/Jacketed target. I, on the other hand, would be able to take 47 arrow shots and would have to reload 3 times with my 50 AP for the day, yielding an average of 183.3dmg against the same type of target. Given those numbers, you would be doing 2.795dmg/AP on average, while I would be doing 3.66dmg/AP on average.

If we were to consider searches as well, the Pistol is currently the most AP-efficient weapon in the game since it has multiple shots per clip and clips are decently easy to find, and this thing absolutely blows it away, since you need less searches, yet hit for harder and have to reload less often. But to quickly show the math, it takes an average of 8 searches right now to find one clip, so we'll assume it would have taken you 64 searches to find the clips you used earlier (there was one loaded in the gun already). Likewise, if we assume 8 searches per clip of arrows/bolts, I'd need just 32 searches. So, if we add the AP we spent before onto the AP for searches, that means that you'd actually need 114 AP on average to deal 139.75dmg, for an efficiency of 1.226dmg/AP, whereas I would need just 82 AP to reach my 183.3dmg for an efficiency of 2.234dmg/AP. Basically, the Compound Bow would be the new best weapon in the game BY FAR. I could average about two kills every day with the thing, even with searches and misses taken into account. —Aichon— 21:29, 6 April 2010 (BST)

In regards of search rates, you have to consider the places where the bow and the arrows pops up. In Mall Sports Stores one would need to go through a lot of fencing foils and other bummer weapons if the bow has an equal chance to pop up, while schools generally have low finding rates. (Not that this minor point helps the suggestion much as it is now.) --Spiderzed 13:19, 7 April 2010 (BST)

That's why I just made some generic assumptions regarding the search rates for ease of highlighting the disparity between the weapons. There are also other issues at play, such as finding pre-loaded weapons and the like. In truth, he probably needs to provide them himself in order to make the suggestion complete anyway, but for now, I just supplied some stand-in numbers of my own. —Aichon— 15:27, 7 April 2010 (BST)

(Zerging) griefers dream. Create a scout alt, get him a bow plus hundreds of arrows, find your victim and let the "fun" begin. Sure, it will prolly take some time/ap due to low accuracy but who cares? The victim has no chance of actively finding out who's targetting him so the griefer has all the time in the world.--Trevor Wrist 12:14, 5 April 2010 (BST)

It can actually be done quicker. Use a pistol to weaken the target rapidly to its last HPs, and then finish the job with the bow. My bounty-sensitive death-cultist would totally do that to ensure that he doesn't get reported. And then report the victim if it dares to retaliate without covering its tracks like me. It's similar to para-chuting and even simpler to use as it doesn't rely on being infected, so expect to see a lot of that if a ninja bow gets implemented. --Spiderzed 12:23, 5 April 2010 (BST)

"(Zerging) griefers dream." Hardly. Zergers don't care about their characters' safety: they just create more, and so have no need for the stealth the bow offers. Firefighter + axe would still be vastly more effective than scout + bow. As it currently stands it would take years with a starting character to get lucky enough to kill someone with a bow at 50AP/day (remember those things called FAKs that people grab when they get injured?), and if you are zerging for more AP then firefighters would work much better! And Spiderzed, most PKers enjoy taunting their victims and bystanders. Removing the risk removes the fun! I imagine this would mostly be used by Bounty Hunters and do-gooders who don't want to damage their good name. --Anotherpongo 14:37, 5 April 2010 (BST)

PKers might, and PKers might also want the bragging rights of having a bounty. My death-cultist won't. He's more interested into keeping a low profile RG-wise, to a.) keep being CRed and eating syringes on RPs and b.) be able to put dumbass trenchies on the RG who are stupid enough to shoot someone for GKing, para-chuting and other lesser crimes. --Spiderzed 14:49, 5 April 2010 (BST)

Is that really a problem? I think alternative playstyles should be encouraged to keep the game interesting. --Anotherpongo 15:52, 6 April 2010 (BST)

