Suggestion:20080225 Zombie Barricade Interception

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

20080225 Zombie Barricade Interception

NativeJovian 07:49, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion type
balance

Suggestion scope
Zombie skill

Suggestion description
Currently, zombies automatically attempt to block survivors from barricading any building they are in. From the Suggestions_Dos_and_Do_Nots page: "One of the things you should therefore consider is "what does it take to use this?" If the answer is "nothing," your idea is quite possibly too powerful. Free-use attacks, or abilities that you can make use of just by standing motionless in one spot, cost nothing to take advantage of and thus wind up abused." This seems to qualify, doesn't it? So I suggest a new zombie skill: Interception. A sub-skill of Ransack, it allows a zombie to intercept survivor barricade attempts. A button would be added whenever a zombie with Interception was inside a building: "block entrance". This works like the current system, except that a zombie must spend 1 AP to enter the "intercepting" state. Any action taken while in the "intercepting" state takes them out of that state and they no longer attempt to stop barricading. Any zombie in the intercepting state is in a different targeting stack than other zombies. Zombies that are not in the intercepting state do not affect survivor's ability to construct barricades.

As it stands, as soon as a zombie enters a building, it begins to block barricading attempts, even as it attacks survivors inside. This makes it infinitely easier for zombies to break sieges, and almost impossible for survivors to recover once the barricades have been brought down. By a) making it a skill b) making it take AP to enter the intercepting state, and c) making intercepting zombies more easily targetable, it helps balance things out. Zombies can still enter the intercepting state just before they run out of AP and remain in the state until the next time they log in and make some other action, but it is not automatic, and survivors can attempt to eliminate blocking zombies first, thus making it easier to construct barricades again. Also, because zombies would tend to not enter the intercepting state until they had nearly run out of AP, it would give alert survivors a chance to barricade immediately after the first zombie entered, before other zombies come inside. All of this makes it easier for survivors to defend against large hordes, without completely negating the advantage that zombies get by intercepting barricades.

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. Keep: My suggestion, of course I vote keep. NativeJovian 08:01, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
2. Keep - you're going to get Kill/Spammed to death, but you've got balls, and your suggestion is fair. No free actions. --Funt Solo ^QT 09:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
3. Question - Would it allow a zombie to block while being the only one present (unlike the current system requiring two)? - W 09:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

   I'd say so. It would be unfair for someone to spend an AP on intercepting and never be able to get anything for it because no one else joined in. -- NativeJovian 10:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

