Suggestions/7th-Dec-2005

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

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.
Suggestion Navigation
Suggestion Portal
Current Suggestions • Suggestions up for Voting • Clothes Suggestions
Cycling Suggestions • Peer Reviewed • Undecided • Peer Rejected • Humorous
Suggestion Advice • Topics to Avoid and Why • Help, Developing and Editing

7th December, 2005

VOTING ENDED: 21st-Dec-2005

Quarentine Failure!

Timestamp: 00:07, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: map modofication
Scope: Global
Description: Malton is pretty crowded. Kevan could fairly easily expand the game world by adding newly accessable suburbs to the �map�. These could either be directly adjacent to the current edge(s) of Malton, or they could be entirely new areas only accessed by taking an action inside certain buildings (eg, subway entrances).

Votes

  • Kill - The city is plenty big for me. --Kulatu 00:14, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Much of the city is mostly abandoned. You only see the concentrations in areas such as malls and closely-bordering supply buildings. --Drakkenmaw 00:19, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep This gives a way to implement everyone's nifty new building types, rivers, whatever. Would work even better combined with vehicle suggestions.--'STER 01:11, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - With the caveat that it would be used to add new buildings and so on to the game, yes. --Shadowstar 01:22, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - The city seems empty enough to me. Just change the existing map if you want new buildings. Jirtan 03:49, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Maybe if we could use those railways for something. =) Riktar 05:33, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • I've always wondered if maybe you had a fuel can, you could hop on a Railway and pop along to ONE other station, for like 10 AP or somesuch. At least then we could involve a "Hobo" class. But I suppose that would be the "crossing Malton in a day" problem. Eh. Whatever. -- Tabs 20:16, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keeep I like the idea, it adds flavor and maybe there will be more 4 x 5 building sections like the zoo except defferent. --Fullemtaled 06:56, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill city is pretty big and empty as it is. -- P0p0 07:15, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I don't think is needed now, but if it becomes necessary I'd like to see some different environments. --Dickie Fux 14:35, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Ive been playing for awhile and haven't been to half the suburbs. I ts a grid map game its not going to get that much more interesting with more squares. --bbrraaiinnss 14:39 Dec 7 2005
  • Kill -- Plenty of places for now. -- Tabs 20:16, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Nooo, no, no. The city is plenty big. --Sknig 01:21, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Ten thousand squares is enough for you, me, and everyone else. Bentley Foss 09:39, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - plenty of room left--Vista 14:48, 20 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Malton is big enough. --Coreyo 03:02, 21 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Show Current/Max HP

Timestamp: 00:05, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Interface
Scope: Everyone
Description: Very simple: with Diagnosis or the zombie equivalent, you can see a character's current and maximum HP. I figure this would be pretty simple development, wouldn't tax the server, and would make it easier for healers to find patients (in other words, one wouldn't need to click on every 50 HP character to find out which has Bodybuilding)

Votes

  • Keep - Streamlined Interfaces? Why yes, I'll have some of that. --Kulatu 00:07, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Good display modification, not confusing, and a bit of an assistance to the servers. I like it! --Drakkenmaw 00:21, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I like the idea in concept, but it would clutter up the room display a lot more. As it is, Diagnosis already increases the clutter quite a bit for large rooms. X1M43 00:35, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Then don't get Diagnosis. You would get it still, because it's worth the clutter. This would make it a lot easier to sift through all the players who have 50/60 HP. Riktar 05:35, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep YES!!! -- P0p0 07:16, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Though I'd like to suggest an alternative way of implementing this - show health as a % rather than current/max. Cuts down on clutter and actually makes it easier to scan for healing targets. --Graaaaaaagh 07:29, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- A way to keep from wasting FAKs/IP hits on a hospital full of 50hpers in the hopes someone has Bodybuilding? Yesplz. -- Tabs 20:17, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- I like. -- Ethan Frome 01:21, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I've never had a problem with not knowing which 50HP people had bodybuilding. It's not a big deal. This isn't worth it, and would double the clutter. --Sknig 01:23, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Re the clutter concerns, I can think of three ways to address it. Health as a percent, color-coding (red = not at max, green = at max), or an asterisk next to the HP indicating that the person needs a FAK Mikm 03:04, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Hate clutter, am already used to checking profiles for Body Building, nd I'm not really satisfied with those suggestions - but applaud the thinking, Mikm. --Biscuit 06:28, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Alternate implementation, show this in the use first aid/attack drop down menus only (I actually wish that the game already implemented Diagnosis that way). --Thelabrat 16:41, 13 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - good. it would get a little crazy in crowded malls, but i think its worth it. --Firemanstan 00:40, 14 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I always need to check if the person had bodybuilding or obvious damage before I heal him/her.This would make things much easier. --Penance 02:28, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • keep -it's a pain in the backside--Vista 14:50, 20 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Good idea. But there should be a way to reduce the clutter. Coreyo 03:04, 21 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Melee Master

Timestamp: 01:19, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Survivers
Description: Basicly an alternative to headshot. You get +20% to hit with melee attacks (% debatable) and a 1 or 2 point damage increase. Those with headshot can't buy melee master and if you buy it you cant get headshot. This would not take any XP from the one being attacked.

Votes

  • Keep My idea --Broton 01:19, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I don't like the idea of a skill that blocks off other parts of the tree. --Shadowstar 01:25, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • RE You mean like how brainrot blocks zombies from having bodybuilding and diagnosis?--Clickytickytai 13:59, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I understand that you're trying to give an alternative which is worth enough to convince people not to buy headshot, but this overpowers melee attacks (60% to hit and 5 damage from an axe?). And what about all those survivors who've already purchased headshot? Oh, and I fixed your spelling and grammar and generally made it more comprehensible. --Argus Blood 01:51, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - This would be to the melee only players a gift from keven. I like it. --Deathnut 02:13, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Bad form to create a skill that is dependant on having not taken another skill already in existence. Though I've never taken Headshot, out of general "fair play" beliefs, it still feels like cheating a bunch of people out of the skill. --Drakkenmaw 03:01, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill. Jirtan 03:53, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep I consider Headshot to be useless as it is now. It causes griefing, and that's it. No real benefit. This would be a nice alternative, and allow people to finally have to choose between what certain skills they want, and would at least help in making each survivor more unique, even if it's only a little bit. --Volke 06:34, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep What the heck, choices are good. Otherwise we survivors will all eventually be exactly the same. 20% might be a little high, though. --Clickytickytai 14:03, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- 20% does sound a bit high but hell yes, give me something to shoot for besides Headshot. Who says I want to be exactly like everyone else? -- Tabs 20:21, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Argus hit the head of the nail. This suggestion turns axes into pistols with unlimited ammo. AllStarZ 20:43, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep I would like this better than headshot. I really dont like to use guns because once I find one I cna never find ammo for it. Also I prefer seeing my rivals face-to-face when I hurt them. --Death 00:55, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Headshot is an overpowered griefing skill; provide an alternative that rewards high level players, such as this, and phase out Headshot. Although both a damage and a too hit percentage increase is probably overpowered.
  • Keep Headshot is useless to survivors except as a bragging right, and it's the worst debalancer out there. Skill tree branching is actually something I'd like to see more of. However, I'd suggest a one-or-the-other approach to the damage and hit chance. You'd also need a zombie balance skill, since high chance to hit with melee is the zombies' only real bonus. Maybe something that allows zeds to use melee weapons? --Leit 10:24, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - No. --Matthew-Stewart 11:42, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - So what are the people who already have headshot going to do? Also, there are no problems with headshot. --Daxx 14:51, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Overpowered. Buff the zombies first, then we can talk. --Basher 23:06, 10 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - i agree with Daxx in the first part of his comment. strongly disagree with the second part, but in regards to this suggestion - kill. --Firemanstan 01:17, 14 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - no need, combat works fine, and headshot been changed--Vista 14:52, 20 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Feeding Frenzy

