Suggestion:20080328 Revive Checkbox

	Spam!
	This suggestion was voted as spam and closed for voting, with 4 keep, 7 kill, and 13 spam votes.

20080328 Revive Checkbox

EvilTheBadger 02:47, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion type
Balance Change

Suggestion scope
All Players

Suggestion description
The 10ap to revive is a serious penalty. It used to be 1ap, but was changed to prevent combat revives. However, it really hurts reviving efforts.

Here's my suggestion to improve things:

Every player has a combo box in their profile. It has the options "Want revives" "Do not want to be revived". Each player can set it as they like. When you scan a zombie, it tells you the setting- so there are now three responses to a scan.

"Scan complete - Revivication recommended"

"Scan results unfavourable - revivication not recommended"

"Cortex damaged - Do not revive"

If they set the box to "want revive", it costs 1ap to revive that particular player. Otherwise, 10ap.

This makes reviving survivors much easier, and it allows random revives of survivors without annoying zombies. NT techs wandering around will scan for XP, and find survivors wanting to be revived. At only 1ap, they can afford to do it. The dual nature players, in particular, will benefit. They get a real chance to get revived in the natural flow of the game. It would reduce the clogs at RPs, and reduce frustration in general. No-one would suffer, it would just make everything easier.

-- Posted on behalf of Uniqueusername, EvAv

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 - While zombie revive queue cloggers may lie and choose "want revive", they'd just find themselves alive again to little cost on the survivor's part. Those that hate CR's will still be protected by the 10AP hit. Think about the balance, currently it takes a good zed without survivor skills 1-6Ap to get back in action, it takes a good survivor without zed skills 20-26AP + travel to an RP + 10AP from another player. EvilTheBadger 03:19, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
2. Keep - Works in an RP sense. A zombie who longs to regain its humanity is going to be complacent and accept the syringe that brings it back to the 'good side', while a zombie indifferent/uninterested in regaining harman form would put up a fight during the injection process, and fight the harman infection as much as possible in an attempt to remain rotted. --Shigogouhou 05:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
3. Keep - this is reasonable. makes things clear and help survivors from zombies that are overpowered. --RayHanley 12:44, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
4. Keep - Sounds right to me, if you make it 5AP instead of 1AP, as mentioned below. Also, sorry if this is formatted badly...first time I've tried this. Noctis 15:40, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Kill Votes

1. Kill - No. That is part of the penalty of a survivor being killed. --Pdeq^Talk* 04:21, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
2. Kill - Not realistic. What person would want to be dead, from an in-game perspective? --Pgunn 06:40, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
3. Change - One AP is overpowered. I think 5 AP would be a bit more fair.--Dr Doom86 ^{T PSS} 07:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

   RE: - Thanks for that suggestion, it seems the general consensus is 1AP is overpowered, but I believe 10AP is way too extreme, 5AP sounds like a reasonable compromise. EvilTheBadger 13:04, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

4. Kill - It's too powerful. --The Gecko PKer 15:09, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
5. Kill/Change - 1AP revives are overpowered- imagine a scientist with 40 syringes at a revive point. 5AP could be possible.--Studoku ^W! 16:26, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
6. Kill - I don't like voting spam, but I damn well could. Don't like it at all.--KF 19:50, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
7. Kill- Bad idea, you are nerfing a legitimate zombie strategy as well as completely overhauling a system that was put in place because 1 AP to revive was ridiculously overpowered. -- BKM 20:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam - where do I begin? first of all, this is asking the game engine to do your thinking for you, meh. And while it seems like this is a survivor buff, really it's not... it's utterly pointless... people will just abuse the function and lie... Just scan before you rezz, and use DNR tools and lists available, as well as your own brain, to decide whom to stick and whom to pass over. --WanYao 02:53, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
2. Spam - One pro-survivor AP to activate fifty of the same? Forget about breaking the game, this would smash it, piss on it and throw the remains into the sea. --The Hierophant 03:20, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

   RE: - I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean here? The suggestion states 1AP to revive a single survivor with "want revive" selected- ah that wasn't actually clear. Edited for clarity. EvilTheBadger 03:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