4. Keep - I agree with the idea that it must be an active choice and thus warrant AP use. If they are "keeping near the doorways once inside a safehouse" then they can't be inside hunting down survivors, now can they? --Amanu Jaku 10:12, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
5. Keep - Good way to balance this ability fairly for all players. --Pvt human 11:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
6. Keep - Awesome Idea. I like it, makes the skill fairer.--Kasei 12:19, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
7. Keep/Change - I like it all except for one thing, make it a sub-skill of MoL because the Zack doesn't have to know how to tear something down, just recognise it's bad if survivors 'cade --Medico 12:59, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
8. Keep - As everybody above. --Vandurn 13:37, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
9. Strong keep -As everyone else--Studoku 11:17, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
10. Weak Keep - Makes sense. I guess. --Pgunn 16:26, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
11. Keep/Change - Just add one skill, leave everything else as is - it will mostly hurt zergers who create new characters to block entry (yes, I've seen such attempts) --Viktor Suvorov 16:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
12. Keep - Makes perfect sense --Rick Best 17:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
13. Keep - as Amanu Jaku--Corndoghero^T-S-Z 20:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
14. Keep - Yes, yes, I love it. --FXI 23:14, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
15. Kepp - Even IF the game policies aren't rules, we can still suggest to Kevan that they are there for a reason. Besides, the zeds are getting surprisingly feisty all of a sudden. It's turned into a north-vs-south battle. Them danged zeds up there won't leave us harmanz alone with our plantations and zombie slaves! -- Quizzical  Quiz  Speak  23:45, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
16. Strong Keep - The flavor reasons for the bullshit 'cade nerf make no sense. If all the zombies are standing in the doorway, how the fuck can they attack the surviviors who are presumably standing in the middle of the building? Also, I think that when zombies enter the block stance or whatever, they should have to pay AP for every cade attempt they block. --Hhal 01:30, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
17. Keep - I like it. --Pdeq^Talk* 01:33, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
18. Keep - It's cool, and I really like it! --Jamie Cantwell3 01:38, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
19. Keep - Yes! --Heretic144 02:01, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
20. Keep - Makes sense. -Milknova 03:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
21. Keep w/ Change While you should not make the zombies stand out per se if they are intercepting, I think that this adds a reasonable balance to what seems to be the overly powered zombie siege breaking machine for the new update for zombies.--Raynor16 04:03, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
22. Keep - Its a free actions which are not allowed.--Carnexhat 07:29, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
23. Keep - This doesn't completely solve the problem of the game inbalance, but it is definitely a good step. In the interest of fairness, I would like to see this one go through.--Dr Doom86 06:48, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
24. Keep - As Amanu Jaku --Johaen 20:41, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
25. Emphatic Keep - This is a wonderful idea. It branches out the zombie skill tree, and makes being a high-level zed more significant in a sense that goes beyond simple damage-dealing. Furthermore, it helps to restore two-sidedness to sieges, which have in recent history been heavily weighted in favour of zombies. I would only change one thing, and that would be making it a passive skill. You're only counted in barricade-blockage formulae if you have this skill. Still makes sieges a force to be reckoned with, less fussy micromanagement. - Adept Omega 00:57, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
26. Keep - because free moves are unbalanced, overly powerful and just plain wrong. - Headshot Hal 15:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
27. Keep would re-balance the over-done zombie buff.
28. I am on a voting spree, but to make this vote valid, I'm in agreement with the above voters. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 15:09, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
29. Sure - Yeah! Why should we change already existing game items? It's not like it has happened in the past, with NT Syringes and headshot. The odds of stuff already existing in the game being changed by a suggestion is laughable! Laughable! Or you could vote on this item based on the merit of the suggestion, like I am. Just say no to omnipresent zombies. --Akule ^{School's in session.} 16:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
30. Keep - I was even working on something like this, and I imagine others were as well. The current system is a bit too powerful and needs toned down just a bit.--Kolechovski 04:22, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
31. Keep - Unskilled zombies were, historically, dumb monsters that can't communicate, gesture, or to do anything except bite and grip, so they can't understand concepts like "blockin' warm ones rebuild barricades is good". Do you want to do it? Then need to buy a skill (and probably, a 2nd level skill, hanging from Memories of Life or 3rd level, from Ransack). Also, it will prevent the use of zerg accounts to block cade rebuild in a siege attack. --Kaipirinha 12:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
32. Keep - I agree that the new(ish) change seems too powerful. Perhaps this skill should be under "Memories of life" as the flavor text suggests that the zombies "are learning the priorities of besieged survivors." --KF 04:50, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
33. Keep - Good Idea would give survivors a better chance.--BuckshotCheney 05:29, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
34. Keep - Somewhat balances out the high percentage chance Padfu-Zomfu 16:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
35. Keep - Good analysis. It makes no sense that rookie zombies can learn a skill with no reason. The tide has turned so quickly that something needs to be done. I'm not sure survivors need the ability to target blocking zombies, however. Kchu 04:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
36. Keep - Kevin added a good update, but it's too one-sided. This would even things out and it works with the mechanincs of the game well. Freedom42 4:21, 12 March 2008 (AEST)

