Suggestions/21st-Jan-2007

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.

Knock Down

Timestamp:	10:09, January 21, 2007 (UTC)
Type:	Zombie attack improvement/addition
Scope:	Zombies
Description:	When a survivor is below 30HP and the zombie has the survivor grabbed, it can decide to knock the survivor down onto the ground and topple over him/her. This should increase further attacks made by the zombie by 4 or so. It could also maybe give a 1-5% chance if the zombie uses bite, to rip out the survivor's throat killing him/her instantly. After each attack there could be a 40-60 chance for the survivor to wriggle free from the zombie on top of them. (wriggle free/stuck)

Keep Votes

1. Keep - Survivors can just blast a zombie repeatedly for 5HP or 10HP while the zombie is stuck with their 3 or 4 attack damage. It'd be good to even the combat out. User - Metalguard January 21, 2007, 10:26 (UTC)
2. Keep - Awsome idea man. --Rocker820 03:39, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
   

Kill Votes

1. Kill Way way overpowered. How come nobody noticed this suggestion? --Jon Pyre 05:55, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
2. Kill Because it is in the wrong place. --Cap'n Silly ^T/W/P/C 05:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
3. Kill *cough*stupidoverpoweredsuggestionifIeversawone* --_Ducis ^Dux_Sloth^Talk 07:46, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
4. Kill - it's a good idea, just needs some tweaking to get a keep from me. No instant kills from 30HP, sorry. And define an attack increase when the zombie gets the victim to the ground. 5% on what type of attacks? Bite, claws? Got potential -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 09:37, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
5. Spam in the kill section - insta-kill? Fark off! --Funt Solo 14:35, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
6. Kill - uhhh... no. Police Officer Jesus 22:05, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
7. Kill - Insta Kills are bad. Overpowering zombies is bad. This whole suggestion is BAD.Waluigi Freak 99 23:44, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
8. Kill - As stated above, insta-kills are bad. Although the flavor is good, the implementation is just horrible. --GhostStalker 02:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
9. Kill - The supposed "problem" with zombie-survivor balance is not that zombies are under-powered, it's that zombies are under-interesting. Being a mindless, shambling pile of rotting meat should somehow be made more interesting. --Nosimplehiway 22:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
   

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Strong Kill -yeah, insta-kills are bad. and why does no one ever think about the AP for searching and re-loading when the're talking about firearms? firearms and mele weapons are about equal, and zombie claws are better than survivor axe. (best mele weapon) --AlexanderRM 6:52 PM, 24 January 2007 (EST) Also, UNSIGNED-can't belive I didn't notice that.

---

Making Character Costs More IP

Timestamp:	07:19, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Type:	anti-zerg crap.
Scope:	Zergers.
Description:	Okay, basically, what I am suggesting here is that making a character should cost ten to fifteen IP hits, so zergers can't have as many zergs. This wouldn't really affect normal gameplay, as normal players usually only make one or two characters, not twenty seven.

Keep Votes

1. Author Keep Cheating = bad. --Cap'n Silly ^T/W/P/C 07:19, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
2. Keep Another step to my much desired request: one character per IP. --Mr. Venom 16:47, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
3. I actually think this is a good idea. -Mark 21:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
   

Kill Votes

1. Kill When players first start off they often experiment with different characters, maybe change their mind about the name...Also zergers aren't really helped by brand new characters. They're distributed randomly on the map and have almost no abilities. I'm all against zergers, but I think this would discourage new players more than it would prevent zerging. Not a bad idea though, but I think the problems are too great. Don't suppose I could convince you to vote keep on my anti-zerging suggestion above even though I voted kill : ) ?--Jon Pyre 07:35, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

   Re Eh, griefing griefers gets my vote, no matter who the hell you are. --Cap'n Silly ^T/W/P/C 08:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

2. Kill - Pretty stupid. Zergers need nerfed but this ain't it. --c138 ^{RR - PKer} 12:35, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
3. Kill - It'll hurt new players making their second and/or third character more than zergers. - BzAli 16:27, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
4. Half Kill - I am overwhelmingly against zerging but don't think this would help. How much of zerg abuse happens the same day a new character is created? Also, for a person to successfully zerg (more than just one or two alts), they usually find some way around using the same IP address for all of their alts. This wouldn't really help in that area, but it is worth a brainstorming session on the discussion page. --Uncle Bill 16:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
5. Kill - While I share your enthusiasm against zerging, this could easily be circumvented by a zerger using a proxy. -- 19:16, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
6. Kill -- Nah, doesn't work, sure initially they would suffer slightly but not long term (they will use the character more than the day of creation). -- Whitehouse 21:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
7. Kill/Spam - pointless due to proxy use. --Funt Solo 22:06, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
8. Kill - Definition of useless, citing to dictionary.com: of no use; not serving the purpose or any purpose; unavailing or futile. --Wikidead 23:58, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
9. Kill - So zergers will make a character and wait a day, or ten minutes if it is close to server reset time. Plus, the IP limit has a bunch of easy work arounds. --Nosimplehiway 22:55, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
   

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam - I saw Apocalypse Now for the first time last week. I can't believe I hadn't seen it before. --Hubrid Nox ^{Mod WTF U! B!} 07:39, 21 January 2007 (UTC) EDIT - I don't think this suggestion is workable. In any form. --Hubrid Nox ^{Mod WTF U! B!} 01:28, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

   Spam - If you get a chance, watch Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse, filmed during the filming of Apocalypse Now by Eleanor Coppola and an excellent documentary. If you thought the movie was mad, this sort of explains why. --Funt Solo 11:26, 21 January 2007 (UTC) EDIT: I think it's stupid, which is why I'm voting Spam. Also - Darth Sensitive - if moderators can vote Spam with no reasoning (and there is heavy precedence for this, which I will provide links to if required) then why can't I or anyone else? You cannot expect to have one rule for moderators and another for regular users when it comes to voting on suggestions - it's simply not fair. --Funt Solo 21:40, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

   #HAMBURGERS?! - I was going to get Apocalypse Now last week at Blockbuster but I got Dr. Strangelove or How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Bomb. --Sir Sonny Corleone ^{RRF CRF DORIS Hunt!} 14:20, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

   Page Rules: Votes that do not have reasoning behind them are invalid. You MUST justify your vote.

   You may restore your votes when you add a reason even tangentially related to the suggestion. War movies != reasoning. --Darth Sensitive ^W! 16:45, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

2. Spam - Doesn't provide any significant deterrent to zergers, and might just piss new players off that little bit more to never give the game a chance. --Rgon 15:56, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
3. Spam - Disconnect/Reconnect and my 160 IP hit limit is reset. Any zerger would know this, this can only hurt newbies. -Certified=Insane^☭ 17:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
4. As above. --Slice 'N' Dicin' Axe Hack 17:19, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
5. Spam - Zergers will zerge, and nothing will ever prevent it, beyond the present penalties. Best to simply ignore the fuckers and try to have a good time in spite of them. --SporeSore 17:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
6. Spam - As said above, 'zergers will zerg'. There is also many diffrent ways to get around this, proxy, disconnecting from the internet ect. -SaintKashmir 00:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

   Spam - Dr. Strangelove is hilarious.--J Muller 01:55, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

   Page Rules: Votes that do not have reasoning behind them are invalid. You MUST justify your vote.

   You may restore your votes when you add a reason even tangentially related to the suggestion. --Darth Sensitive ^W! 12:21, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

7. Spam -Heart of Darkness is an excellent novel. And movie, too. Oh yeah, suggestion useless. --_Ducis ^Dux_Sloth^Talk 07:47, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
8. Spam -Newly created zerg accounts arn't as big a problem as long term character that work together. Just penalising the creation of accounts does little to discourage it -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 09:43, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Trading System

Incorrectly formatted suggestion moved to discussion page. --Funt Solo 14:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Contact list improvement

Timestamp:	Whitehouse 22:40, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Type:	Minor improvement.
Scope:	Anyone with a contact list.
Description:	Right, on the current contact list you have the option to sort your contacts by the different categories such as Name, Class, Level, XP, Group, Colour/Action. This makes things a lot easier, but there is one thing that could be improved. After exiting your contact list it reverts to sorted by names. What I suggest is that after selecting a method of sorting and clicking "Make changes", it will then stay sorted by the method you selected instead of reverting to sorted by names when you exit again.

Keep Votes

1. Wow I've never noticed it. BTW you do know you can vote on your suggestions right? --Deras 23:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
2. Keep - I also never noticed this. --Wikidead 23:58, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
3. Keep - Sure, useful for people who refer/fiddle with their lists all of the time. --_Ducis ^Dux_Sloth^Talk 07:50, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
4. Keep - yes, useful -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 09:48, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
5. keep - Sure, sounds good. The Mad Axeman 10:13, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
6. I never notice this since my contacts are always on "Sort by Name". --Slice 'N' Dicin' Axe Hack 12:43, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
7. Goodness - it's a long time since I saw a Keep Train. --Funt Solo 14:37, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
8. Author keep -- Seems I forgot to vote on my own suggestion.. thanks for the support everyone. -- Whitehouse 14:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
9. I noticed this today and searched the wiki for suggestions. Now here it is, and it gets a strong Keep -- ρsych°Lychεε^ELT 06:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
10. Keep - Good, useful, basic upgrade. --Nosimplehiway 22:56, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
    

Kill Votes
Against Votes here
Spam/Dupe Votes
Spam/Dupe Votes here

---

Contact list improvement 2

Timestamp:	23:59, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Type:	Minor improvement.
Scope:	Anyone with a contact list.
Description:	As of a few days ago, you may now see when people die and when people are revived. I'm just suggesting that if the person being revived in in your contact list, then "zombie" should appear bolded and coloured. No profile link, as there isn't right now, but just to colour.

Keep Votes

1. Author vote. It'd be useful to see how many of the revives are allies and such. -Certified=Insane^☭ 23:59, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
2. Keep Sure. Or just replace zombie with "Reviving" --Jon Pyre 00:19, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
3. Keep - No problem with this. --_Ducis ^Dux_Sloth^Talk 07:51, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
4. Changed vote -- Was just looking back at these suggestions, I suddenly understood what you were saying, and I think its ok, so keep. PS: I am not the creator of this as someone has suggested in the spam section because of the similarity to the suggestion above which I made, and this is proven as there is an author vote and it isn't mine. -- Whitehouse 18:48, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
5. Keep - I'd rather see the full profile listed, but yeah, this is a good step. --Nosimplehiway 22:58, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
   

Kill Votes

1. Kill - I see no need for it. If it's not going to link to the revivee, or kill victim, then no to knowing if they were on the contact list or not -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 09:51, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
2. As above. --Slice 'N' Dicin' Axe Hack 12:46, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
   

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. unsigned, probably two suggestions in a day -see the vote name. this is a good suggestion though so I won't vote spam. --AlexanderRM 7:00 PM, 24 January 2007 (EST)

---