Timestamp: 01:32, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Combat System
Scope: Zombies
Description: Simply put, this is to balance out percentile hit chances. Under this system, whenever you miss with an attack you would get a +10% to hit on your next attack. This means that if you attack with claws at 30% once and miss, your next claw strike will be at 40%. This ability resets the "to hit" bonus to 0 if you hit, or switch to a different attack, thus you could not charge up a claw attack with bite attacks, it also means that if you hit with an attack, your next attack is at your base "to hit" percentage; IE if you claw 4 times, miss the first two, then hit with the third, the fourth attack would be at your base attack, not at 20% above. The entire idea of this is to remove the incredible annoyance of missing 4 or more times on a 50% attack. It also alleviates the awful experience gain as a beginning zombie with 30% to hit base. In this current iteration all the attacks would get over 50% to hit with fair accoradance to their percentile chance. Claws at 50% would hit one out of two hits generally, Bites would hit one out of 3 hits generally (with the appropriate ugrades). Because the percentage resets whenever damage is done this prevents you from stacking up insane hit chances. Genre wise, the idea is the zombie hungers for flesh and makes every effort to get it, the more he misses, the more desperate he becomes. Overall though, just an idea to alleviate frustrations over really awful statistical rolling (not that it won't happen, but it would happen alot less often).

In a nutshell; if you miss with a particular attack (claw, bite) you get a 10% better hit chance for your next attack unless you either use a different attack (like switch from claw to bite attacks) or you hit. When you switch to a new attack or hit the bonus is removed and it starts from 0 once again (IE 30% for a vigored bite). This means it would become much more difficult to rack up 5-6 misses in a row with a 30% to hit which happens *often* for zombie players.

Note for those that didn't read the rules, it specifically states a bonus after you *hit* not miss, and it is written specifically addressing stacking bonuses that carry over. This bonus is removed as soon as you change attacks, attack a new target, or hit, thus it would be *impossible* to get a 100% to hit with say, a bite, or to destroy a barricade in one shot as the percentile to hit would be reduced to its base as soon as you miss, if you are already say, attacking a barricade it simples makes sure you don't go through a ridiculous number of attacks before even hitting (IE missing 30 times in a row) if you do it with a bite it ensures you hit about 1/3 with vigor mortis and neck lurch, which is statstically what its supposed to be. Thus those who do not understand what it means by cumulative bonuses or why they are not desirable need to reread the rules, the example, and the post, because right now you've obviously not done one of these three things.

Votes

  • Kill This suggestion is utterly incomprehensible. What the hell are you talking about? --Argus Blood 01:45, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill I dont like the idea of being able to charge up a bite. --Zaruthustra 01:47, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill This effect happens to survivors too, and I wouldn't recommend it for them either. --Shadowstar 01:50, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • KILL This would overpower zombies so H*** no. --Deathnut 02:14, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Feck, when people said to suggest zombie skills, we meant balanced ones, not outrageously powerful ones. AllStarZ 02:44, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - The percent chance to hit is the percent chance to hit. When you start messing around with "building percentages" you throw the percentage change WAY higher than it should be. Besides, I believe the way the back-end of the system is run this idea would be needlessly-complicated on the implementation side of things. --Drakkenmaw 02:58, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - No cumulative bonuses. --Osric Krueger
  • Kill - Mikm 05:55, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill *strike with rolled up newspaper* no.. NO! no 100% hit chance -- P0p0 07:21, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - For every time I've missed five attacks in a row, I've also three in a row at some other point. If you think the server isn't calculating chances correctly, then document that. --Dickie Fux 14:28, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I'm too lazy to do the math, but I suspect this is a little overpowered...--Milo 14:31, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - No stacking --Adrian 18:34, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- NO. --Tabs 20:22, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - And what part of No stacking combo bonus skills didn't you understand?--Spellbinder 23:30, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - It warms my heart to see how well everyone has taken to the guidelines...except the person who posted this, of course. Bentley Foss 09:03, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Separation between Civilian and Military

Timestamp: 03:44, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: balance change
Scope: Survivors
Description: Based on Kevan�s Simulator there are three groups, the Zombies, the Civilians in the middle, and the Military. Because of the current simplicity of the game there are currently two sides, the large amount of humans and the small amount of zombies. The reason for the imbalance is not so much that zombies are weaker, but that the civilians and the military, who are two separate groups with different ideals, are currently combined. They both are working together towards ridding the zombie swarms from Malton; however they could be also in direct conflict with one another.

My suggestion is to simply make a separating line between the military and the civilians, just as the zombies are to humans... this distinction between the two is all it would take, they still get the same skills, everything is the same exept a differentiation. This suggestion would bring the conflict between military and civilians that is already said to be in place and I qoute, "Military quarantine units have closed Malton's borders and are moving in to eliminate the looters, to forcibly evacuate those civilians who still refuse to leave their homes." If you are a looter, and if your a civilian whos spent more than several months in Malton you probably are, you will be eliminated... That means we are under martial law folks, which makes military troops your, Judge, Jury and Executioner. And they have orders to shoot looters alongside zombies. That will put a fifth to a quarter of both the civilian and military sides working against each other, with zombies still in unity, that creates a definate advantage and solves zombie numbers without making the zombies powerful. Civilians and military troops can still work together, the cultists have proven that two sides can work together, even if they normally don't see each others' names. Instead of looking at the zombies to figure out the problem I hoped to try taking a new approach of looking at the survivors instead.

I really do understand this would mean so much work, a few changes, but I hope that this would mean less work in the long run and overall a better game. If this is too much for Kevan to work on the he simply wont even if it passes, but I believe this is in some part what he was suggesting would happen since he put this on the front. I don't know if this would mean reseting the game however... though I could be wrong on that.

