From The Urban Dead Wiki

Revision as of 11:18, 11 June 2006 by Xoid (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

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 SuggestionsSuggestions up for VotingClothes Suggestions
Cycling SuggestionsPeer ReviewedUndecidedPeer RejectedHumorous
Suggestion AdviceTopics to Avoid and WhyHelp, Developing and Editing

7th November, 2005

Shotgun Slugs

Timestamp: 00:35, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Item (ammo)
Scope: Affects the shotgun
Description: Increases damage by 2, but reduces damage by 5% accuracy because there's no lead balls in the slug, thus, no spread shot. When loaded into a shotgun already loaded with regular shells this may happen: "Jack has a shotgun with normal shells. He tries to load it, but the following message is displayed, 'You try to load it into the shotgun, but you are unable to.' This would also happen with normal shells trying to be loaded into a shotgun with slugs.


  • Kill, Crap. --GameGod
  • Kill Personally, I'd think it would be the other way around - less accurate (can't use the spread to help aim) but more damaging (that's one freaking huge peice of metal hitting your target). However, Specialty ammo/gun modifications might be too complicated. It would put more strain on the server even deciding what ammo is in the gun when you find it.
  • Kill, For the same reason as the toolbox upgrades, i like my game simple.--Spellbinder 01:25, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, creator does not understand ammunition types- in reality, the reverse would be true. Ammotype checks also would cause tons of lag. --LibrarianBrent 01:31, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill The shotgun with buck shot is still more accurate... that's how shotguns work: Multiple wounds in a large area. ALIENwolve 19:56, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill It'd probably be an insane amount of book keeping to deal with multiple ammunition types. Plus, as has been mentioned, Buckshot is more accurate, Solid does more penetration.--Zark the Damned 22:29, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Too much bookkeeping. In real life, "damage" is defined in a lot of different ways. Shells cause many small wounds. Slugs cause one frikkin' huge wound. It would be too complicated to represent this in a meaningful way in the game. Bentley Foss 23:23, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill I agree with Zark the Damned. This is quite complex and backwards. -- Juntzing 14:43, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep/Change I personally like this idea - it would have to decrease the accuracy and increase the damage of the shotgun, plus it'd have to be a pretty rare ammunition type. ALSO: Shotgun slugs are basically shotgun shells that have a large chunk of metal in place of the buckshot (so, for example, a 12-gauge shotgun could fire either 12-gauge buckshot shells or a 12-gauge shotgun slug), so no special modifications are needed - just the slug ammo. I do agree, however, that it needs some tweaking. -- John Taggart 20:27, 9 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill As Spellbinder says. Madalex 21:07, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - This could cause problems with tracking which ammo is where; what if a Shotgun had 1 of these slugs and 1 traditional? Which gets fired first? Whichever got loaded first? I'm sure shotguns currently aren't coded to track the ammo TYPE in them. This is like asking for different bullet calibres. --Squashua 00:10, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)


Timestamp: 01:21, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Game event
Scope: Survivors
Description: Simply put, an NPC sets up a few shops, such as in a mall or random location, and for a couple of hours will trade items for different items. mostly, players will trade in the 3rd flak vest and 14th pistol for ammunition and syringes, or for other usefull items that person lacks.


  • Kill This game event can be too easily abused --Carfan7 01:27, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep, very cool idea and fitting to the background. --LibrarianBrent 01:32, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep, A black market would be a better name there should be supply depots to store stuff only for recognized groups. --GameGod
  • Keep, but I'd put it on a random time... might be too complicated though, with having to balance prices... Shadowstar 02:04, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Neads some work, but will prove usefull if implimented. --Alexei Yaruk 03:06, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill What makes this game great is it is totally PC driven with no NPCs. I think a once amonth "suppily drop" event could be kewl, and help cause the scambling for location (for survivors who want the stuff and the zombies who want to eat the survivors) like this suggestion would that would be really interesting but without lame NPCs--Matthew-Stewart 04:33, 7 Nov 2005(GMT)
  • Kill Like said above.Gnaag 14:26, 7 Nov 2005
  • Keep I agree with matthew and Game god, but when i wrote it out i couldn't think of anything other then "npc store" when i was trying to explain it. this was MOSTLY an attempt to feel out how the masses think about trade driven events.--Spellbinder 17:37, 7 Nov 2005
  • Kill Basically, this weighs in in favour of the older more established character versus new Survivors, i.e. those with currently better skills and bettter equipment due to being around a longer time then newbies benefit, new players with no surplus equipment won't. Madalex 20:45, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill This is a Zombie Survival game. Why the heck would anyone set up a corner shop when they're running from hordes of infected gribblies?--Zark the Damned 22:30, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Too technically complex (inventory management aspects), not in keeping with the atmosphere. What Zark said. Bentley Foss 23:24, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Agreed. -- Juntzing 14:45, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill It is a very tough concept. See Container Buckets below for a trading alternative. --Squashua 23:53, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Blood Lust

