Suggestions/19th-Mar-2006

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.

Call of the Dead

Timestamp:	02:54, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
Type:	Skill
Scope:	Zombies
Description:	A subskill of Feeding Groan to improve zombie communication. The zombie thanks to it's mutated and improved senses can call out to other specific zombies it knows on frequencies of sound too low for humans to hear and not really noticeable to zombies other than the target recipient. Here's how it would operate: The zombie would be able to moan to attract the attention of a single specific mutual contact for 1AP. This sound is audible within ten spaces both indoors and outdoor (the low frequency can penetrate through wood and stone easier so unlike Feeding Groan it can be heard indoors). The spam prevention of having humans present is not required because unlike Feeding Groan you can only receive these calls from allies. Only the target zombie would receive a message which would look like this: BubZombie called out to you from 8w 1n. The moaning zombie would get a small confirmation sound as the target zombie involuntarily grunts in reponse. This sound does not give away the receiver's location and only occurs if the target zombie got the message, just so the groaning zombie doesn't waste AP after AP without knowing whether their target is in range. It would look like this: You call out to ZombieMan. You hear a low moan in response. What would be the purpose of this skill? It would allow zombies to effectively strategize without metagaming or any dialogue. Let's say you want to start an assault on a specific target. You can call out to four or five of your friends to assist you and they'll know your location and head on over. Then you can work together to break down the barricades. Upon encountering the survivors within you let out a Feeding Groan to call other zombies to the assault. A horde is effectively formed without zombies needing to talk or chat on forums.

Votes

1. Keep Author vote. See? That's what zombies need. Not stronger attacks. Don't suggest attack upgrades, give zombies utility skills like this ^ --Jon Pyre 02:54, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
2. Keep-Love it only one problem as of now its kinda hard to add zombies to your contact list so zombies need to be able to tell each other apart.-Deadeye207 03:28, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
3. Keep Not a bad idea. Adds flavor. Can't change any kind of balance because most organized zombies already metagame. --Mia Kristos 03:27, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
4. Keep - <3 idea, but like Deadeye said, mutual zombie contacts are rare. If two zombies have each other listed, what are the odds they're not already metagaming? Still, this could help the odd feral break-in and I'm all for zombie balances that don't require steroid usage. Keeping, not arbitrarily spoofing. Undeadinator 03:33, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
5. Kill - Interesting, but I can't imagine why zombies would use this. Organizing as a horde is already taken care of through the new, "familiar" feeding groans -- why would you want to call one of your friends over and not the whole horde? --John Ember 03:56, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
   • Re Because the presence of humans is not required. This lets you call in allies so you can break in to be able to use feeding groan. --Jon Pyre 04:51, 19 March 2006 (GMT)

   • Re - In that case, the suggestion should be a way to call the whole horde apart from the presence of humans -- a "Feeding Groan Lite" that's distinguishable from a true, harman-inspired groan. What you're suggesting is tantamount to a zombie cell phone. The flavor is wrong. --John Ember 19:35, 19 March 2006 (GMT)