Oh, don't get me wrong, as a passionate death-cultist I'd _totally_ dig a weapon that allows me to kill anonymously and taunt the victim to lure it on the RG. It's just that I can imagine enough haters who'd outcry at the prospect of that. --Spiderzed 16:28, 6 April 2010 (BST)

I've done a bit of archery, and yes, bows are quiet. But even the compact compound bows make a noise when you let go, if not as loud as a gun, and it's easy to tell when someone is shooting at you, or anyone else. --Enigma^talk 14:17, 5 April 2010 (BST)

A bow is however certainly more stealthy than a gun, which the suggestor is trying to reflect. --Anotherpongo 14:37, 5 April 2010 (BST)

I also said I would be open to dropping the 'silent kill' part --Lucifer210 04:29, 6 April 2010 (BST)

The author hasn't mentioned whether the kill message will appear, only the hit message. I suggest adding what skills would affect it. Possibly +10% from Body Building, in addition to a new line of Archery skills? I like the idea of exchanging accuracy for stealth, but you might want to add some limitations. --Anotherpongo 14:37, 5 April 2010 (BST)

Originally, neither the hit or kill messages would show up, except for "you were shot for 4 damage" & "You are dead". Now I would disregard anything related to stealth. --Lucifer210 10:30, 7 April 2010 (BST)

I support this idea also the sond you may hear from a bow is the string so txt could be

• You hear the thump of a bowsting nearby* but instead you shoud make it with 2 damage and injure the person until a FAK or remove the arrow for -3 health (the arrow will act like an infection to the zed) this would be logical and coming back from where zeds can infect you-scvideoking 17:59, 5 April 2010 (BST)

If Thumping Bowstings is not already a band, it should be. 22:28, 5 April 2010 (BST)

This sucks. I'm tired. That is all. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 22:13, 5 April 2010 (BST)

so you're saying that (in theory) you can hold 15 arrows to attack? at 4 damage per succesful hit at 5%, a little general math tells me that it is a bit overpowered damagewise. possibly getting rid of the advanced skill for this could balance it out a bit, and possiblt lowering the quiver size too. but still, this is a great idea, and i like it. --Jack Kolt ^Talk|Chars 04:53, 6 April 2010 (BST)

How would firearms training affect bows? While it doesn't matter to me it might matter the the more anally retentive among us. And 6 damage at 65% accuracy makes this better than the pistol if searching for ammo is ignored, but 15 arrows per quiver is excessive. --Anotherpongo 15:59, 6 April 2010 (BST)

With the invisibility, this is terribly overpowered (as stated above). Without it, you've got a 5% to hit, 4 damage weapon with 15 ammo. Assuming maxed hit% of 65%, it has more ammo than a pistol, but less damage. Not enough less damage, in my opinion.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:56, 6 April 2010 (BST)

It actually does more damage. Notice the +2 damage for Advanced Archery Training. It'll do 6 to the Pistol's 5. —Aichon— 21:11, 6 April 2010 (BST)

Extremely stupid. Didn't notice that. It should be about 2.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 21:52, 6 April 2010 (BST)

Okay, so if I were to use the bow as my primary weapon and I had all skills I would now wield a weapon with an average damage per AP of 3.6 per shot, a clip size of 15, and 65% accuracy? Even without that damning overpower its encumbrance to ammunition ratio is way too low. Example: I carry a standard emergency supply kit that is roughly 10% of my total encumbrance, if I devote the remaining 90 percent to pistols and I do it for combat I will carry 4 pistols and 37 clips. That totals to about 246 shots. If I replace the pistols with one bow (with a clip size of 15 and a damage of six reloading isn't going to be a worry) and the clips with quivers I can now carry 44 quivers. 44*15=660 shots before I have to restock. Do you see the problem? -Devorac 23:07, 6 April 2010 (BST)

Taking this in to extended maths, this would be easier to search for as well, because you get 15 shots from one successful search.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 23:11, 6 April 2010 (BST)