Votes

  • Kill - The consumer class - a very weak class at first, as they have no weapons training nor easy way to gain XP - up against both the zombies and millitary. I seriously doubt that people who signed up to be consumers would have done so if they knew about this. What do you do about consumers who are dedicated to killing zombies? Aren't almost allsurvivors "guilty" of looting malls, police stations, and hospitals? There is no way of gaining ammo, guns, FAKs, revive syringes - everything needed for survival - without looting/searching. Do they become targets too? If so everybody, except newbs, would be in the same "group" again. Anyways, if it is realism you want, I think the military is much more worried about the zombie infestation than looters. They wouldn't care if somebody broke into a gunstore to help out - it's not as if people are likely to come back to Malton to their old lives. Mikm 05:48, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re: - well, the thing is I started this under the idea of looting, and that civilians would be able to loot and gain half as much xp as it would require for a private to find ammo and shoot a zombie... these looting places would be the one place nobody went to... the neiborhoods that dot the city... the problem is that though I mannaged to intertwine all those details together by the time I was finnished Nobody understood what it ment... thats why I went with the idea of keeping it simple... and not giving two ideas at once... and no I did not make this with the idea of pking... hell just some friction or fear between the two groups would be enough... or the fact that there is two groups would work just as well.. --Ringseed2 07:29, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill start a group under this premise.. recruit PKers -- P0p0 07:22, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I see no problem with the idea in and of itself, but there's no real way to implement RP matters ingame. If you're talking about changing game mechanics, please specify HOW in the suggestion so that we can vote on that instead. Otherwise, as above, just start a roleplayer group to "follow military orders." --Drakkenmaw 16:21, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill- Feels spammy but I couldn't find the old one --Lord Evans 16:49, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill--Uh, no? What would even be the point of this? Go PK and be quiet. -- Tabs 20:23, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill There is no order in an anarchist situation like a zombie outbreak. Besides, this suggestion only has the effect of making all Pkers jump with glee. AllStarZ 20:45, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Interesting concept, but a little extreme. The military would not go in with the intention to kill the civilians. This actually would be extremely easy to implement though; just give Civilian and Military full XP for attacking each other. --Sknig 01:29, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - What about necrotechers and doctors? As far as we know necrotech might be in bed with the military as they are a large corp (if I follow the idea they are like umbrella corp) and might even be in ultimate control over malton. -- LS 22:56, 07 DEC 2005 (GMT-5)
  • Kill - Forcing people to RP and PK? Not a chance. Not to mention that the city is anarchistic unless the miltary forms a contract with the people that is accepted and followed. :-P --PatrickDark 07:59, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Oooh boy. I would seriously hate to see this one get killed - this fascinates me. Hasn't anyone here ever played half-life? You know, the first one, with the plot. Implementing this means, as in half-life, and as in the original zombie simulator, there are three factions. Military characters get to shoot everything, work mainly with other military units, and maybe start with a real weapon. Scientists are civilians are in actual danger, as the world has abandoned them. And the zombies just add to the chaos. Though I'll be the first to admit this would make Urban Dead an entirely different game (basically one about a government cover-up), it would make it a game I would much rather play. --Biscuit 08:00, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Didn't something just like this get shot down a few days ago? And really, both military and consumers are humans--what on earth is going to stop them from cooperating in some form or another, even if it's just a simple "okay, don't kill each other" truce? "I'm a guy from the military--I'd better go kill all these people and then sleep in this now-deserted safehouse. Gee I hope no zombies break in while I'm asleep." Not gonna happen. Bentley Foss 09:06, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -no pk excuses--Vista 14:59, 20 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -It's up to the actual players if they want to attack other classes or not, not the game's preference. Coreyo 03:08, 21 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Fear Effect

Timestamp: 22:50, 7 Dec 2005 (EDT)
Type: Location change, Skill
Scope: Humans/Locations
Description: In short, whenever a survivor is in a graveyard, a wasteland, or inside an unpowered building, they will become more afraid due to the atmosphere of the situation, causing them to have a harder time hitting zombies (a 5% decrease to all attacks). This effect could be nullfifed via a new skill, Courage, which would be included in the Zombie Hunter skillset (or maybe just civilian, but zombie hunter seems more appropriate). Numbers are entirely fluid and debatable as to what would be more fair.

Votes

  • Kill This is bad, and I'm pretty sure its spam too. I dunno. I dont really want to check. This will just be back in 3 days anyhow. Also, I fixed your broken template. --Zaruthustra 04:10, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Malton isn't permanently night. - KingRaptor 04:13, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Wow, so you basically come up with bad suggestion for an effect, and you come up with a stupid counterskill to your suggestion. (Takes out shotgun) Get out! AllStarZ 04:49, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Wow, a 0% base chance for hitting with guns, superb Kindie 10:22, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Gonna change vote to spam once I find and link the suggestion that this seems to rip off. --VoidDragon 14:48, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - What the heck? Inside unpowered buildings? Graveyards, maybe, but unpowered buildings? Why not everywhere then? It's going to be just as scary out on the street as in an unpowered building. --Shadowstar 15:26, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - I figured zombies would probably be scarier in a dark building. Perhaps a change to just plain creepy places, such as graveyards and warehouses? --Truec 22:29, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Was suggested way back in the summer in the NT Yahoo Group, and Kevan killed it there. He said he's very unlikely to use "fear" mechanics in the game. Seems to be the first time posted here, though, so not technically Spam. --Drakkenmaw 16:26, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill --Lord Evans 16:47, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -This is not Spam as it isn't ridiculous or a repost, however while I like the attempt at flavor, it isn't what I would call a "good idea". Nice try though. --Matthew-Stewart 17:06, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- Meh. -- Tabs 20:24, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Fear effects are good, but this one is getting a little ahead of itself--Spellbinder 23:31, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I'm afraid of the dark, and I would NOT want to be in a graveyard in the middle of a zombie plague! This would also make for a very good reason to have generators in more places than just hospitals. One thing though, there shouldn't be a skill to counter this. --Sknig 01:32, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - I'm not to certain on dropping the counter skill. Maybe weakening it so that it doesn't completely nullify the effect. I'd like to think that a level 20 zombie hunter has become used to seeing zombies in any environment.--Truec 22:31, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - It'd give zeds more of a chance, differentiate them in that they have no fear, and add a lot of flavour. just one thing though... 'unpowered buildings'? Perhaps only if you're alone.
  • Keep - Author vote. --Truec 21:32, 19 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -I'm a day-sleeper I work at night--Vista 15:03, 20 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Necrotech Database

Timestamp: 06:41, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Improvement
Scope: Necrotech Buildings
Description: Here's a way of making Necrotech buildings worth setting up a generator in. While in a powered Necrotech building you can "Access Necrotech Network" which gives you a brief report giving you information gathered by scientists with their extractors in that suburb and then sent to Necrotech's database. Here are some options:
  • 1. Accessing the network gives you the number of scanned zombies in the suburb.
  • 2. Acessing the network gives you the name of every scanned zombie in the area.
  • 3. Accessing the network allows you to search for individual player names in suburb if they have been scanned.
  • 4. Something else.
  • 5. Acessing the network allows you to search for an individual player name and if a zombie and scanned gives you either their suburb or (Option 5a) precise coordinates.

Option 2 is more spam heavy but it's more useful and since it's optional I don't think it counts as spam. Option 3 would be useful if you were trying to find a specific person. Option 5 is very useful for reviving allies and finding enemies, but maybe overpowered. Basically my suggestion is: Power lets you access scientists' reports to Necrotech.