   • Re Anyone can join a group. If one person in your horde isn't too bright and calls everyone ten times a day for no reason it results in massive spam. Having to be mutual contacts prevents spam. And it isn't farfetched. We've already accepted that Malton's zombies can have group affiliations. It's only natural they can have personal affiliations as well. --Jon Pyre 20:16, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
6. Keep - Merely because it is something that helps the zombies, without being broken.--Wifey 04:53, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
7. Kill I love this idea but zombie communication needs limitations. --Deathnut ^RAF 05:04, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
8. Keep - I like it because things like this would explain why zombies are moaning all the time for "no reason". They're calling out to one another for backup. Makes it more fun to be a zombie without being able to transmit specific information.--MrAushvitz 22:53, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
9. Keep - But how do zeds add contacts, unless the contact is a human to see he's profile? --Abi79 05:15, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
   • Re - Zombies goes "Barhah!". Other zombies click on their profile and add them to their contacts. --Jon Pyre 05:46, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
     • Re - Oh, okay. Now I get it. --Abi79 13:39, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
10. Keep - But I might very well change my vote. Any more communication for zombies is good, but the claims of this helping coordinate without using metagaming seems weird, since you don't really get to know who the hell you are contacting if you don't communicate out of game. Info from "zombies says Barhah" or zombie killed Survivor1034 is very slim IMO. Still, this could be surprising, so keep for now --McArrowni 05:52, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re Well, you could check their profile and add them if they're in your group. Or zombies could say something that approximates "add me" in Death Rattle. Or you could initially metagame to add your friends but not have to metagame to play with them after that point. --Jon Pyre 06:51, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
11. Keep can be cool for zombies to communicate.Link title Vote not signed or formatted. Please remove strikeout when that happens. --Grim s 10:23, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
12. Keep - Definately a keep. This would open so much possibilities. --Brizth ^W! 10:39, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
13. Kill -I'm a bit on the fence here. One. I can see the usefullness of this, Two, you are right that this is will improve zombies more then yet another combat -percentage- buff, Three, Zombies are going to outcommunicate survivors on every level if we keep this up. with this it's a small concern I know, but I feel it goes against flavor. I dislike the fact that it makes zombies even more individials instead of an horde. I feel the 'familiar' call is more then good enough.--Vista ^W! 14:42, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
14. Kill - I'm with Vista. This idea is very, very nice, but it still makes the zombies too individual instead of focusing in "horde communication". Also, you'd still have to metagame to call your allies and have them to arrive soon enough so the effort is not in vain. I'd rather do it the usual way: try to break in, and if I'm lucky enough, groan (it also helps ferals). --Omega2 15:11, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re I understand your point but here are my two cents. In order to play effectively zombies generally need more teamwork than survivors do. I think zombies should have good communication skills but at the same time that they should not be able to talk beyond what Death Rattle gives them. Humans have a variety of things they can do and talking lets they coordinate: "A bunch of us are injured here. Can anyone make a run to the hospital and pick up some FAKS?" Zombies however just attack buildings and people. They don't need to talk but they could use a skill that lets them select targets. One of the legitimate frustration zombie players have is that they cannot influence where hordes go except by metagaming. If I as a zombie player know there are humans in a nearby building, if it's heavily barricaded and I'm the only zombie there don't really have a shot of breaking in. I'm forced to go on forums and organize a raid. With Call of the Dead I could go there and call a few people over, break in and use Feeding Groans and assemble a horde. It's not better communications than survivors just different and more specialized for what zombies need to do. The information given by a call is nothing more than the zombie's location and it has a limited range. --Jon Pyre 17:47, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
      • Re: I know what you mean with this suggestion, and I find it a great idea, but it doesn't convince me. I think that the better solution would be to give the zombies a way to communicate without being restricted to hordes. Maybe give them another Groan-like ability, with short range for other zombies (three blocks or so), but hearable by your horde-friends from six blocks or even more, without the need for a human target. That's an idea I've been playing with for a while, and think it would be better than this one here (no offense meant), but can't seem to get it finished enough to post here. --Omega2 19:05, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re The thing is you have to have a way to prevent spam. Feeding Groans are limited to being used when a survivor is present. If you can just groan whenever you want and everyone nearby hears it that would result in massive spam for hundreds of players. This would let small groups of players organize specifically with each other, and they could use Feeding Groan as normal to attract the rest of their horde and feral zombies. Having to be mutual contacts would prevent spam. --Jon Pyre 20:04, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
15. Kill So very out of genre. Ignatius Newcastle 14:05, 26 March 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 9 Keep, 5 Kill, 0 Spam 18:48, 7 April 2006 (BST)

---

Zombies Need to tell each other apart.