Timestamp: 01:45, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombies
Description: Gives the player the ability to deal 1 extra damage point with bite attacks, in exchange for 1HP loss per bite dealt.


  • Kill, bites allready cause infection how unbalanced are you trying to make the game. Improve the game please and do not destroy it. --GameGod
  • Kill Seems a little useless. Jirtan 01:54, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill I take 1 hp damage, but heal back 5 with digestion? Broken --McArrowni 7 Nov 2005
  • Kill ^ I was just about to say that. Shadowstar 02:05, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Kind of doesn't make sense: Why would you attack someone to just lose 1 HP? --Carfan7 02:45, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, useless without Digestion, abusive with it. --LibrarianBrent 03:59, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, as was said, with digestion that extra point is another point healed, so that backlash isen't really backlash at all. And no, claws need extra damage, bite dosen't--Spellbinder 18:17, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - What they all said. Bentley Foss 23:28, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - See above.--Arathen 22:13, 10 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill 'Nuff said. Madalex 21:08, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Does not seem useful. --Squashua 00:11, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Change to a small bonus to hit. --Dickie Fux 04:27, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Undead Adrenaline

Timestamp: 01:45, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombies
Description: Increases overall AP by 5, but reduces overall health by 10.


  • Kill Too much book keaping. And it could be abused. --Alexei Yaruk 03:08, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, Nothing should ever affect ap in a positive or negative manner more than 1. --GameGod
  • Keep, good idea that has only minor effects on balance as a whole. --LibrarianBrent 11:41, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, so a zombie with body building and this would have max 50 HP and max 55AP? Why not make it applicable to everyone like body building, then? Or do you mean they'd give up 10 HP each time to get 5 more AP? If so, wouldn't a zombie with ankle grab just keep doing it forever? 1AP to stand with 50-60HP, and you get 5AP back each time. I am a zombie, I have 10HP and 1AP-- give up my 10 HP for 5AP without a penalty, stand up, now I've got 50HP and 4 or 5 AP, and I can keep doing that until I get to full AP and HP... (And now, if you're a paid character, you kill everyone else on UD) Shadowstar 13:20, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, Totaly unbalanced dump crap. Gnaag 14:33, 7 Nov 2005
  • Kill - Don't. Mess. With. APs. --Seagull Flock 16:27, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Don't. Mess. With. APs.--Spellbinder 18:18, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I know my one vote won't make any difference, but it's my opinion. I like it, and I really don't understand what Shadowstar said. Getting it forever? It's a skill, if you haven't read. You get 100XP and spend it on this. Now your max HP is 40, and your max AP 55. Nothing to do with raising and recovering AP, nothing. And you can't get it twice, either. Monstah 19:40, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Why make it easier to get your zombie self killed? There are more elegant AP-modifying suggestions on this page. Bentley Foss 23:31, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I don't think that AP totals need to be messed with; they are there to keep everything even across the board and allow everyone site-access equally. What if you become a survivor? Your AP total changes? This isn't the way to go with this. --Squashua 00:12, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill I'm join the don't-mess-with-AP-dance. Madalex 17:35, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill I don't oppose AP modifications, and I don't think it's overpowered, I just don't see the thematic concept behind it. I could see it as a survivor skill, although I don't think they need it just now. --Dickie Fux 04:30, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Scent Bomb

Timestamp: 04:23, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Item
Scope: Survivors (Scientists)
Description: Survivors can plant a "Scent Bomb" which when zombies with Scent Trail smell them out get two positions, where the survivor is and where the scent bomb is. This would be given to the players starting out as NT scientists so they have a chance of escaping a massive horde of zombies that they happened to have tagged. Only one scent bomb can be used at a time by a survivor.