See the math I added to my initial comment on this suggestion. This weapon is almost twice as good as the Pistol. —Aichon— 23:40, 6 April 2010 (BST)

Right, since you people apparently can't let this die I suppose I'll have to deal with it. Now, form what I can see the following jumps out at me:

• Stealth weaponry? Why don't you just call it the death cultist special and have done with it?
• Maths. Aichon has made with the numbers and it's just overpowered. It's going to fail voting for this reason.
• Location. Where do you find these things and the ammo? I feel my response to this answer is going to begin with the letters 'D', 'S' and 'R'.
• Why? What's the flavour? How common are these in genre? What is the reason to spend time programming them into the game? -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 00:55, 7 April 2010 (BST)

Regarding location, the suggestion description says Mall Sports Stores and Schools, so diluted search rates won't be as bad as they typically are for these new weapons. It's one of the considerations I actually like about this suggestion. —Aichon— 05:13, 7 April 2010 (BST)

OK, after reading generally negative responses for my suggestion I have decided that 'Basic Firearms Training' would not affect the bow, and only be a prerequisit skill, and 10 arrows a quiver. Would someone kindly do the new math due to these changes. --Lucifer210 10:30, 7 April 2010 (BST)

Might want to change the suggestion to say 10 arrows per quiver. Anyway, I'll be nice and do the math for you one last time, but you have to do it from here on. Given that it only has 10 arrows per quiver and now does 4 damage per shot, you'd be able to get in 46 shots with 4 reloads, for 73.6dmg, or 1.472dmg/AP before searches are considered. With searches considered, you would need 40AP to find the quivers, for a total of 90AP, yielding 0.817dmg/AP, making it, in my opinion, a virtually worthless weapon. It doesn't have burst damage (like the Shotgun), AP efficiency (like the Pistol), or a nice balance in between. —Aichon— 11:04, 7 April 2010 (BST)

I did some archery as a youngster, and I remember having to reload my bow after every shot no matter how many arrows I had stuck in the ground (we didn't use quivers). It's not as if a quiver is like an automatic weapon's magazine where you just take one shot after another. (I accept that the 'pistols' and 'clips' of ammo in the game aren't too realistic either.) I'd also be surprised if you were to find many compound-bow style arrows in schools. (Darts, yes, but not flighted arrows.) In brief, my suggested changes would be 1) reload after every shot, 2) no arrows in schools, and 3) drop the stealth aspect - it's no fun being killed by an unknown assassin as there's no chance of getting payback (arrows are neither silent nor invisible, anyway). Encumbrance should also be more of an issue, as a full-sized compound bow and several quivers full of arrows should be no joke to tote around Malton along with your generators, fuel cans, stuffed moose heads etc.--Mallrat ^{TSI TKS CTD} 11:33, 11 April 2010 (BST)

---

Lets smash the place up!

Timestamp: RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 12:11, 3 April 2010 (BST)

Type: Ruin Alteration

Scope: Zombies and stuff.

Description: Ruining a building automatically destroys all improvements to the building. This means not only decorations, but gennies, transmitters and internal graffiti as well. This does not alter the ability to place such items in already ruined structures, which would be foolish, and in the case of Dark Buildings make them unrepairable. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 12:11, 3 April 2010 (BST) Note Such a ruin action would not gain you the xp you would otherwise gain by smashing a generator separately. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 15:35, 3 April 2010 (BST)

Discussion (Lets smash the place up!)