This suggestion has been Spaminated for nerfing multiple Zombie skills with 14 Spams (including my own), 5 Kills, and 2 Keeps --CPQD 17:57, 19 March 2006 (GMT)

---

Major Event: Infection 2

Timestamp:	10:45, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
Type:	Major Malton Event: Infection 2
Scope:	New "rules" regarding infection, and infection stacking, a new anti-infection skill, and loss of all infection after being revived!
Description:	Infection 2 This is a suggestion that would be a major "event" in Malton. A "mutation" of the virus that causes infection (as the scientists understand it). But who is to say what the real cause is. All that matters is the manner of infection takes a change, for the worse! There is a systemic infection increase, infection is now more effective and (for a time) rules the day in Malton (until countermeasures are available) giving the zombies an advantage (for a time.) There would be a lot of finger pointing and blaming as to the cause, many NT scientists would believe or be accused that the current revification methods have created a more virulent "strain" of the virus. Many may claim that the appearance of "100th generation", or higher zombies that have risen over 100 times (in some cases 200+!)have given rise to a new order of infection. The cause is unknown, to be honest, but the results are horrifying. My Rationale For Effects Upon The Game Infection is now capable of "Stacking" that is to say you aren't just infected, or not infected.. there are varying degrees of HOW infected you have become (the disease running it's course, stages I through IV). This is due to the new, nasty "fast acting" virus which can make even the most hardcore zombie hunter a Z in no time if he gets bitten enough times, in all the wrong places (ouch!) To be technically accurate, you can be infected from a single bite, but multiple bites you're going to need a LOT more medicine to cure your infection (that and a lot of uninfected plasma to replace your sheer bloodloss.) On the left side with HP and AP is a new stat "IP", that is Infection Points. Simple enough, all survivors have 0 when not infected, when you first become infected it becomes 1 (take 1 damage a turn until a FAK cures infection.) Your infection points can go as high as 4 IP, that is to say 4 points of infection damage a turn! ("Whoa, that's too high, that's crazy! Stage IV infection!") Not really, chances are you may be dead before your infection rating can get that high, BUT if your survivor is mixing it up with zombies and things don't go so well, it can definately happen, especially if you're out of FAK's! Infection level 4 will be a lot more rare, but can happen if you're online (healing yourself) and using FAK's while being bitten repeatedly (at the end of your combat you may find your infection is at 4 and you're in need of medical assistance.) Bottom line, it makes infection a nightmare even for the hardened zombie hunter if they're facing a zombie horde (as it should be!) The "poison effect" of a survivor being seriously infected is now the only smile on a just dropped zombie's face. Obviously you could run to the local (powered) hospital and beg players to disinfect you, and they may very well do so.. but this element of the game would mean players would always want to hold on to 1 or 2 FAK's for their personal use (sorry buddy, gotta save my butt first!) The #1 reason this should be introduced into the game is it creates the infection as a more real, more SCARY thing to be hit by.. not just 1 point a turn until you use an FAK.. something you have to get your hands on an FAK pretty quick or you'll be switching sides very soon "Ohhh noo.. infected.. dammit.. run.. get away from me... gahhhhhh! Rrrrrr." (And so forth). Also the rate of infection means just how far away you are from BECOMING a zombie yourself.. which adds to the "Oh crap, I'm infected" element. Game Mechanics: Increased Rates Of Infection Going from rank 1 infection to rank 2 infection requires a LOT more virus being directly added to your bloodstream (ex. a very bad combat with a very skilled zombie). The same zombie can actually get you up to rank 2 if they do pretty well in combat (maybe 3 if they're real, real lucky and they find you as soon as they get up.) But realisticlly this is a way of making "spreading the love" more fun for zombies, now they get to make life harder for survivors, costing the survivors more AP to stay alive (when they log on), creating balance. Additionally more survivors will become zombies for a time, until they learn new tactics to get around the 2nd infection outbreak. Specific Game Mechanics 1, Increased Rates Of Infection: Going from Rank 0 to Rank 1 Infection ("Stage I"), requires 1 successful Infection. Going from Rank 1 to Rank 2 Infection ("Stage II"), requires 2 MORE successful infections. (Rank 0 to rank 2, 3 infections total) Going from Rank 2 to Rank 3 Infection ("Stage III"), requires 2 MORE