  • Kill, This has no place in a zombie game. --Boron 13:30, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill A interesting consept but likely unworkable. --Alexei Yaruk 04:44, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep I like it. Maybe it can just return the position of the bomb if it's too hard as is. Jirtan 04:57, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, makes no sense. --LibrarianBrent 11:42, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, Zombie Mechanic: Somebody set up us the bomb.--Spellbinder 18:22, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Too much coding effort for too little reward. Scientists should just tag less and run/hide more if that's the concern. Bentley Foss 23:34, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Can you even imagine someone seriously considering putting this in the game?
  • Kill - For great braaaainz.--Arathen 22:16, 10 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - You cannot tell when a Zombie scents you; therefore you would never know when to plant the bomb. --Squashua 00:14, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill How long would it last? Where could it be found? Madalex 17:38, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Just make a smoke bomb that negates Scent Trail for all zombies in that block at that time. I don't know if that's even worth the bother, though. --Dickie Fux 04:33, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Basic Training

Timestamp: 16:29, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Scientists
Description: This Scientific Skill represents a small amount of basic combat training undertaken by the scientist. Thereafter, that scientist can buy Military Skills for 125 XP (instead of the standard 150 XP). Currently, a character that starts as a scientist has to spend way more XP than the other character types to gain all the skills.


  • Keep, Scientists way unbalanced...however i question how useful it will be? Maybe for brain-rot?
  • Kill, Personaly, i say get over it. More skills need to be added to the science tree, not this skill.--Spellbinder 18:31, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep, it's very hard to find decent new skills for scientists. And very easy to find new skills for military. This is just a suggestion, afterall, and you can say be creative all you want, if all else fails, this looks like a decent alternative --McArrowni 7 Nov 2005
  • Kill, skills that only affect one class, and a XP cost reduction at that - a no-go from my side Madalex 21:31, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, A class's skill shouldn't be the ability to multiclass better. Jirtan 23:24, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Same reasons as mentioned above. Bentley Foss 23:41, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - see comment by Jirtan. --Seagull Flock 22:43, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - If you wanted it to be easy don't choose a scientist character class in the first place. --Hazmat Tom 07:07, 12 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Coming from an even-steven, point-based, RPG background, I agree with the attempt to put all classes on an equal footing, but this isn't the way to do it. Something global and sweeping would be better (kind of like what they're doing to Star Wars: Galaxies). --Squashua 00:16, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)


Timestamp: 011:42, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Zombie Skill
Scope: Zombies
Description: This skill fits under a new tree. The zombie takes 1 less damage from a pistol, 2 less from a shotgun, and 3 less from a flare gun. Does NOT stack with a flak jacket.


  • Kill, I know it doesn't stack with a flak jacket but we already have a flak jacket, ya know? If you want the effect of this, just get revived and take a walk before you get the brain rot skill. This is unnecessary.--Insomniac By Choice 11:49, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep, it doesn't make sense that the best zombies need human stuff to be resilient. Aren't zombies usualy resilient on their own? --McArrowni 7 Nov 2005
  • Kill, skill already exists as "flak jacket". Being calloused also doesn't protect you from bullets. --LibrarianBrent 13:30, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - see comment above by LibrarianBrent. --Seagull Flock 14:58, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - So if my fingers are calloused does that mean their bulletproof shields of invincability? --Thor 14:58, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep This skill should specifically be IN the Brain Rot skill tree, and maybe "Leathery Skin" would be a better name--Matthew-Stewart 17:34, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, don't get all uppity about it. if you want to RP it, say your skin is calloused/leathery and wear the damn flak jacket. if you forgot to grab a FJ before you picked up brain rot, tough cookies!--Spellbinder 17:50, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, Sorry, just can't see this working without severely unbalancing the game. As has been said, grab a flak jacket and pretend. I can let you borrow my dolls. Err...Lucero Capell 18:27, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep, There's no reason not to have this. It would allow zombies to not have to wear a flak jacket... Which is kind of stupid, btw. Going for 'realism' and yet all the zombies are running around wearing flak jackets? Give them a skill to be the equivalent and don't make them stack. Pyrinoc 8:08, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep, ^ is right. Jirtan 23:26, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Dumb de dumb, dumb. --Alexei Yaruk 12:18, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep If you lower the bonus and place it under Brain Rot. --Squashua 23:45, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill--Milo 15:46, 9 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep, what McArrowni said. Career zombies should never be encouraged to 'go human' for extra HP/armor. Slicer 00:51, 11 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep/Change Call this "Organ Rot" and put it below "Brain Rot". Rationale being that a bullet in the heart isn't that inconvenient when your heart is just another lump of putrefying meat. Should probably stack with a flak jacket. Niggle 11:30, 11-Nov-2005 (GMT)
  • KILL What a horrible idea. Renders guns nearly useless try not making such outlandish suggestions and this might actually get keep votes from ppl other than ones that only play zombies --GodofGames 01:40, 12 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill As LibrarianBrent said. Madalex 17:43, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Just because I think the "Just get a flak jacket" arguments are stupid; it's like saying "Let's all start survivor characters, but half of us just act like zombies." Leathery Skin is a better name, though. --Dickie Fux 04:39, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Congealed Flesh