Votes

  • Kill - I don't understand what would be the point. I assume it would cost AP and it just doesn't seem useful. --Cabbage cookies 06:45, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam This is spam http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Peer_Reviewed_Suggestions#NecroNet - -Fullemtaled 06:53, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - After seeing the link I admit this suggestion has similarities to the old one, but this has some significant changes including different ways of having a Necrotech database as well as its use of generators. I changed the suggestion name and changed option 3 to allow individual player searches and made the old 3 number 4. --Jon Pyre 07:02, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep sorta useless, but tasty -- P0p0 07:24, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - Added a fifth option. --Jon Pyre 07:31, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam - I like this idea. I like it so much I posted it about 2 weeks ago. I really don't think this one is that different, save some hypotheticals we already bounced around in talk and a power generator that didn't exist when I created it. We don't need to go back through ever peer reviewed suggestion and make a duplicate "with generators" version. That'll just have Kevan ripping his hair out. He can figure it out. --Zaruthustra 14:44, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Why not combine the two? Basic NecroNet (for unpowered NT buildings and NecroTechs on the move - which would let you access Option 1) and Enhanced NecroNet (aka Necrotech Database Access - which would let you access Options 1-5) for powered buildings? Also, a suggestion for Option 4: You could get/leave messages on NecroNet for other NTs, and perhaps get messages/orders from NecroTech's higher-ups. (Could be useful for finally figuring out what caused the zombification . . . ) --John Taggart 15:05, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Useless? This would be overpowered! This would let you know exactly how many zombies were around you, and you could specifically target any one of them. --Sknig 01:36, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Overpowered, one of the few things that the undead have going for it is Anonymousness the zombies have.
    • Re - Zombies would still be anonymous if they were in a crowd. And knowing how many zombies were around you would be pretty useless since 1) You can do that just by going outside. 2) It would likely be an underestimate since not every zombie would be tagged. --Jon Pyre 02:41, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Graveyard Feeding

Timestamp: 06:55, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Improvement
Scope: Zombies
Description: While in a graveyard a zombie can choose to dig up and feed on the corpses buried there. They have a 10% chance of gaining 1XP for this, equivalent to the chance of gaining an XP for reading a book. This will give zombies that wish to hold suvivor-less suburbs something to do to slowly accumulate XP and it isn't unbalancing in the same way that books aren't. What's that, 1 skill every twenty days assuming no headshots? It will also result in masses of zombies in graveyards which is a nice touch flavour wise.

Votes

  • Keep - I like one for once. - --Fullemtaled 07:16, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep sure -- P0p0 07:26, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I thought xp for nothing, but you went and presented this in a way that I agree with so Keep. - Jedaz 11:13, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Sounds reasonable Mikm 13:07, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I don't think zombies eat dead bodies, but the concept of some kind of task zombies can perform in a graveyard for XP is good. Would be very nice when I'm at 97 XP and want to avoid Headshot. --Dickie Fux 13:35, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - As always, I like making some places important for zombies. --Shadowstar 15:28, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Almost useless, but why not? --Seagull Flock 16:12, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Why not? Zombies need something to do if they can't find somebody to chew on. --Kulatu 16:28, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Very much like books - slow but safe XP for the risk-averse. I see no problem with it. --Drakkenmaw 16:29, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -Nice, Really fits into what kinda place zombies would gather--Lord Evans 16:53, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Then why did you vote kill? --MaulMachine 11:58, 07 Dec 2005 (EST)
  • Kill - With all the corpses on the street and the living things with the scent of fear and blood to attract? What would they dig with, their hands? Hmm. I don't know if it's plausable for a living corpse to dig six feet of Earth and have the intellect to know what a Cemetery is much less where the plots are. -- Amazing 18:19, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Because i'm feeling sorry for the zeds out there. --Adrian 18:37, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Can't find anything against it.--The General 19:02, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Just so I can say "Zombies ate my grandma!" --Arcos 19:24, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I don't plan on saying anything; just voting keep for this idea... Oh, crap! --ALIENwolve 19:51, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Why not? You guys get books, we get cannibalism. It's win-win. -- Tabs 20:28, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Seems fair. Mikm 23:06, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep i think Lord Evans just had a Vote Kill reflex--Spellbinder 23:33, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Why not? --TheTeeHeeMonster 23:40, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - it may also slightly lessen zombies eating other zombies as well Moon stone 23:57, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep I think we can all agree that zombies need a way to gain XP without fighting. This is a good way to do that, and allows them to heal without the risks digestion has. --Volke 00:00, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Not bad... Amazing? I have a few responses for you. One: Can Zombies be smart enough to open doors? If they can open doors, then surely they can recognize buildings and special areas of the town, and with their enhanced sense of smell, they can probably smell decay even under 6 feet of earth. Two: People do dig with their hands, and with a zombie's relentless hunger, they would probably be able to dig 6 feet, though it would take a while. Also, in a zombie emergency, I hardly think people will bother to bury corpses in coffins or in 6 feet of earth. AllStarZ 00:18, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Not only does this add balance to the game by giving zombies a book equivilent but also works in the flavour of the game. The only thing I can think of is with books, a survivor can carry them around with them and gain experience, but you couldn't carry a corpse around with you. So perhaps raise the % of gaining XP a tiny bit to 11%, or 12%, in order to balance out the necessity of having to stay in the graveyard (and thus attracting zombie hunters). -BauulBen 11:48, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Hell yeah. --Basher 23:09, 10 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - mmmmmmm.....dead brains. -Penance 02:30 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Nice suggestion. Perhaps a new scent skill could be created along with this to improve the chances of Z's smelling a body in the cemetary and digging it up. Coreyo 03:13, 21 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Construction engineer

3 spam votes. Mikm 21:39, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Cranial Injection

Three SPAMs, no keeps, and even the author voted to kill it. --Thelabrat 16:49, 13 Dec 2005 (GMT)

The Wiki site "blew up" while I was reposting this to rejected (i.e. timed out several times and lost my post_. I have asked in [discussion] what should be done to fix this.
All I can remember now about the idea itself is that it involved syringes (and after a week only had a handful of votes, all kills or spams, including the authors vote). If anyone can remember the actual idea (or if the author reads this) can we have the summary back for posting here and/or in rejected? --Thelabrat 14:15, 14 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Heedless Strength (name can change to anything that sounds less Gothic, I guess)

Timestamp: 21:16, 7 Dec GMT ?
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombie attack skill.
Description: The reason people don't always lift cars up with their hands or punch through walls under anything but the most extreme circumstances is: our brains inhibit our bodies' ability to destroy itself through recklessness. A zombie no longer has this inhibition.

I suggest that a zombie can pay HP for damage, specifically somewhere in the neighborhood of 10hp for 6 damage. This skill creates an extra option in the drop-down attack menu (bite/claws/heedless strength) To balance it, a 10-15% percentage less to hit; the damage you've inflicted as you power your body in ways it wasn't intended also makes your broken body parts jerky and prone to missing. Finally, to keep it from becoming a haven for people who don't want to be headshot: If you kill yourself with this skill, you lose xp as if you were headshot. (Symbolizing you strained your body to the point that your steel-flexing unliving tissues popped your skull)

Votes

  • Kill - Great, now I can Headshot myself. Super. --Dickie Fux 15:47, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - This makes headhsot useless. Now zombies don't need survivors to kill them. Plus, if doing only 6 damage for 10HP then they would inevitably kill themselves before even getting close to killing a survivor. --Cabbage cookies 16:11, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - FAR too much sacrifice for not enough reward. Rebalancing is needed for this suggestion, but even then - killing yourself for a little extra damage doesn't seem very useful. You still wind up dead, and still likely out any XP you gained. --Drakkenmaw 16:37, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I really wanted to kill myself.--The General 19:09, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- Why no, of COURSE I don't have a problem staying alive as it is! I love this! And now I want the option to Headshoot myself, and to impale myself on the barbed wire around the junkyards, and to cut my own limbs off with a stacking 80% hit rate on the fire axe, and... -- Tabs 20:40, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - to quote Dickie Fux : "Great, now I can Headshot myself. Super." Moon stone 00:04, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Just dont head shot yourself then, i like this.." User:ericblinsley 00:04, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - What? --Basher 23:11, 10 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Zombie Type (Different types = different names)