Why no additional xp gain for the generator? This would be depriving zombs of a little bit of xp right? Other than that I like the idea though.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 17:08, 3 April 2010 (BST)

I think it's because you're already doing X amount of achieved damage with 1AP (the cost to ruin), so stacking all that XP gain shouldn't be possible unless you do it manually. Honestly, I wouldn't vote kill on this if it had stacked AP, but it is more balanced that way. --

 

 

 

 

17:31, 3 April 2010 (BST)

Its a trade. If I get into a Hospital or an NT its a good bet I want to wipe out the genny ASAP. Especially if I'm a rotter. What this suggestion was intended to do (Doesn't mean that's what will happen) Was skew Ruin effecieny slighlty towards zombies. At the minute what I can do with ransack for 6ap takes a survivor less to repair (unless 5 days have passed.) Taking out a genny shifts the balance the other way (especially if you factor in search costs). Plus it might encourage people to not just dump gennies in empty buildings, or maybe defend darks differently. I'm sure Iscariot can come up with a malevolent use for it. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:16, 3 April 2010 (BST)

Not off the top of my head. It doesn't really impact pinatas, given the high cades and ruin block all entry negating any benefit from the generator, so it doesn't give an immediate malevolent effect to death cultists. It doesn't harm newbies and their experience track as you need Ransack in order to gain XP from smashing decorations. It's a limited ability, meaning that you'd still need to purchase Ransack to gain the effect or else you'd have to break the generator and other fixtures the old fashioned way. It's not even going to affect the ability of survivors to retake a building as even if they drop a generator in a zombie occupied building there's no way for the zombies to 're-ruin' the building so they're forced to hit it to remove it. The thing I find most preferable is the removal of all the crap in one button press, currently a building that has ten skulls requires ten AP to smash them all, even though it only takes six AP to do the same thing to the entire building. I always hated that bias in favour of survivor interior designers. I shall have a think if there's a potential evil use for this, if I don't find it amusing I'll tell you if I think of one. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 18:27, 3 April 2010 (BST)

<Cyrus>I can dig it</Cyrus> 20:22, 3 April 2010 (BST)

As Iscariot points out, it would take 11 AP to destroy those 10 skulls and ruin the building. Throw in another 5 (minimum) for a generator and 5 (minimum) for a transmitter. That is 21 AP worth of attacks/damage all for 1 AP. One offset is that the zombie is getting only 1 the 1 XP for it (for the ruin) instead of the full 21 for destroying everything. But I don't think that is much of an offset considering that a lot of zombies don't care about XP (for whatever reasons). I don't have a problem with ruin destroying all the decorations. That makes sense. But generators and/or transmitters? That is overpowered. Maybe instead, ruin does significant damage to them. There are 6 "stages" (undamaged, dented, bettered, damaged, badly damaged, destroyed). So maybe ransack does, say 2 levels of damage to them. Thus is if the generator was 'damaged' it would be desroyed. But if it was only 'dented', it would become 'badly damaged'.--Pesatyel 22:38, 4 April 2010 (BST)

That's a pretty bizarre way of looking at it. It takes me 6ap to ruin a building. 5 ransacks and 1 ruin. For those 6ap I get 1 xp, as you only get 1xp for the first ransack. A survivor can repair said damage for 1ap and gets 1xp. As for the 21ap example listed above how often would that happen? From my experience the only buildings with large collections of useless decorations are survivor strongholds and well manned TRP's - I.e. the very buildings that are hardly ever ruined. In the vast majority of cases (Powered, non radio, no decorations), those 6ap would result in ruination and generator destruction for 1xp, as opposed to the current situation of (Minimum) 13ap for 6xp gain. You save 5ap, you lose 5xp--Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 00:58, 5 April 2010 (BST)

Well my example (10 skulls) was built off Iscariot's point and sort of worst case. When it said ruin, I applied ONLY the AP to ruin, not ransack also, so change my example to 26 to destroy everthing. How often would it happen is irrelevant. The fact is it CAN happen. The more stuff in there, the more AP you save. Discounting decorations as irrelevant (I already said I agree that ransack/ruin should destroy them all), it would require, normally, 16 AP to destroy both the radio and generator and ruin the building. Here you are saving a minimum of TEN AP. There are 3 things your forgetting:

1) It is a minimum of 5 AP to destroy each generator and radio. More likely 7 or even 8 for each. In fact, there is the potential to waste 50 AP trying to destroy a generator and NOT destroying it. This way, your guaranteed to do it with only 6 AP. Less in a coordinated effort. You could conceivably do it it all for 1 AP.