   RE: - In spending action points reviving someone you are spending X pro-survivor action points in order to create 50 pro-survivor action points (the maximum that the revived player can have). At present that is 10 AP, yet you want to cut that by 90%. This would create a scenario in which a survivor could actually use fifty pro-survivor action points to activate two thousand five hundred(!) pro-survivor action points. Your suggestion could literally kill the game off. --The Hierophant 06:44, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

3. Spam - I didn't think this was possible, but this suggestion is actually worse than the free reload suggestion. Way too pro-survivor and completely changes the mechanics of the game.  Billy Club Thorton  T!  RR  03:37, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
4. Spam - Misconception, it was changed because Kevan was planning and already had buffed revives to the extreme. Revives now are easier than they were when it was one AP, syringes are found nearly 3 times as much, rotters are inconsequential, you can view profiles, and you can skip the stack. 10 AP revives were added to balance those things, not to reduce Combat Revives(although they were in part, Necronet Access made combat revives 1 AP auto-drops when it was added).--Karek^maps?! 04:07, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
5. Spam - This is not a good thing. --Druuuuu ^OcTRR 04:46, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
6. Spam as the hierophant---Airborne88^T|Z.Quiz|PSS 06:52, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
7. Spam 10 AP to revive MAY be a little excessive, but it was put in place for a reason. How hard it is to put "revive me" in your profile? I see it all the time. If your going to revive someone, your going to do some "research" on the guy I'd think.--Pesatyel 07:32, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
8. Spam - 1 AP to revive?!! That's over9000powered --~~~~ [talk] 08:02, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
9. Spam - for roleplay reasons. How can someone decide, prior to zombification, that they would or wouldn't like a revive, and then pass that message on through time, space, and matter - so that the person examining them also gets to know? Sounds like magic, time-travelling telepathy to me. I don't want any of that in my highly realistic simulation (about zombies). --Funt Solo ^QT 09:29, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
10. Spam - As Duke Garland and Funt Solo (btw - thanks for revive Duke). -- 
    •  Nevin McAvoy 
    •  (talk) 
    10:47, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
11. Spam - this suggestion reminds me of Necronet Registry. but i am not going to say dupe --Scotw 19:09, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
12. Spam - Even in the worst possible circumstances (searching a ruined building) the cost of doing a revive (search cost plus 1 AP to scan and 10 to revive) is less than the AP needed for a zombie to kill a survivor. So survivors can revive faster than zombies can kill, which is all that is required for survivor numbers to go up. The ONLY reason survivor numbers are NOT going up is because survivors do not choose to perform revives as often as they should be. (And yes, I realize other factors, such as travel time, affect revive and kill costs; those large come down to survivor organization and tactics vs zombie organization and tactics.)  Swiers 19:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
13. Everyone above in kill and spam said it all. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 19:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

---

Voting Rules

Current Suggestions Advice to Suggesters Adding options to your suggestion is not good practice. Others will not vote on the options, only the main body; please don't ask them to do so. Once you have posted your suggestion, it is considered complete. Altering the suggestion mechanics after voting has begun nullifies existing votes, and is considered an abuse of the suggestions system. Doing so will result in your suggestion being removed from the voting system to removed suggestions, where you can work out the details and resubmit later if you desire. It is preferred that you remove your own suggestion and resubmit a new version with changes, if changes are needed. "Notes" added for clarification purposes, and correcting spelling/typos are permitted. When considering adding a clarification note, it is often better for all parties involved, for the author to remove the suggestion and resubmit it with the clarification included for the voters who have already placed their votes. Advice to Voters You are voting on Suggestions, not Users. The text of your vote should not personally attack or denigrate the user who has submitted it... no matter how ridiculous the idea. Flaming and/or Trolling will not be tolerated. Before voting please read the Suggestions Dos and Do Nots and Frequently Suggested Ideas Page to read about concepts that have been generally considered unworkable in the past. You do not need to follow the guidelines on these pages but they are worth consideration before casting a vote. One vote per user. No exceptions. You cannot use multiple wiki accounts to vote on a suggestion. To Vote, use the [edit] button at the top of the voting section, then enter your vote in the the proper format to the end of the relevant section (keep/kill/spam). It is strongly recommended that voters (especially in the kill/spam sections) justify their vote to help others understand the reason they disagree. Feedback helps new suggesters get a feel for what the community does and does not want included in Urban Dead, and a deeper understanding of the balance needed for a workable suggestion. Votes must include a signature in order to be considered valid votes. To sign a vote, use --~~~~. Please remember to sign your votes! Unsigned votes will be deleted after 30 minutes or when found. Each Suggestion will be open to voting for two (2) weeks, measured from the suggestion's Timestamp, unless it is a Dupe or Spam. If, at the end of that time, there are two thirds (2/3) more Keep votes than Kill votes, the Suggestion will be moved to the Peer Reviewed Suggestions page. Otherwise, the Suggestion will be moved to the Peer Rejected Suggestions page.

Rules for Discussions Votes are NOT the place to discuss Suggestions. This page and archived suggestion pages only to be used for the Suggesting and subsequent Voting of these suggestions. If you wish to discuss the suggestion or vote here, please use this page's Talk page (Suggestion talk:20080328 Revive Checkbox). Suggestions do not have to be submitted in order to discuss them. Developing Suggestions can be used to workshop possible suggestions before they are submitted.

Valid Votes Keep, for Suggestions that you believe have merit. Kill, for Suggestions that you believe do not have merit. If you need to discuss a rule fix, use the discussion page. Spam, for the most ridiculous suggestions. Suggestions can be removed with Spam votes as described on the cycling suggestions page. If the criterion described there are not fulfilled, the suggestion must remain for the whole two weeks. Spam votes are not a "strong kill", they are simply here to prevent the utterly ridiculous from clogging up the system. If you do not like the idea, and it's not some crazy uber power or something else ridiculous, VOTE KILL, NOT SPAM. Spam votes will be counted as Kill when votes are tallied. Dupe, for Suggestions that are exact or very close duplicates of previous suggestions. For a Dupe vote to be valid, a link must be provided to the original suggestion. Dupe votes can be used to remove suggestions as described on the cycling suggestions page. Dupe votes will not be counted when votes are tallied. Humourous, for suggestions that are obviously intended to be satirical, or of comedic value only.}} Suggestions can be removed with Humourous votes as described on the cycling suggestions page. If the criterion described there are not fulfilled, the suggestion must remain for the whole two weeks.

Invalid Votes Server Load and Programming Complexity are NOT very good Kill reasons. You are voting on the merit of the suggestion and whether or not you think it belongs in the game. Server load/complexity issues are up to Kevan to decide. X should be implemented first is not a valid reason for a vote. You are voting on the merit of THIS suggestion, not how it compares to others. Votes that do not have reasoning behind them are invalid. You MUST justify your vote.

Comments Re may be used to comment on a vote. Only the original author and the person being REd can comment. Comments are restricted to a single comment per vote, and it is expected that Re comments be as short as possible. Reing every kill vote is considered abuse of the Re comment. A Re does not count as a vote, and any subsequent discussion not part of the Re comment should be held on the discussion page if there is any extended commenting. Note is used by System Operators to invalidate trolling-based votes. Only Sysops may remove troll-based votes and they do so with a strikeout <s></s> in order to preserve the trolling removal for posterity. The voter may contest the strikeout with the Sysop that struck their vote out on the discussion page. Only a System Operator may remove a strikeout.

All Caps Try to avoid YELLING, writing in bold, or using italics, except when emphasizing a point which has escaped other voters.

VOTING EXAMPLES Keep Votes Keep - I am the author and I am allowed to vote once on my own suggestions. --MrSuggester 05:01, 11 Nov 2005 (GMT) Keep - Best. Suggestion. Evar. --Bob_Zombie 04:01, 11 Nov 2005 (GMT) Keep - Good sugestion. no signature --FakeSuggester 07:39, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT) Kill Votes Kill - This is a terrible idea, but you can totally fix it up. --NegativeGal 06:01, 12 Nov 2005 (GMT) Re - Please be more specific about how to fix it on the discussion page. --MrSuggester 14:01, 12 Nov 2005 (GMT) Re - Sure, I have detailed my proposed fixes here. --NegativeGal 23:38, 12 Nov 2005 (GMT) Kill - You will eat my poopie and love it! --PooEater 11:12, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT) Note - Inane vote removed. Defend in discussion. --DaModerator 11:13, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT) Spam/Dupe Votes Spam - Kung Fu CB Mama on Wheels is an inappropriate Survivor Class. --NoFunAtAll 09:01, 12 Nov 2005 (GMT) Dupe - Duplicate Suggestion --AnotherSuggester 05:01, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)