successful infections. (Rank 0 to rank 3, 5 infections total) Going from Rank 3 to Rank 4 Infection ("Stage IV"), requires 2 MORE successful infections. (Rank 0 to rank 4, 7 infections total) Note: It only takes 1 FAK to remove 1 full rank of infection, which is quite easy, but you have to have them on hand! This means survivors even ones without surgery and such medical skills are going to have to dedicate some time to the seriousness of infection, and keep a close eye on "how many HP do I have and how quickly can I get rid of this many levels of infection?" it makes the game much more serious for the living, you might have the HP to survive several zombies beating on you.. but you'd better have more than a couple FAK's after it's all over. Additionally, a player may choose to use an FAK in combat not because their HP's are low, but because they don't want to lose 2 HP a turn for the next so many combat rounds.. it makes up close combats much more scary, and challenging. Additionally this is a much needed game balance, yes zombies can gain HP from digestion in combat, but a survivor with sufficient skills and FAK's can gain 10 (or 15) life in a combat whenever they spend an AP for healing. Specific Game Mechanics 2, FAK use in combat: Using an FAK at any location that contains at least 1 zombie still grants the full HP benefit BUT there is only a 25% chance that it removes 1 full rank of infection (true infection removal doesn't take more time, it takes more careful cleaning, not easily accomplished with a zombie hanging on your back!) This has no effect on FAK's removing a full rank of infection anytime you are not at a location where there are any zombies. This also makes having a zombie just enter your hospital a very big deal "Get that damn thing outta here!" Zombies may very well start attacking hospitals even more, to add more stress to the situation.. but more patients might just unload some ammo into any non living guest in the lobby. A zombie at your location is something you have to deal with, or leave, in order to deal with your infection! Specific Game Mechanics 3, New Skill, For Hospitals and NT Buildings: "Zombie Viral Pathology" This skill allows this character to be able to heal 2 ranks of viral infection IF they are at either a powered Hospital or a powered Necro Tech building. Prerequisite: Appears just below NecroNet Access on the Science skills tree, so you have to have the above skills to get this additional benefit. A lot of Malton doctors are being given some Necro Tech science access (just to see if the local docs can learn anything new!) A character with this skill using it in a powered hospital has a 15% chance of healing 2 ranks of infection instead of 1 (when using a FAK), this jumps to 30% if that character has the Surgery skill! A character with this skill using it in a powered Necro Tech Building has a 15% chance of healing 2 ranks of infection instead of 1 (when using a FAK), this jumps to 30% if that character has the Diagnosis and Surgery skills (NT buildings have a lot of labs, not much for medical supplies and beds)! Note: These bonuses seem small for a new skill, BUT, keep in mind it's a new strain of the virus and the survivors are being used as guinea pigs to find out what works and what doesn't (ex. a blood introduced form of "non-lethal bleach" is one of the more successful experiments!) The more medical knowledge your character has, the better their chances of helping control "this damn virus", guns aren't enough anymore. Specific Game Mechanics 4, revivification cures all infection points, resets IR to 0. To prevent "griefing" for players who die of infection, and dying from high IR to boot, a new rule.. when you are revived it means you were cured of being a zombie which requires a CURE of all infection in your body. This keeps the hassles to a minimum, and prevents the "perpetual death" of overly infected characters, keeps the game fun. Note: This does not Nerf newbies, but it does make walking up to a group of zombies more, shall we say, serious? When one takes into account that it takes a "maxed out" zombie to really capitalize on this it means more players will want to play their zombies, more often, and survivors need zombies to level per se. As far as events, this is both a cause and an effect.. the overuse of "revives" has created a backlash effect, not superzombies but a supervirus! Now the Z's will be able to "spread the love" much more quickly and successfully (for now.) Another Note: Please forgive the length of this suggestion, even those who voted kill last time wanted to see it continued, so now we have the carfully worded, very-fast acting virus. As well as many answers to some questions voters may have. And to the hardcore survivor: "Whassamatter, you ain't MAN enough to face some more zombies?" Bottom line: it's a major Malton event suggestion, it should have a lot of checks and balances in place at the same time of it's introduction.