2) The zombies most likely to use this won't care about XP. Losing 10 XP for not manually destroying the radio and generator is nothing to someone who doesn't NEED XP. That isn't, of course, to say that still leveling zombies wouldn't use it but frequently you gotta get the XP where you can.

3) Just because the "majority of cases" are generator only (no radio) doesn't mean you can ignore those case that DO have radios.

So, simply put, ignore any XP points of the idea and see what you have. I can see the point of this offsetting the fact that a badly damaged generator (and radio) can be fully repaired with 3 AP (1 for the radio, 1 for generator, 1 to refuel). That is overpowered in itself too, but not really the subject of this suggestion. But what about the other affects of ruin relative to the affects of the generator?--Pesatyel 07:35, 5 April 2010 (BST)

You mean like degradation? For example ruin destroys decoration and internal graffiti, and then for every day ruined as well as the ap cost going up by one, the damage level of gennies and transmitters also increases by one? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 10:32, 5 April 2010 (BST)

Well I never had a problem with generators being damaged. I just though "destroy" was overpowered. It DOES make sense that the generator (and radio) would be damaged in a ransack. Degradation applied to the generator after a ruin isn't a bad idea.--Pesatyel 05:13, 6 April 2010 (BST)

---

New Weapons

Timestamp: Attila the Hunny 21:12, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Type: machete and cast iron skillet

Scope: survivors

Description: Can a machete and a cast iron skillet be added to our weapons, please?

Discussion (New Weapons)

No. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 21:44, 2 April 2010 (BST)

And, to add to why "no", the game already has 10 weapons nobody uses, except for flavor purposes. Do we really need a full dozen?--Pesatyel 22:07, 4 April 2010 (BST)

Thats not really how developing suggestions work. You tell us the idea and then we tell you how its flawed. Whats the damage, accuracy, and weight of these weapons? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 22:16, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Yes, they can be added to the game just as soon as you describe how they work in detail (as per Ross' comment), you put it up for voting as a suggestion, it gets approved by wiki users, it gets noticed by Kevan, Kevan is feeling like adding new flavor, and he does so. Otherwise, see what Iscariot said. —Aichon— 05:33, 3 April 2010 (BST)

NONONO ahem, what I meant to say was, a machete is like a katana. trenchies like those things waay to much, and (machetes) seem to feel a bit to over-the top for a survival game. Also, is this the same skillet that you can use as a melee weapon in L4D2? --Jack Kolt ^Talk|Chars 02:55, 4 April 2010 (BST)

I never understood the whining about "trenchies". If a katana WERE to be added...who cares? Unless, of course, the weapon were overpowered, but THAT goes without saying. As for the machete, it is VERY common in zombie genre, L4D2 being irrelevant in this circumstance. Ever read the Zombie Survival Guide?--Pesatyel 22:07, 4 April 2010 (BST)

How many Englishmen do you know with machetes on hand? 22:10, 4 April 2010 (BST)

Actually, I once encountered a nifty lil' thing called a garden knife in my local Canadian Tire (I know, I'm not English)... and I know they called it that, but it was obviously a machete. Don't see why something like that couldn't be in Britain. But from a pragmatic point of view, this suggestion as it is right now is worthless. There are no details, and these are two weapons which would probably not serve a purpose even if they were put in.--Enigma^talk 14:09, 5 April 2010 (BST)

Having a small knife Garden knife such as this may be more commonplace, but I highly doubt most people will have these lying around.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:17, 8 April 2010 (BST)

I'm English and while do not have an actual machette I do own 2 composite bows, several broad swords, a matched pair of ornamental polearms, several hammers and hatchets, a fire axe, a sledgehammer and a broad headed spear. I also own 2 sets of Mail armour and a set of platemail... This is very far from unusual in a country with such a fine old tradition of invading its neighbors :) --Honestmistake 14:07, 11 April 2010 (BST)