Timestamp: 15:41, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Starting class options for Zombies
Scope: Zombies..
Description: Zombies can only be zombies, humans can be doctors, cops, Necrotech scientists, soldiers. This suggestion I hope doesn't get me thrown into a pit; I wonder what happened to the animal population of Malton? Were the mammals, at least, infected? With this new option, it would be discovered that the dogs of Malton have also been infected by the plague, (and they are not reviveable.)I suggest that they have 1/2 the hp, deal more end damage(and hit more often) with bite than with claw, and move at 2x speed (instead of non-lurching gait speed) Personally, I think it would give the zombies a slightly different feel, at the very least make it fun to be dead. They could receive the same skills as zombies do, (except for a small difference; the dog zombie's bite attack gets the claw upgrades to hit and to damage, and the Infectious Bite skill has a high percentage chance of missing, to counter the primary use of bite for attacking and the high damage bites would do) I hope this doesn't sound too complicated; let me nutshell this.

Basically: Dog = New Zombie Starting Class

Bite does 4 damage, starting accuracy 20-25%(max 5 damage, max to hit 50% after upgrades)

Has 25 HP. (Or 30, it's debatable)

Infectious bite chance to miss is 50-60%

NON-REVIVABLE

Votes

  • Kill - I think it's a good idea, but needs some work. First, these are equivalent in some ways to high level zombies, in terms of blocking revive points and so on. How would you deal with that issue? If they can get the same skills as zombies, how would the lurching gait skill apply? Or would this be considered already their skill? Lots of other questions, I think... --Shadowstar 16:01, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Nice idea but needs some work, I do like the overall thought of it but some things should be addressed (see shadowstar).--Cabbage cookies 16:07, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Since they can't be revived anyway, just make them ineligble targets; on the drop down menu, these would come up as "zombie dogs" or whatever, so they would have no effect on the regular "zombie" stack. --Dickie Fux 16:34, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Seems a bit silly to be playing a dog. No offense, I think zombies do need more options and flexibility... but this doesn't seem like the right way to go. --Drakkenmaw 16:40, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Sounds cool. But wouldn't a dog have an easier time infecting in a realistic sense? EDIT: A dog isn't able to have memories of life because they don't even have thumbs. Keep these kind of things in mind and make a list. --ALIENwolve 20:20, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- Haha. I think this is great, m'self. I wonder if you could make their fleas into a weapon too; I mean, surely they'd be carrying plague just like the rats used to back in the middle ages. Just don't give them skills they need opposable thumbs for and stuff. -- Tabs 20:45, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill I suppose we will be adding pigeons next. Ability: Poop on people. Whenever a zombie pigeon takes to the air, he can poop on people, which has an uncannily high accuracy of 50%. When hit with poop, survivors have a further 50% chance to contract the virus. I think many or some of us agree that dogs should be left as NPCs in other games. AllStarZ 20:58, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill I'd have to say kill, the less hp isn't all that much of an issue for zombies. Moon stone 00:09, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Change to the pigeon suggestion. I would be very happy playing a zombie pigeon. --Sknig 01:40, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Ever see a cat knock down barricades? Mikm 03:13, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Problems: 1.) Would set a precedent for making the game far more complicated than the simple simulator it is now. 2.) No incentive to really build this character - it'd need its own skill set? 3.) It's silly. But this is still a really cool idea, and I think I'd like to see it tried. --Biscuit 06:17, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - A better way of doing zed starter classes is to simply have zeds that start out with skills other than Vigour Mortis. And yes, that has already been suggested and passed into Peer Reviewed with flying colors. --VoidDragon 12:38, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Mechanically sound (as far as I can tell,) but a zombie dog is just too funny.--Milo 13:01, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Reloading

Timestamp: 16:31, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Survivor, Military
Description: This skill would allow the Survivor to create ammunition, by using used shells that are reloaded to work once again. This would give gunfighters a steady but slow way to get the bullets they need, but it is a slow process. The easiest way to implement this would be to create one pistol bullet/AP. This would mean that you can�t create shotgun shells, which obliviously is unrealistic, but makes the skill balanced. One could add an item (Reloading kit) that was needed to work the skill, and if wanted, some component, like bag of gun powder (2% chance of being empty after each use perhaps) if the skill still feels to powerful. Suggestions on how to balance it in respect to shotgun shells are welcome. One idea is that the creation of shotgun shells cost more then one AP.

Votes

  • Keep - Got to stand by your own ideas. --Asperon 16:39, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Actually, I think you can make shotgun shells, and more easily than bullets. In any case, why search for "bag of gun powder" when you can just search for ammo in the first place? --Dickie Fux 16:36, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - Thats why i wrote that it was unrealistic, if we can come up with a working mechanism for it then i think you should be able to make both types. --Asperon 16:48, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Fear the magical bullet rejuvination kit! --Lucero Capell 16:38, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Easier to just search up more bullets than to go this route. --Drakkenmaw 16:42, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - Well, this gives the gunfighters a option apart from camping in PDs/Malls. Options are always good, or? --Asperon 16:48, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Re-loading bullets is NOT a time saving measure. To reload a bullet in real life, you need an intact shell (preferably a clean one, requiring a shell tumbler- and you are right, most shotgun shells can't be re-used), some gun powder and a way to measure it, a slug (the part that come out of the gun) of the propper size, a primer (the part the gun hammer sets off) of thew propper size, and a press with the proper fittings to seat the primer and slug. And Where do you find all this? You find it in a gun shop. In much smaller quantities than comercial bullets are found. Really, the only reason people hand load rounds is to make things they can't buy, or to save money. Their no wierdo special guns that require special bullets, and bullets are free for the looting, so why would anybody bother? --Swiers 19:00, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill In reality, in an urban environment, its easier to find bullets than to make your own. You really don't need to make your own bullets unless you're like Ash in Army of Darkness or something. AllStarZ 20:13, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- Not necessary. -- Tabs 20:46, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- Absolutely not necessary. --Biscuit 06:18, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I would vote spam, but it wouldn't matter. People seem fascinated with needlessly impractical and complex ways to modify their weapons or create ammunition when it's much simpler to JUST GO SEARCH FOR IT IN THE MALL LIKE EVERYONE ELSE. Bentley Foss 09:12, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Not using muzzleloaders here. Reloading a bullet isn't as easy as pouring gunpowder down the barrel then shoving a bullet in. --VoidDragon 12:35, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Diagnose Zombie

Timestamp: 03:12, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombie Hunters
Description: Everyone is always complaining about how when you have headshot you dont see how much xp you capped off, if any. This would be a skill under headshot (i couldn't think of a name so tell me if you have an idea as the name at the moment is kinda gay). What it would do is tell you the level of a zombie and the xp of a zombie if it was alone. If there were a group of zombies you would have a button that diagnoses the zombie on top of the list for no ap. So, now you know how much xp the zombie has and how much you will knock off. Ta Da!