Votes

1. Keep - Author vote. It's simple actually if you take the time to read it (please do!) but unlike the old suggestion entered the virus takes effect faster (stacks faster). But there are counters to this to cut down on "griefing" and cure the "revived, I die, revived, I die" problem. Just vote keep, you'll like it (even if you don't like me! boo hoo) MrAushvitz 11:45, 17 March 2006 (GMT)
2. Kill If you're going to attack someone that much just kill them and do it right. Don't expect to bite a few times and they have them kill themselves by taking 24 damage from infections while they use 6AP to head to the hospital. Your bites do not get to count for double. --Jon Pyre 18:36, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
3. Kill- infection is fine the way it is, in order to reach multiple infections the player loses so much health he's never going to notice it because he's already dead from combat damage. as I said before infection is meant to be only a minor inconvience, and is only workable as a minor inconvience. your Suggestion is too complicated, it tries to do too much at once, Try to make it as simple as possible. don't try to be funny, but be as businesslike as you can. limit your text, I've read the whole thing, but it wasn't easy. you could condense it to only a quarter of the length it is now without losing any info.--Vista ^W! 18:42, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
4. Kill - The what? Sorry, but while that does make some sense, it's not good. Stacking infection is something I could deal with, but all the other things you added are... well... excessive. Just the infection (stackable or not) alone is a nuisance, don't make it so complicated. And 7 bites (28 damage) for 4HP lost every turn? I'm pretty sure I'd be dead much before that! --Omega2 19:09, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
5. Kill - Infection is a pain in the ass, as it is. The thing you propose is that infection equals death. You can't run, because anywhere you run is close to the zombie that attacked you, and running to anything far away will kill you; you can't fight, because you deal more damage to yourself than to the enemy. One damage per AP is more than enough based on the amount of HP we have. This suggestion might be logical if we had say... 200 HP, but we don't. There is abso-freaking-lutely no reason for an infection to get so serious that it hurts a person more than being gnawed on by some rabid, decaying freak. Destin Farloda 19:20, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
6. Spam - This just seems entirely outrageous. I think the reasons have all been just about covered. That it's only "for now" makes it even more silly.--Wifey 19:27, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
7. Kill - You're so close with this. 2 bites to bump the rank is reasonable (even if it does mean rank IV will almost never happen -- you might consider just leaving that one out, actually), and zombies would love to inflict these illnesses on their victims. Makes things more intense for survivors, too. Other things I like: infection-removing bonuses for powered hospitals and the new skill to help with this. What I don't like -- reducing the effectiveness of the FAK to a percentage. I would suggest that the FAK continue to be 100% effective at removing a level of infection -- powered buildings and the new skill should simply boost how much infection (how many levels) one is able to cure with a single FAK. Do resubmit this again, I think you're onto something. --John Ember 19:30, 19 March 2006 (GMT)
   • Re - Hmm, seems I'm getting less of a positive response than the last time suggested it, even though this version is even faster and more specific. Maybe simpler is better. No worries, I just wanted to have the beginning counter measures included with the same suggestion. Maybe, just maybe I should have just a "Stage II" virus, maximum infection 2 pts a turn (for now) the reason I wanted to do this is I have a lot of zombie skill ideas about increasing your infectious attacks (ex. improved bite which has a 5% chance of doing 2 points of infection instead of 1. Anyways, just trying to develop the game by developing the infection. #1 reason it's getting shot down is combat, people don't want their survivor combats messed with (that's what I'm hearing) and they don't want to have to run from a zombie combat (who does?) I'll figure it out, needs less work more simple. --Mrushvitz 18:03, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
8. Kill - Go away and never come back. --Grim s 00:03, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
   • Kill - If one of my suggestions gets added to the game, that just might happen! Vote for me, vote for glea! (The man loves me people, really.. it's all good) --MrAushvitz 18:03, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
     • Re It's #* dammit, not *#. And you just proved you don't want to suggest for the good of the game, but your own puny, pathetic little ego. We don't need that, thank you--McArrowni 01:00, 20 March 2006 (GMT)
   • Tally - 1 Keep, 6 Kill, 1 Spam, 1 Vote with a function issue (Mod should decide if it's valid). 18:47, 7 April 2006 (BST)

---