Kill Votes

1. kill/change I almost agree with this, just think it needs a way for "active" zombies to be doing this automatically. Perhaps a mechanism that allowed the zombie to be considered intercepting for a few minutes after login? Fair enough that when they are swaying mindlesssly they should pay an AP to do it somewhere inconvienient but if they are actively swinging they should have the effect for free!--Honestmistake 10:28, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
2. kill - Leave britney, i mean the update, alone... just leave it alone. Seriously. Quit trying to nerf this BADLY NEEDED pro-zambah update. especially this soon after its implimentation. perhaps the percentages need tweaking, perhaps it's somewhat overpowered as it stands... perhaps... let Kevan deal with tweaking the percentages for balance, if need be, but quit effen whinging, already. You're lucky Kevan even CODES for you, you bastards!!! ;P --WanYao 11:11, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
3. kill - The zeds aren't doing anything, it's the survivors! They aren't willing to stand two inches away from a zeddie, and tun their back! Perhaps as another MoL effect? UCFSD 13:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
4. Kill - Zombies have the decency to kill everyone in the block before they start ruining your building. Likewise, please exert some effort to kick them out before cading. --Aeon17x 13:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
5. Kill/Change I've been saying this should be a skill for a while now (it's not that I don't want zombies to have it, but more that I don't want them to automatically have it), but I don't think the active blocking bit is necessary, and I don't think you should mess with zombie anonymity.. --Diano 17:27, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
6. Kill - Survivors inside a building automatically stop zombies from ransacking the building. That is a free action too. Maybe I'd go for this if there was also a "Building Defense" skill for survivors, and it cost 1 AP to enter "Building Defense" mode, which was the only way to stop zombies from ransacking a building. As it is, the suggestion contains a lot of hyperbole ("infinately easier") and makes a reasonable action overly difficult (ransack has no real use for newbie zombies). It also allows "friendly zombies" to NOT block barricade building; IMO, one of the best features of the barricade block is it makes ALL zombies (even ones who were friends) more dangerous to have inside your safehouse. And for that to remain the case, its pretty much a requirement that the ability NOT rely on any skill. I could MAYBE see tying it to "Lurching Gait" (in fact, I originally thought it was) to reduce zerg abuse; in that case, a few hard core survivors willing to pay 2 AP to move 10 AP to stand up would be "friendly zombies", and I'm cool with that. Also, there is the MAJOR flaw in this suggestion that it seems not to work for a zombie who breaks in and is in the process of killing people. That means that during a mall break in, a zombie would be forced to choose whether to "hold the door" or bite people. That pretty much removes the whole point of blocking barricade builds, really.
   If you reply to this, please use the talk page; I'd hope to have a fully developed discussion with input from multiple sides.  Swiers 19:54, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
7. RE: - Swiers, a zombie in a ruined building automatically stops a survivor from repairing also, are you suggesting zombies must also purchase a skill to stop survivors repairing a building?
8. Kill - I think WanYao and Swiers put it very well. -- John Rubin^{T! ZG} 21:20, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
9. Kill - A good suggestion, but current system in place is fine.  Billy Club Thorton  T!  RR  01:19, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
10. Kill - As Swiers. --Zombie in Pajamas 01:23, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
11. Kill - Previous statements. --Gregarious Instigator 02:45, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
12. Kill/Change - As so many above me, but nice try though. Acoustic Pie 20:33, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
13. Kill - you can thank Swiers for changing my mind and voting kill --Scotw 23:52, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
14. Kill - Shotguns are way to powerful, but you don't see zombies voting to make it cost 2 action points to fire. --The Gecko PKer 16:35, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
15. Kill - There are already free actions in a sense, just standing inside a building makes it that much harder to take it. I think it's safe to assume that a mob stays by the door, while another goes around the rooms inside a buildin and eats things. It seems silly to have a skill to stand by a door. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
16. Kill - It's nice to see low level zombies be able to do something, anything, at a decent parity level without a skill. Also as Swiers. --Riseabove 16:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam - The Suggestions Do and Do Nots are not game policy, they are player established guidelines for the suggestions page. What next? Asking for feeding drag to be removed because it's Pied Piper, or headshot because it messes with someone elses AP? Kevan created this change, the odds of the this changing that are laughable. -- Iscariot 11:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
2. Spam - "The Suggestions Do and Do Nots are not game policy", balls or not -- boxy ^{talk • i} 12:33 25 February 2008 (BST)
3. Spam - This suggestion messes with zombie anonymity. Sorry, but we cannot tag zombies so others can kill them. -doc crook 13:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
4. Spam/Dupe - This is a suggestion that had been done many times over pre-update, under various names like Door Holding (There probably is a legit dupe somewhere, Ill look later). Additionally, it isn't a fact of "I'm a zombie standing here! I'm gonna grab things!" Your whole argument is based on the fact that you imagine it as zombies attacking anyone who gets near. However, if you merely imagine it as survivors not wanting to get too close to the zombies with something like a wood table instead of a fire axe, well this is a little more reasonable. Also, it is fine as is. --Druuuuu ^OcTRR 22:28, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

   Re: my objection to the update isn't the flavor, it's the mechanics. It makes the standard survivor tactic during break-ins (raising the barricades first, then dealing with the zombies that made it inside) completely unworkable, and even before the update survivors were losing more sieges than they were winning. -- NativeJovian 02:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

5. Spam - As above, nicely thought out but the Does and Donts aren't law...--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 18:10, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
6. Spam - The present system is fine. --The Hierophant 21:15, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
7. Spam - Way to make up your own rules. I'd be okay with this if intercepting then was 100% effective. - Grant (talk) 23:00, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
8. Spam - the percentages will be tweaked and played with as it is. If you want to see cade blocking removed, suggest that we remove barricades. - Bisfan 07:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
9. Spam, spam, eggs, bacon, and spam. Your old tactics aren't working as well as they used to? So get some new tactics, and stop exaggerating! "Infinitely easier" gave me a good laugh… very funny, now go away. Humans still have a 2:1 AP advantage building barricades up to at least VS, and holding buildings was always a stupid tactic. My survivors try to never sleep in a besieged building, and consequently die very rarely. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 04:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

   Re: Right, because trying to hold buildings like the only NT building in the suburb is obviously a bad idea. Survivors can't function without resource buildings under their control, they can't just run indefinitely. Retreat is not always the best option... or at least wasn't before this update. -- NativeJovian 07:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

10. Spam - Does not qualify. Zombies prevent fixing a ransack or ruin just by being there. Survivors prevent ransacking and ruining just by being there. It's not an action, and the increased risk of getting headshot is not exactly "nothing". --Midianian|T|T:S|C:RCS| 14:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

    Re: That's not what the suggestion is about at all. Survivor presence prevents a ransack and zombie presence prevents repairing a ruin, that's all well and good. This update is about zombie presence preventing survivors from barricading, which is a completely different thing. -- NativeJovian 07:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

    Re: My point is that there's already similar things in the game which cost "nothing" (only the increased chance of getting killed and maybe headshot). The largest difference is that this isn't 100% of the time, unlike the other abilities. --Midianian|T|T:S|C:RCS| 12:52, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

11. Spam -System is already in place/ does& do not section..--Airborne88^{T Zom MIS} 02:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC)