Suggestion:20080220 Necronet Registry

	Closed
	This suggestion has finished voting and has been moved to Undecided Suggestions.

20080220 Necronet Registry

Jon Pyre 23:13, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion type
Improvement

Suggestion scope
Science

Suggestion description
No one enjoys being a Mrh Cow. But for a zombie seeking a revive it's the only sure way. Most survivors assume anyone NOT at a revive point doesn't want to be revived, and unless they're stupid enough to combat revive they'll leave zombies needle-free. This suggestion is to give people the option of getting revived without necessarily flocking to revive point.

Necronet lets sciencetists track zombies. Well, now it has a secondary purpose. Identifying slain Necrotech staff. I suggest survivors with Necronet Access be allowed to press a button inside powered Necrotechs for 1AP: "Add self to registry". This catalogues your DNA and keeps you on file throughout the Necronet system.

This just flags you as someone who wants a revive. If a registered player is a zombie, and has been DNA scanned, any survivor with Lab Experience and a DNA extractor will see in the location's description:

There are X zombies here. X of them have registered for revives.

It also shows up when you scan a zombie.

EXAMPLE 1:

Bill is registered. Bill dies and becomes a zombie. He stands in a random street square.

John is a newbie scientist with Necrotech employment and no other skills. He scans Bill for 3xp.

Gary is a more advanced player. He has a syringe and a DNA extractor on him, but he's not necessarily searching for anyone to scan or revive as he travels. He enters the square with Bill and sees this: "There is 1 zombie here. It has registered for a revive." Gary would not have stopped for Bill otherwise but now takes the time to scan and revive him

EXAMPLE 2:

Same stuff happens with Bill and John as above except this time Bill is standing in a square with several zombies, a few of whom are also registered.

Phil, a guy looking to revive someone, comes along. He comes Bill's location and sees this: "There are 12 zombies here. 3 of them are registered for revives." Phil wouldn't have stopped before since he doesn't want to waste AP scanning random zombies, but now that he knows three people here want revives he'll devote the AP to finding and scanning them. If not for the registered zombies Phil would have just proceeded to a revive point, but now he can stop here instead.

---

Basically all that this does is flag a crowd of zombies with: "HEY LOOK SCIENTISTS! SOMEONE HERE WANTS LIFE!"

Notes:

• It does not violate zombie anonymity because it doesn't identify non-registered ones from registered ones, unless you scan through the pile.
• It still allows brain rotters to interfere with the revive process.
• Brain rotters would not be counting in the number of registered zombies, unless inside a powered necrotech. Come on, the fact they're brain rotted is in the system. The database would be designed to exclude them.
• You would also be able to take yourself off the registry in powered Necrotechs, also for 1AP. This is if you don't want to be revived anymore but don't want brain rot yet either.

Voting Section

Voting Rules

Votes must be numbered, justified, signed, and timestamped. # justification ~~~~ Votes that do not conform to the above may be struck by any user.

The only valid votes are Keep, Kill, Spam or Dupe. If you wish to abstain from voting, do not vote.

Keep Votes

1. Author Gives players a method of not being Mrh cows but still signaling they want a revive. How is that not good for everybody? Of course revive points would still be used, this would just be a useful alternative. --Jon Pyre 23:14, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
2. Keep- As an opportunist, I like this.-Studoku 23:32, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
3. Keep- Simple, to the point, Looks good. --FXI 23:39, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
4. Keep - Don't like the part where it says how many zombies in a block are registered (you should have to scan their DNA to know if it's in the system or not), but overall I like the suggestion. --Pdeq^Talk* 23:41, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
5. Keep - Me lieks dis. And Mudkips. :D -- Cheese 23:45, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
6. Keep - The less time they spend Mrh'ing, the more fun moments we have eating them all over again! --Aeon17x 23:51, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
7. keep anything to get people to actually play the game instead of waiting in line... One niggle though, i would prefer it if the info was only given by checking necronet or actually scanning.--Honestmistake 23:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
   • Re Oooh. Good idea. However that makes use of this a third tier skill, while this makes it available to anyone with Lab Experience. It also ties revivers to Necrotechs, as opposed to letting them get a supply of syringes and head elsewhere. It also makes it easy to find where people are without needing to explore. It's a good idea though, there are just pros and cons. --Jon Pyre 00:43, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
8. Keep - This is a really really REALLY good idea!!!--Jamie Cantwell3 00:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
9. Kepp - Holy Mrh Cow! No kill votes as of yet. That's better than putting numbers on groups. Also, it would save zeds some AP, allowing them to get further faster when they stand up. -- Quizzical  Quiz  Speak  00:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
10. Keep - I'm thinking necronet scans should also pick them up--Corndoghero^T-S-Z 00:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
11. Keep - As an Atheist, I admire the godliness of this Suggestion. There is no reasonable justification, in my opinion, not to fully support this. --Alphonse Burr 19:02, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
12. Keep - A great idea! As to answer Swiers's concern about how you know who is in the data base, maybe you would need a DNA extractor to be able to see tagged zombies? (DNA extractor is connected to the data base and that allows it to identify the number but not name the tagged people). That way it also works into the fiction. --Mayor Fitting^{Talk RR} 01:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
13. Keep - This looks helpful. Also, Swiers is wrong about the rotters. Even if you rez them, they're still rotted and the suggestion doesn't allow for them to be databased. --Heretic144 01:19, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
14. Strong Keep - I don't know where you come up with some of your ideas, but this one is brilliant! --Uncle Bill 01:23, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
15. Keep - Interesting. --Private Mark 01:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
16. Keep - The end is near!!! Jon has actually suggested a half decent suggestion!!! *faints*--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 02:13, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
17. Keep - This is a really cool idea. Makes sense that Necrotech would implement something like this, and also adds further use to the Necronet access skill-which otherwise isn't that helpful given the outrageous cost to manufacture syringes. Nice!--Dr Doom86 06:39, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
18. Keep - the text of the suggestion is my justification. --Funt Solo ^QT 08:58, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
19. Keep - big keep of course. Sounds very reasonable. If NT was capable to invent zombie virus and to construct a net which monitors the subjects, such thing would be easy for them to predict and implement.--James beckerson 09:33, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
20. Keep - Sounds good to me. I like giving existing skills more uses. Goathens 21:00, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
21. Keep - Looks like a great idea. Now Mrh? cows don't have to waste AP Mrh?ing around. Easier way to revive people without being unbalanced. --Waterspark2 22:24, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
22. Change - Random wandering, where zombies automticlty move for no AP cost, one random square, unless there are harmanz around. A nerf for a buff. --BoboTalkClown 02:24, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

    Keep - No more Mrh? cows seems like a good thing to me. --Carnexhat Improperly signed vote struck. No timestamp. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 16:52, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

23. Keep - as with Bobo. -doc crook 03:29, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
24. Keep - to be honest with you i think this is a crummy idea, but if it is implemented, i will just place my zombie alt on the list and wait to be revived and precede to attack the reviver just to have some fun--Scotw 0--7:57, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
25. Keep makes sense that necronet would do something like this----Androo the 2 00:16, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
26. Keep - As above. --Vandurn 13:58, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
27. Keep AS above, and because the ZSS voted on this one. ~A`Blue`Jelly^TME*V*I*L*_? 06:02, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
28. Keep - Sounds good to me --Rick Best 18:39, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
29. Keep this is a Very good sugestion in my opinion, a minor buff to counter the major(highly needed, but a bit over done) zombie anti-barricading buff. --Aldaris 19:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
30. Keep I rather like this idea. Sure getting a revive is pretty easy using metagaming materials, but I prefer to keep things in game as much as possible. Surely after 2 1/2 years NecroTech has realized that there are some zombies that would just rather stay dead. --_└^Frozen_┘^┌_Flame^┐ 06:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
31. Keep Like it, the only real problem would be mrh cows deciding to become zombies, then getting tonns of combat revives.--The apprentice 03:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
32. Keep I think its realy helpful and would save trudging to a RP - Daniel camburn 20:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
33. Keep - I would just make the suggestion that if a zombie with brain rot is scanned that they get removed from the registry. - Headshot Hal 15:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Kill Votes

1. Hell No - How the hell does the scientist know X zombies are registered if he hasn't scanned them? If that info is available to them "for free", then the actual names of the zombies LOGICALLY should be too, and that would be REALLY bad. Also, what's to prevent every zombie in the game from getting revived and registering themselves? Once enough zombies with brain rot did this (and I'd make it my sworn duty to ensure they could, by doing Rot Revives) the ability would be totally useless.  Swiers 00:52, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
   • Re It's why you only see the number if you're holding a scanner. The scanner is hooked up to necronet, you have the scanner, scanner displays the number. Let's assume the scanner can't display or Necronet doesn't save names, just DNA profiles. Also in the notes I mentioned that brain rotted zombies will only appear in the count inside powered NTs. --Jon Pyre 02:49, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
     • That's just psuedo-flavor to justify a HUGE reviver buff. Its based on some very arbitrary (and IMO unlikely) assumptions.  Swiers 04:40, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
2. Eh. Mrh cows are flavorable. And, more seriously...as Swiers.--ShadowScope 00:53, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
3. Change - Only thing that could at all be added from this suggestion is the ability to be registered, what i would add to that is the ability to see how many are registered on the necrotech map. - Pardus 01:01, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
4. Kill - Does not fit theme of game. IRL, what person would prefer to be a zombie? --Pgunn 01:03, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