Votes

  • Keep - Great job. --APOCzombie 03:12, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - There's no need for this. Zombies already have it tough leveling up in a headshot-heavy environment. --Osric Krueger
  • Kill poor outnumbered out classed zombies.. dont take away their best defence, anonomyitiy -- P0p0 06:33, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • kill "for no ap" ha! Hagnat 15:28, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Free to use skill that encourages griefing behaviours? No thanks. --Drakkenmaw 16:59, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- Emphatically no. -- Tabs 20:46, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - The above reasons. Also, I was under the impression that when I headshot a zombie, I am shown the XP deducted. --Sknig 01:43, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- Not really useful, unless you revel in being a git to the minority zombie population. Is it worth the effort coding for so small and insignificant a feature. --Jean Gregoire 02:50, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I don't like it. --Seagull Flock 20:22, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Why do idiots keep making suggestions that would permenantly end zny hope of zombies ever levelling? --Grim s 21:33, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - No. --Basher 23:12, 10 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Subway Tunnels

Timestamp: 16:53, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Improvement
Scope: Train Stations
Description: Train station tunnels would have underground passages leading to one another. There would be set directions to get from one station to the next (perhaps the large map of the city could be updated to show these paths). On the in-game map you would see just the buildings you can pass under. All other buildings would be shaded out.

Generators could be set up in a station that would power the lights within the tunnel. Each generator would power the neighborhood subway lighting system (or certain number of surrounding blocks). There would be some kind of indicator when you go into the tunnel to show how much energy is left for the lights (“The lights are at 100%”, “The lights are at 50%.”, etc.). When the lights go out, the in-game map goes black, except for N, S, E, and W indicators. You wouldn’t even be able to see if there were other players around you except, perhaps, by sound. The player could still move but this would force both zombie and survivor classes to diligently take note of where they are and be able to get themselves out using the city map or guessing (“You move further into the tunnel.”, “You’ve bumped against a wall.”). Since there would be, essentially, only two directions you could end up, through trial and error or map reading ability, a player could eventually find their way out.

Zombies with Scent Trail would be able to traverse the tunnels in complete darkness, as their maps would not go black. I would suggest that an equal survivor skill or a flashlight be created so survivors wouldn’t get totally stuck in the dark.

(NOTE: See update on Dec 14 suggestions.)

Votes

  • Keep - Author vote. --Herbalbert 16:53, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I like the idea, as far as flavor goes, but I can't see a reason to implement it in the game. It takes more time to set up and traverse "safely" than it would take to simply walk around with Free Running or in the streets. --Drakkenmaw 16:58, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I think the flavor alone is worth it; being trapped in a dark tunnel during a zombie apocalypse would be awesome. --Dickie Fux 17:03, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I really like it, the idea of being in a dark subway tunnel with the danger of the lights going out at any moment adds some excitement. It may not be as quick, but I wouldn't mind the delay. It would be easier to hide large numbers of survivors and zombies on the move if the subway tunnels are operating or not operating respectively. --Kulatu 17:07, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Awesome idea. Adds a whole other plane of play. Full-hearted endorsement. And a box of chocolate for me. --Lucero Capell 17:42, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Just another way to walk from point A to point B with more frustration. -- Amazing 18:26, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - It's not meant to make travel easier. It just adds a flavor element and possible battle/survival tactics to the game. --Herbalbert 18:57, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Creepy. As long as people can only get in and out of the tunnels at stations.--WibbleBRAINS 18:44, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Cool idea. But some people not like being lost inside of a tunnel for days. And that's where the flashlight could come in handy. Maybe if there was a flashlight it would only light up the square you're in? --ALIENwolve 19:26, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Useful.--The General 19:29, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep I like it. However, maybe make it so that you can barricade subway stations? AllStarZ 20:40, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- Oh, this is fun. Especially if you had the flashlight thingie that only lit up the place for you. How scary would it be to be hiding in the dark and hear "GRAAAH" and not know if it was a zombie or your friends just screwing around with you? Plus, ambushes, and tactics, and general enjoyment! -- Tabs 20:48, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep --Lord Evans 22:40, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill: As cool as this sounds I'm afraid I'm gonna have to go for the kill here. There should be more of a reason as to why risking going undergound in the first place, besides reaching a destination, some RP fun if you're lucky and bragging rights for making it thorugh, especially if zombies will take to it like a second home. On the whole, it's lacking a certain element to make this a keeper. "The undead have taken to the underground" - but why should I care? --Kehraus 22:55, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I like the flavor of this.Edit: after thinking, maybe it would be better if you could get into the tunnels from points like malls and maybe fort armouries? Then there would be insentive to hold them longer? - --Fullemtaled 23:18, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I think it would make a good improvement, But maby we could make it so that humans go though the subway faster (than tradional movement above), to intice humans to go below, because it seems that subways are zombie advantaged (as with the scent blood skill) Moon stone 00:17, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Would add some great flavor, but I just don't think this would be good for this game. --Sknig 01:45, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • keep - I think this would be really helpful for zombies... the reason I see that people would be faster moving in subways is they dont have the obstructions that the surface world has... it would also be as much a place for zombies to control as humans control malls, as malls are defencive fortifications subways would be offencive... I think zombies should have the atvantage in this area with humans lacking in subways... these rail lines being placed all over the city, It would create a new level of combat as the entrances to these areas become important for defences... id love to see it...--Ringseed2 02:45, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I really like this. Perhaps flare guns could light up areas too? or new item lantern? - LS 23:13, 07 Dec 2005 (GMT-5)
  • Kill - But why would suvivors want to go there? The only function it serves right now is a shelter for zombies who want to hide from zombie hunters that don't want to spend all their AP to get lost in the dark and killed. There's something there, but this either needs to be redesigned entirely or resubmitted as a zombie hiding place. --Jon Pyre 06:15, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I guess it doesn't really serve a function, but hey, neither do banks. This is solid beautiful flavor. --Biscuit 06:20, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Holy Dear God, yes! We need some subway/train crap in this game =) Riktar 07:31, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I like idea of the flavor, but it honest to God serves no purpose really. The only thing I can see arising from this is a zombie hiding spot, which really isn't that great, since zombies don't benefit from hiding. In fact, the ONLY use I can see for this is to move large zombie hordes undetected at the surface level (I'm assuming you can't see stuff in the tunnel from the street). Since for one thing, zombies aren't smart enough for "covert ops" that idea does make sense, plus, its probably easier to travel as the crow flies above the ground. I just can't merit it being worth Kevan's time to recode the game, redesign the map, and redesign the interface just for this. --Vellin 08:44, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - The original intent wasn't directed towards a zombie hideout. It was intended as a form of flanking tactic for organized groups (survivors, zombies, etc.) to get from one place to another without being detected. This would mean that, if you're a survivor, not everyone in your group would need Free Running to move about undetected I figured the darkness element would add something a little new to the game.--Herbalbert 16:07, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Nice idea, but there really needs to be more insentive to go underground for survivors. Perhaps in the tunnels you can move two blocks on 1AP or something like that, because in it's present form no survivor would bother heading down below for any reason other than to get potentially lost and eaten. -BauulBen 11:56, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - I agree that there should be more incentive for the survivors. Perhaps subway tunnels should be instituted later in the game when a certain item (what that would be, I don't know) could only be found down there.--Herbalbert 16:07, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I love this idea, but Free Running is now so easy to get that using tunnels only to be invisible is useless. Modify the suggestion with some more incentives (i.e., places reachable only via tunnels, or items to be found, etc.) and I'll be glad to vote keep. --Seagull Flock 20:26, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - I'll rethink this a little more and see what I can change. Look for a revision in a week or so. Anyone who wants to bounce a few ideas off me can send a message to matt@kandy-man.com. Thanks! --Herbalbert 16:34, 12 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Just one question, would you be able to see the block you are at if you are in the tunnels at a station when the lights are out? - Jedaz 11:18, 10 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Not bad, I suppose. Bentley Foss 11:36, 10 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Train stations won't be useless anymore. --Signal9 05:28, 11 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - im gonna vote keep on this one in support of the basic idea - assuming that you are going to work out the details and resubmit it. perhaps its the wrong choice under the voting guidelines, but im gonna go with it anyways because i like the idea so much. --Firemanstan 01:46, 14 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Deadruff