What he said. I used to know someone who ran one of the major re-enactment groups, he had more weapons in his attic than the Royal Armouries. Also, I'm sat at my computer desk and am with ten feet of seven swords and an assorted number of staves. There's a reason the last successful invasion of our island was the better part of a millennium ago, and it took two armies of Vikings to do that. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 15:15, 11 April 2010 (BST)

Exactly.... If the zombie apocalypse ever does hit Blighty it will be fought with sharp implements and regular tea breaks! --Honestmistake 11:59, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Hopefully there will also be cake.... --Honestmistake 12:00, 12 April 2010 (BST)

to answer pesatyel's question, i did read the zombie survival guide. Rule #1: Blades don't need reloading! touché, pesatyel. --Jack Kolt ^Talk|Chars 04:58, 6 April 2010 (BST)

I like Left 4 Dead 2 too, but I think machetes are just asking for bad buff suggestions. Skillets, on the other hand, I would vote for that... if they were found in hotels and stuff, and had no special powers... then again, it seems kinda pointless. BoboTalkClown 19:18, 8 April 2010 (BST)

---

Machine Gun turrets

Timestamp: Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 20:42, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Type: Overpowered

Scope: Newbs

Description: I've seen this idea before, and I'm sure it's unbalanced! But wait! Done a preliminary search, and couldn't find this exact thing. And I've taken a crack at balancing this. The Idea There are now Machine Gun turrets outside the gatehouses of forts. Obviously, you can only operate them if the gatehouse is powered and unruined. Now, for the crazy balancing part. Crazy Balancing Part? My Machine Gun Turret always has a 65% chance to hit, even for newbs. No skills effect this whatsoever. It deals 10 damage, or eight with a flak or flesh rot. Hence, this is as good as a fully powered shotgun. Except it's stuck in one place, outside, and needs to be powered. So, Yonnua, you're telling us this suggestion is useless? No! It just doesn't effect fully levelled survivors. Since it's only usable outside, it doesn't really effect the zombies. Who does that leave? The Newbie survivors, of course! Now, they have a very easy way to level up, if they go to a specific place and stuff. Zombies need a boost first! Well, that really has nothing to do with this, as this doesn't effect zombies. If you really care, I'm working on something similar for zombies. Perhaps a balanced rehash of Boxy's old rocket launcher suggestion? Input Now it's YOUR turn!

Discussion (Machine Gun turrets)

Yes, I would vote for it--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 20:45, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Have you ever participated in a fort siege as a zambah? I have, and one gets already headshot enough by the various Lvl41 trenchies (who wouldn't need the experience, so there's not even that excuse). To bolster that by handing them a free, permanent shotgun without any need for searching, reloading or encumbrance would make matters even worse. Therefore, I'd immediately spaminate this without further adieu. --Spiderzed 21:00, 2 April 2010 (BST)

^That. 21:58, 2 April 2010 (BST)

And shooting zombies outside suddenly makes a difference because...?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:10, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Oh, and while I'm at it, I'd be open to making this require ammo. It would just be a matter of clips v shells, and how many it can take.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:15, 2 April 2010 (BST)

It plainly annoys the hell out of zombie players, as it forces them to spend 5 extra AP to spring again into action, and is made even more annoying by the fact that is tactically pointless (AP to shoot a zombie vs AP for the zombie to stand up again etc.), and thus grieving for grieving's sake. If you want to adress that practice, make the machine gun unattractive for experienced trenchies by providing a.) a lower accuracy than with a maxed out marksman, and b.) making it ineligible for headshots. That would yet help new survivors, while at the same time not encourage trenchies to pointlessly headshot zombies outside. --Spiderzed 23:18, 2 April 2010 (BST)

This makes sense, since aiming for a precise headshot with a large-calibre automatic weapon would be pretty damn difficult. 23:57, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Sorry, I forgot about headshot. Naturally, that would be stupid, so this shouldn't effect headshot. How about 50% accuracy?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:00, 3 April 2010 (BST)

Dupe. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 21:04, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Link me.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:10, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Terrifyingly, I kind of remember it. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 22:20, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Im not really trying, but 2006, See Funt's comment and 2007, See Grim's Comment and 2008, see Funt's comment again.--Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 22:31, 2 April 2010 (BST)

2006: The Gun was in the armoury, which is inside the fort. Mine is a massive difference in that it's outside the boundaries of the fort, and is outside the gatehouse. 2007: Portable turrets. This is a fixed turret. 2008: Portable. Most of the comments on the 2008 one actually illustrate my point that shooting outside is useless, and so this would really only help newbies. I feel I've distinguished this enough from the dupes; do you have any ideas about balancing this further (I did what I could in five minutes before lost), or are we gonna call this dead in the water?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:41, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Personally I think its Chrissie Watkins, but go ahead and tweak it if you feel you can make it work. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 22:47, 2 April 2010 (BST)

My general idea at the moment is suggesting things which are totally insane in an attempt to use DS as an actual medium for balancing suggestions, because most suggestions here either stay exactly as they are or don't go to vote at all. I deliberately started with something unworkable. :P --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:50, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Before Iscariot burns me at the stake, I actually do intend to take this to vote if it becomes balanced.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:51, 2 April 2010 (BST)

It would be harder afterwards. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 22:52, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Are you quite sure you want to put yourself through this kind of abuse? -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 15:52, 3 April 2010 (BST)

The likely net result would simply be that zombies wouldn't log out in the square outside the gatehouse. Which is actually kind of cool, because then the zombies (and anybody who comes outside to use the gun) would know how many zombies were actively attacking at any moment. I can see a few ways to help make this balanced enough that I;d support it. First, to attack with the MG, you have to go to the armory and construct a link belt for 10 AP; the armory needs to be powered for you to do this, since you can't work in the dark (Armories are one of the dark building types). This grants 1 xp. That makes it slightly useful, but not much so. The link belt takes up 20% encumbrance, and has a 20% chance of being used up each time you make an attack with the MG. Second, hit or miss, no matter the target, you don't get any XP for using the MG. That might slightly discourage trenchies, assuming XP stacking is their motive. Third, it can be used to attack the barricades with the same effect as a melee weapon (so net 25% to do damage). That makes it fun for death cultists, even if there aren't any silly trenchies around to shoot with the MG.  :)  Swiers 01:49, 3 April 2010 (BST)

Let's give the survivors yet another way to gain XP without ever having to see a zombie(!) What a brilliant idea(!) Next up I'm suggesting knitting for XP. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 15:54, 3 April 2010 (BST)

Good point. OK, no XP at all. Really, I can live with the Headshotting and the trenchie factor, because the only folks getting headshotted by MGs would be those who AP out while standing in front of the gatehouse; any player with half a (rotted) brain would just step to another square before they run out of AP. Which makes perfect sense- the PURPOSE of a MG is to keep an area clear!
BTW, flamethrowers powered by fuel cans could work equally well, with no need for a new "ammo belt" object. Searching for fuel doesn't net any XP, so.... Swiers 01:29, 4 April 2010 (BST)

Of course you can live with the headshotting, you've been playing for a gazillion years and every character you own has Ankle Grab and every character you level has it earmarked as its fifth skill at the most. Go level a character by attacking at a fort gatehouse and tell me how tedious headshots get. Now add in a free weapon with increased accuracy and no encumbrance and see how long you'd stick around as a newbie zombie. Zombies should not be getting massive penalties for the basic default of actually attacking important survivor buildings. Even one square away from a fort a zombie is still likely to get headshot while he recharges AP, if he follows your ridiculous suggestion of stepping one square away he loses 15AP for the head shot and 4AP for moving (2 forward to attack and 2 to step away) as you suggest. Meaning that they're at a deficit of 19AP each and every day that they are attacking a fort full of trenchies. From 48AP a day to 29. At level one they need a fuckload of AP to take down even VSB cades at 17.5% success rate, sticking a free gun to damage zombies for precisely no benefit, this won't affect zombies inside so won't actually stop the metagaming horde is retarded. If you want to pass out a free upgrade to survivors in a fort, make transmitters like buildings in forts, subject to ruin and not destruction, meaning any survivor with a toolbox can restore communications in a fort. That is reasonable, big fucking guns for Matrix re-enactment purposes is not. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 13:06, 4 April 2010 (BST)