   IRL how would a zombie know where to go to get a revive? IRL what person would be so stupid as to kill someone in a mall with 200+ people in it? IRL why would there be more survivors than zombies in a zombie apocalypse? Your logic is flawed.--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 02:13, 21 February 2008 (UTC) Non author re removed --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 02:51, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

5. Kill - As Swiers. --Themanwhocares4 01:05, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
6. Kill in addition to what every here has said, it could also be abused. Say Bob (who works for a PK group) DNA extracts Jim, who is a pker. Bob then adds him to the registry, and when other people see him then they revive him. Same for zed spys, and zombies who PK in human form--ȠәȻᴙʘɱΔȵƆεʁ 05:15, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
7. Kill - This has the potential to be good, I think it's just too open to abuse though. Once the system is full of Pkers/Gkers/Spies/Anyone else who likes to cause trouble for the prosurvivors, then it becomes near useless and as there is no way to fairly judge who is a 'good guy' I think I've got to vote kill on this.--DI Sweeny 10:25, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
8. Kill - As Swiers and Grim. - W 11:30, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
9. Kill - Also as Swiers and Grim --Zombie in Pajamas 21:41, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
10. Kill - overpowering already easy to achieve revives. The only places you should currently have a problem gaining a revive arn't because scientists don't know where to find you, it's because there are no scientists left -- boxy ^{talk • i} 12:24 22 February 2008 (BST)
11. Kill - I just don't really like it, and it doesn't work well for people who become a zombie, and then decide they want to be human. --Toejam 13:33, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
12. Kill - A well thought-out idea, but as Swiers.  Billy Club Thorton  T!  RR  17:25, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
13. Kill - As Swiers and DJ Marc Sweeny. Sounds good, but very flawed. Ioncannon11 20:24, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
14. Kill - Think about this in a meta-gaming way. How is a zombie meant to register themselves for a revive? I know, "They could have done it when they were alive!" But think about it. You're living in a zombie apocolypse, trying to live off what little food there is, I don't think that people would be lining up for some twisted form of life insurance. I doubt that people would be thinking "This isn't a very safe place... I'm just going to submit my registration, because I doubt I'll live to see the morning!".--Normal Phobic^C 10:27, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
15. Has reviving changed that it no longer costs 10AP to do? That never seemes to be factored into revive-altering suggestions.--Pesatyel 15:23, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
16. Kill - Does more harm than good. --Midianian|T|T:S|C:RCS| 14:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
17. Kill - Just a little bit much. Part of the game is sitting around waiting for your needle.. or if you are a zombie getting random revived all the time.--Airborne88^{T Zom MIS} 02:22, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
18. Kill - The idea itself ain't bad, but this would likely be unneeded, mostly unused, and it dwarfs revive points and revivees to a certain extent.--Kolechovski 04:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
19. Kill - too much potential for griefing. also, revive points aren't really that hard to come by.--Rocky Road 17:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam - As sweirs, only adding in that revives are ludicrously easy to obtain already if you decide to take the matter into your own hands rather than line up. Doesnt take me more than a day to get a brain rot revive without any metagaming regardless of where i am in the city. Just because people are stupid enough to sit in line doesnt mean the game is broken. Revive queues are a player construct as well, if there is a problem with the construct you dont change the game, you change the construct. This is just absurd. --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 01:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
2. Spm - As Swiers and Grim. --The Hierophant 01:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
3. Spam - As per the three people above me at the moment. --ramby 02:34, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
4. Spam - Grim is wise. - Bisfan 02:55, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
5. Spam - goodness no. evne without reading grim and sweir's comments i knew there is NO NEED for this and that it's a ludicrously overpowered survivor buff... --WanYao 05:28, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
6. Spam - Prioritized revives and zombie trackers are insanely overpowered and broken.--Karek^maps?! 05:34, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
7. Spam - as Sweirs --~~~~ [talk] 12:02, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
8. Spam - Grim says it better than I can. --Trav 13:15, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
9. As Swiers and Grim. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 14:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
10. Spam As Axe Hack. --Druuuuu ^OcTRR 01:08, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

    Spam - -- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 03:07, 22 February 2008 (UTC) No justification: struck. --Funt Solo ^QT 15:45, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

11. Spam - As Grim, with some metagaming you can get a revive in 30 minutes, without it doesn't take longer than 6 hours. --Viktor Suvorov 07:58, 22 February 2008 (UTC)