That's what? 5 Spam? Out of here! — g026r 18:22, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT) }}

Yet Another MP5

Timestamp: 17:37, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Weapon
Scope: Survivors
Description: I know you guys are sick of it but it is different and I think its balanced. This MP5 fires fairly accurate 3-round bursts at a base accuracy of 10%, Basic Firearms Training applies and another branch of skills granting SMG training would probably have to be included (though weaker than other skills so as to give the same 65% hit chance once advanced.) The weapon does 5 damage per shot and one clip holds enough shots for the MP5 to fire 10 times.

MP5s and MP5 clips can only be found in Armouries, but they CAN be reloaded slowly using pistol clips, since they share a common ammunition. If all of your pistols are fully loaded, then clicking a pistol clip adds 2 shots (3 bullets apiece) to your MP5. A Survivor can only hold two MP5s at any given time, if you find a third while searching you will recieve an MP5 clip instead. MP5s and their clips are twice as hard to find as shotguns, shotgun shells, pistols and pistol clips.

Note that the following data does NOT include the AP required to find and load ammunition.

  • Starting Skill: 10% Accuracy

Average Damage Per Clip: 5

Average Damage Per AP: 0.5

To Kill 50HP Enemy: 100 Attacks (10 Clips)

Average Damage Per Clip: 17.5

Average Damage Per AP: 1.75

To Kill 50HP Enemy: 29 Attacks (2.9 Clips)

  • SMG Training: 55% Accuracy

Average Damage Per Clip: 27.5

Average Damage Per AP: 2.75

To Kill 50HP Enemy: 19 Attacks (1.9 Clips)

  • Advanced SMG Training: 65% Accuracy

Average Damage Per Clip: 32.5

Average Damage Per AP: 3.25

To Kill 50HP Enemy: 16 Attacks (1.6 Clips)

Votes

  • Keep - This is the first automatic weapon I've seen that's even close to being balanced. --John Taggart 17:49, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Explain why I should vote Keep if we already have Yet Another SMG and I'll change my vote --Squashua 17:59, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - We need more items, not more weapons - a machine gun is just another form of attack, when attacking is currently the only significant part of the game. Attacking with one type of gun over another isn't worth the coding when there are things with far more player-involving value needed. --Drakkenmaw 18:03, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -Yet Another SMG is better. Also I am going to vote kill on all specific weapon suggestions. If pistols and shotguns are general, why should other types of weapons be specific?? --Matthew-Stewart 18:07, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I like it better than the Yet Another SMG suggestion. --Kulatu 18:18, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Just don't see the need. — g026r 18:24, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Prefer the Yet Another SMG suggestion. AllStarZ 20:08, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - "Nay" for all. --ALIENwolve 20:09, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- For god's sake people, give us something to do or play with besides freaking guns. -- Tabs 20:49, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Too complicated. I'm all for new weapons, but give them their own ammunition and stats. -- S Kruger
  • Kill - I don't care how balanced the suggestion is, automatic weapons have no place in this game. The humans are the battered remnants of a devastated city, not an organized military. Humvees would have to follow, then cruise missiles that can kill everything in a block, all leading to the glorious conclusion: a nuclear missile, that, when used, turns every square in the game to wasteland and deletes everyone's accounts. --Sknig 01:56, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - This is not Counterstrike & Rare != Balanced --VoidDragon 02:04, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam Why do we need more firearms suggestions? Essentially, at best, we're looking at a 10-shot clip pistol here, with fussy search odds and reloading eccentricities thrown in to distinguish it a little more. I think the weapon system works well enough for survivors as it is. Adding better weapons would be overkill; adding worse weapons would be pointless. Can't we leave the weapons as they are now? --Jean Gregoire 03:01, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - That's not a Spam vote, that's a Kill vote. Make up your mind. (Unless you were referring to that Peer Reviewed Suggestion which nowhere in your comment did you make mention of) Riktar 07:28, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill- I'm so bloody tired of the MP5's, this is NOT counterstrike. --Vellin 08:45, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - What they all said. The "Yet Another SMG" suggestion was much better done, too. Bentley Foss 09:14, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - What in the name of Hades is it with people and MP5s? - KingRaptor 13:11, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Where the last shot went

REMOVED BY THE AUTHOR... RE-WRITTEN IN A SIMPLER FORM 8TH DECEMBER

--Adrian 18:14, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Increase Ammo Finding %

Timestamp: 22:39, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Percentage Change
Scope: Those with firearms
Description: I suggest the search percentage of pistol clips and shotgun shells in mall gun stores is increased to 25% and 22% respectively. The search odds seem a little unbalanced, to me, since I never seem to be able to find the ammumition I need (and I have both skills).

Votes

  • AUTHOR VOTE: KILL - I've decided that this is a kill vote overall, judging by the fact that there ARE no keep votes. --Zacharias Cross 01:29, 9 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill First, i changed the name. i had to. second, i deleated the authors vote because you didn't put your sig next to it, feel free to put your vote back in its proper place once with your proper name. --Spellbinder 23:40, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Zombies have enough trouble as it is without survivors having around a 50% chance of finding ammo when they're at a mall with Bargain Hunting! --Volke 00:11, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I always have plenty of ammo. --Dickie Fux 00:19, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Because survivors really need a boost. --Lucero Capell 00:21, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Funny, I seem to pick up way more pistol clips than I need. Perhaps you have multiple characters in close proximity to eachother. Supposedly active characters from the same IP in close proximity to eachother get a negative modifier on rolls. --VoidDragon 02:00, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - It's easy enough to find ammo, compared to the other essential items for survivors. And it needs to stay at least somewhat difficult for balance reasons. --Drakkenmaw 04:52, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Man, just get shopping. Its not that hard with shopping. --Vellin 08:51, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Survivors don't need further increases in power such as this. Bentley Foss 09:15, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Risen from the Grave

Timestamp: 22:39, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Spawning
Scope: New players who choose zombie as their class
Description: Any new player that picks zombie (Corpse) as their class would spawn in a random graveyard in Malton. It wouldn't have much of a practical use, but it would be a nice theatrical touch to it. Here's an edited spawning message:

"Your eyes flick open, first one and then the other, staring blankly into the darkness in front of you. In seconds, you notice you are not standing, but laying down. As if by instinct, you begin to claw your way through the wood and dirt above you. Finally breaching the ground, you lift yourself upwards and stare at the deserted streets, a strange hunger for flesh in the back of you head.

Unsteadily, you begin to lurch forward."

Why do I suggest this change? I assume that, by this point in the game, that all of the casualities caused by the process of the quarantine would have either been consumed or turned undead themselves. The message would be debatable.

AUTHOR'S EDIT: In response to the arguments on hospitals and morgues--> No, I don't think that would work. You see, by this point in the outbreak, those that were in the afformentioned locations would have already been reviven . . . as zombies.

AUTHOR'S EDIT 2: As to the griefing issues, I really don't think that would be a problem. A zombie who has just been created would not likely be staying in one spot. They would move once they spawned. Besides, would a player really want to stick to a graveyard? Think about this: refreshing causes AP to be used again. Once the AP was used, the player would be stuck. They would die. Would they want that? No. Furthermore, if once player would be staying in a graveyard, others would too. They would kill each other. This means that it would be seen as a forbidden place, as players would be attacking each other since the zombies weren't there when they tried to attack them (the zombies would have moved since they selected the action). Therefore, griefing would not be a problem.

AUTHOR'S EDIT 3: I took the liberty of grouping all of the keep votes and all of the kill votes for simplicity.

Votes

  • Keep - Personally, I think it would be a nice touch . . . Even if I created it.--Zacharias Cross 22:39, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep --Lord Evans 22:45, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -- I wanted to know why I didn't get a message like that when I first started playing myself. -- Tabs 22:46, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I like it. Rhialto 22:49, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep- Very cool. It would a fun RP touch to it. Rejuvanator 22:51, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Sounds nice Mikm 23:02, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Nice touch. As for become XP farms, no human is stupid enough to stay out of doors for long, and hopefully newer zombies can figure out enough to move a square or two. --Lucero Capell 00:02, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I like it Moon stone 00:28, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I wouldn't worry about camping. While new zombies might not be powerful, they would have 50 AP to spend. That should be enough to take few bites and leave the area. --Brizth 00:31, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Wow... reading this, I find it amazing that the Corpse class hasn't started this way all along. I think this is the best suggestion I've seen on here. --Sknig 02:10, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I'd love this. Let us not forget the corpse possibilities streaming out of the hospitals, or the morgues. All those people trapped would eventually die/break their way out of the morgue and want brains! -- krupintupple 2:56, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Interesting flavour is an important aspect of any game, so long as you don't want it to just end up being dice rolling or straight math. I like this touch. --Drakkenmaw 04:55, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Indeed. Riktar 07:23, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Nice one. Maybe hospital morgues are a good idea... spawning inside a hospital sounds like a good way to get your char off the ground. --Leit 10:49, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Nice one, mate. There is one thing I have noticed, though. There seems to be a pattern of graveyards always being beside, or close to churches. Most of the suburbs I have been in have their revive points at churches. This might lead to having mass revives as soon as azombie spawns. Or I might be wrong. -- Andrew McM 12:05, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep --Milo 12:59, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - In response to Fullemtaled, this could possibly be altered to include wastelands. --Daxx 14:56, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I like the theatrical touch, but graveyards would just end up as XP farms for survivors to camp out and take out confused n00b zombies. --WibbleBRAINS 23:45, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Yeah, survivors would just camp there and grief new zombie players. --Dickie Fux 00:18, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill At least two suburbs don't have any graveyards - --Fullemtaled 12:14, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - What about hospital morgues? --VoidDragon 12:20, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - This would have such a minor impact that I can't forsee it being worth implementing. Bentley Foss 11:39, 10 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Not worth it IMO. --Basher 23:14, 10 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - im gonna go with kill on this one. i like the flavor of it, but unless more graveyards are going to be added into the game (yeah, probably not) it wouldnt work. Fullemtaled raises an excellent point, as does Dickie Fux. --Firemanstan 05:54, 14 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Schweeet. I like this. --Coreyo 03:19, 21 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Handcuffs and handcuff key

Timestamp: 21:59, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Item
Scope: Survivors
Description: Handcuffs, police issued (found in Police Station), for a certain %, lets say 25% to successfully cuff a person or zombie to something within a building (pole, pipe, or door handle) so they couldn't leave. A Survivor handcuffed couldn't use a shotgun or axe, for they require two hands, but could use a pistol or knife in self defense, and they could also search. There are a few ways to escape this.

1) Handcuff Key- found in PDs, require 1 AP to use. 2) Wirecutters- New USE! cost 2-3 AP to cut through. 3) Break Out- cost 5-6 AP, Take 2 points of Damage.

If Z-spies horde handcuffs and try to get a whole building, the first player could announce someone handcuffed them and others to watch out, weeding the spy out, and potentially getting the handcuffer handcuffed himself.

An addition to this is to enable other players to use the Key or wirecutters on someone else stuck, much like first-aid kit or DNA extractor.

Votes

  • Keep--Eh, looks interesting to me. Besides, it's not like anyone else has come up with a good idea for wirecutters yet.--Tabs 22:10, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Too much potential for griefing here. Rhialto 22:53, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Would become a nuisance. Any skill that decreases the skills of others could be a deterrent for new users. It would make it even harder to level up for them, and as a result, would turn-off anyone looking to become frequent players.--Zacharias Cross 23:10, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Just seems like a perfect griefing skill. --Spellbinder 23:46, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep I have wire cutters therefore this is good. --Splendicide 19:07, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I have wire cutters too, and it's still a griefing skill. --Shadowstar 00:09, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Just annoying. --Dickie Fux 00:15, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Yah yah, as has been said, only really good for griefing. --Lucero Capell 00:19, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT) (with wirecutters)
  • Kill - Not to be repetitive, but... yeah, griefing. Also, I don't see how you're going to search a building if your range of movement is restricted to like two feet. --Sknig 02:02, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill chef boyargrief --krupintupple 02:59, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Eh, no. Anyways, it seems to be just a way to make wirecutters worthwhile. Mikm 03:12, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - As much as I'd love handcuffing an exhausted 0AP arrival to a pipe as sacrificial bait to a zombie horde near the end of a failing seige... I'd hate to be the guy handcuffed to a pipe. So despite loving the concept, I'm going to have to vote no. --Drakkenmaw 04:58, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Don't mess with people's skills (even temporarily) and don't make it impossible for them to do simple actions like, say, movement. Bentley Foss 09:28, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Thriller

yea, you knew someone was gunna do it. moved to Humorous.--Spellbinder 23:45, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Zombie Master and Minions

Well, for what is it? The third or fourth time? Zombie NPCs was spaminated with unanimous spam to the surprise and dismay Of none. --Zaruthustra 01:43, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)

  • Re - Author: sorry for the spam but I did check old suggestions and didn't see anything similar. I'll check better next time. Anyway, bad spam bad! :) --Shaolinzombie 01:53, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - actually it mostly was spammed cause it created npc/pet/minions, these ideas get shot down immediatly

Oh god, so you're responsible for this god awful crap? Anyways, this is basically taking the whole "follow the leader" crap, and NPC ideas will all be spaminated out of existence. Also, this idea just plain sucks. AllStarZ 02:01, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)

God, you don't know how to RE: for beans. AllStarZ 02:15, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT) pointlessly aggressive comments

Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Suggestions/7th-Dec-2005&oldid=1028349"