How would you feel about some kind of mechanism limiting the usage of this gun to when cades were below a certain point? E.g. Not at all. So, there are no doors to the gatehouse, but survivor A doesn't have any ammo. So, he goes outside, uses the gun, and wastes the AP of some of the zombies outside instead of attacking the ones inside the fort. It weakens them before they enter, but doesn't effect the overall attack power of the horde. It would need a flavour explanation, but would this be more satisfying in terms of balance?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 15:00, 4 April 2010 (BST)

Hmmmmm, no. Survivors already have a massive advantage in the walls of the damned forts, that were put in because they couldn't fucking hold them. Why should they get yet another boost when there are only four hordes in the entire game that can actually crack a fort? -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 15:07, 4 April 2010 (BST)

Ok, I thought you were kidding, Yonnua, so I was ready to come in here and strongly approve with my tongue planted firmly in my cheek, but now it seems like you're actually halfway serious. As you already said, this suggestion is unworkable, and I'm inclined to agree. It may help survivors burn AP on a wasted proposition, but I don't believe in giving people more ways to undermine their own side's chances of victory, especially when it makes the game less fun for the other side. And that's exactly what this would do, since it is incredibly frustrating to find out that you've been headshot again by an idiot trenchie when you're sieging a fort. Sure, it was a waste of their AP, but that doesn't make it fun for you. That makes it annoying, and annoying is bad. —Aichon— 05:31, 3 April 2010 (BST)

Assuming you are serious I would (at the very least) want to see survivors making belts for the machine gun... 1AP and 10 pistol clips. Accuracy fixed at 50% and only getting 20 shots. Absolutely no chance of headshots is also a must. Oh and the turret should be ransackable as a separate entity.--Honestmistake 11:03, 3 April 2010 (BST)

You can't be serious with this. I'm reluctantly assuming you are, but am too tired to actually list the problems I have with your suggestion, so when I find myself back here tomorrow I'll give it a go. --

 

 

 

 

17:35, 3 April 2010 (BST)

Good, it'll save me doing it. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 18:13, 3 April 2010 (BST)

I'm more hoping to see DS used as it was actually intended, rather than have this particular idea implemented, so yes, please list as many faults as possible, preferrably with possible solutions. :) --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:25, 3 April 2010 (BST)

You do actually realise that Talk:Suggestions was never actually meant to be used in this way? -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 12:45, 4 April 2010 (BST)

For developing suggestions? Thanks for clearing that up. ;) --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 15:00, 4 April 2010 (BST)

The name was changed without consultation by an incompetent sysop, if there had been any consultation we wouldn't have the shockingly bad grammar in the page name that we do now. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 15:04, 4 April 2010 (BST)

The best machine gun suggestion I've ever seen, but it's fundamentally flawed. If it helps survivors do anything (like get EXP, headshot zombies for less AP..etc), it will be an unwanted OP survivor buff. If it somehow helps zombies, it'll wind up being a fort nerf and zombie buff (which people probably won't be thrilled with). If it doesn't do much or anything well, then it basically becomes useless and will probably be shot down for having no impact. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 22:57, 4 April 2010 (BST)

Lelouch, hit me with one of your templates and I think we can bring this suggestion to a close. ;) --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 23:31, 4 April 2010 (BST)

---

Suggestions up for voting

Binocular/Ruin nerf

Has gone to voting here. --

 

 

 

 

07:33, 4 April 2010 (BST)