Timestamp: 011:45, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Zombie Skill
Scope: Zombies
Description: This skill fits under the "Calloused" tree. The zombie has a maximum of 60 hit points. This, like "calloused," is meant to give balance to zombies who bought "Brain Rot" early in the game before zombies could get bodybuilding or wear flak jacket.


  • Kill, I think my above complaint applies here, too. It's redundant and that was the trade off for taking brain rot. You can't get extracted or revived, but you can't get the benefits of getting revived, either.--Insomniac By Choice 12:15, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep --McArrowni 7 Nov 2005
  • Kill, as stupid as calloused was. SKILL ALREADY EXISTS. --LibrarianBrent 13:31, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, This makes no sense at all. --Boron 13:30, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - it's true, Body Building already exists. But if Diagnosis has a zombie counterpart (Scent Blood), why shouldn't this too? --Seagull Flock 15:01, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Destroys the balance of the game. Has no basis in this game its not some fantasy RPG. --Thor 15:01, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep This skill should specifically be IN the Brain Rot skill tree. as a reply to the above, and why would body building give more HP instead of more weapon melee damage? It doesn't adversely affect game balance any more that body building does seeing it does the same thing. (also is not Sci Fi, it implies the insides are like jelly and less vital, like a putrid zombie...)--Matthew-Stewart 17:39, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, Bodybuilding effects both, so would this stack with human skills (thus giveing a max HP of 70?) or just 70hp for zombies. actualy, having more hitpoints as a zombie dosen't actualy sound too bad--Spellbinder 17:52, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, primarily for balance reasons. If it doesn't stack with bodybuilding (though there's no logical reason why it wouldn't), there's no real point. If it does stack with bodybuilding, it would unbalance the game. Just can't see it working.Lucero Capell 18:32, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep, why should older zeds have a disadvantage because they bought rot sooner? Don't have it stack, just make it a cross-skill, so that in the Human trees it's called Body Building, and in the Zombie trees, it's called Congealed Flesh or whatever other name you'd like. Shadowstar 19:30, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Give older zombies(or people who just want brain rot early) the opportunity to get the stuff they missed out on. To be honest, I don't think human skills should work for zombies, and zombie skills shouldn't work for humans. EVER. If you want it to count for both, either allow those skills to be bought by both classes, or make two equivalent skills for each tree. If I want to be a zombie, I shouldn't ever have to become human to be the best, and vice versa. Pyrinoc 8:08, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep It makes MORE sense for zombies to have more HP than humans; since structural damage (broken bones or wide-spread muscle damage) are necessary to take down zombies, whereas poking a human in those pesky organs or arteries/veins puts them down for the count. -- Juntzing 14:54, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Place this under Brain Rot to deter Survivors from taking it when they change over. --Squashua 23:43, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Make Body Building have no effect on zombies and have a balance. Slicer 00:52, 11 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Redundant (Body Building) as for those who want to RP their zombie characters remember we all started out human at one point otherwise you would be a fetus crawling around chewing on people's toes. --Hazmat Tom 07:16, 12 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill As LibrarianBrent said. Madalex 17:44, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep I think it is silly how players who choose to be zombies have to try to get revived to get body building. Just let them buy it as zombies.--Apocalypse Lord 17:39, 18 Nov 2005
  • Keep Zombies shouldn't have to spend one minute as humans to get a basic skill. --Dickie Fux 04:46, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Flare Combat

Timestamp: 04:38, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Zombie Hunter Skill
Scope: Survivors
Description: +15% to flare acuracy: evetualy you Will learn to work with even the most dificult of weapons.


  • Kill, Flares are meant to be used for signals and it unbalances the game. --GameGod
  • Kill, flare != rocket. --LibrarianBrent 11:38, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, Very bad idea. Weapons are all supposed to be balanced and this is about as unbalanced as you can get. Flares deal ridiculous damage at a low percentage for a reason.--Insomniac By Choice 11:45, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - ^ditto. --Seagull Flock 15:04, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, yup, its your low % BFG.--Spellbinder 18:08, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, Nuh-uh. Just no.Lucero Capell 18:32, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep/Change As is the flare is next to useless for combat (2.25 dam/AP, far too low for an ammo weapon). 30% total gives 4.5 dam/AP to the pistol's 3.25, so this suggestion's kinda overpowered as-is, but make it 6% for 21% max to-hit for 3.15 dam/AP and the flare, while still not as good as the pistol, isn't actually useless anymore. However, the shotgun already takes 6.5/AP--this is balanced by the AP drain of reloading, and flares don't even take ammo, but still, you only find them one at once rather than 6 shots, so they really ought to do a bit MORE dam/AP than the pistol.--'STER 23:35, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT) (edited 00:22, 9 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Just lower the percentage - flares are notoriously un-aimable, but at least knowing how to point it in the proper direction is worth an additional 5%. Change the bonus to 5% and add some sort of skill-based side-effect to make the skill worth something, and you've got a winner. Or... well, does Basic Firearms "affect" Flares? If not, then maybe that's the fix - make Basic Firearms Skill enhance Flare targeting and be done with it. --Squashua 00:18, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill As LibrarianBrent said. Madalex 17:44, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)


Timestamp: 21:17, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Item
Scope: Incentive to learn Knife Combat before or instead of Axe Proficiency
Description: Add a machete item to the game using the same combat stats as the fire axe (damage & base accuracy), affected by the Knife Combat skill instead of the Axe Proficiency skill, and only to be found in the Sporting Goods department of a Mall


  • Keep I like the idea, it isn't unbalanced and even has a good item location to so it is introduced slowly enough to avoid sudden paradigm shifts. Fire Axe will still be favored because it is easier to get, but adds nice flavor and makes an underpowered skill as useful as the others.--Matthew-Stewart 21:56, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Sounds great. Jirtan 23:29, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Requires very little coding/srver strain, absolutely no effect on balance, and adds some variety and a use for a useless skill.--'STER 23:37, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep, Knife skills are near pointless with the current implementation. While this may not serve as much incentive for those with fire axes and axe skills to switch, it at least provides a little variety.Lucero Capell 00:10, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep, I really like this idea. Good work. --Pyrinoc 00:16, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill/Spam, what the hell? This idea is competely, utterly worthless. Try proposing something that is original and different. Also, how would being good with knives allow you to use a machete? --LibrarianBrent 01:24, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep, Nothing more then a new item, seems allright to me.--Spellbinder 05:08, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Makes a worthless skill have a use, ergo, good idea. --Alexei Yaruk 12:25, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Makes knife proficiency useful. -- Juntzing 15:05, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill I'd like to see knives have some other use. Claw and bite are both useful because they do different things, not because they are equally powerful. Axes and knives should be the same way--Milo 19:06, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill See comment by Milo. -- McArrowni 8 Nov 2005
  • Keep Gives Knife Combat a purpose; would prefer that it provided some variation from the currently identical Axes. --Squashua 23:37, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep/Change Like all of the above, but call it a Hunting Knife! Can you really buy machetes at the mall? --Biscuit 02:51, 9 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • RE I'm not sure what giving knives another use or purpose has to do with the Knife Combat skill, e.g. what influence what having knives act like wire cutters having on the choice of Knife Combat vs. Axe Proficiency? Or do you mean a combat use for knives which requires you to have Knife Combat? Madalex 12:48, 9 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep/Change Machetes can easily be purchased, but you would find them in the gardening section of a store so you'd want to place it with tools. Personally I don't think it needs to be differentiated from the axe skill. It just makes the knife skill useful for a change. --Torvus 17:24, 9 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill If they're exactly like axes whats the point? Its just a redundant skill tree with some limited RP purpose. From a RP angle finding machetes in sporting good stores strikes me as a bit strange. Malton isn't exactly near any jungles. My suggestion, resubmit as something like hunting knife and rebalance the stats to be Higher chance to hit but lower damage than the axe. --Zaruthustra 22:00, 9 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • RE Like it was already previously stated, they are sold in sporting goods stores as they are used in camping or other outdoor activities. --Madalex 13:45, 10 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Sounds good, although it would probably better that they are found in hardware stores. --Trunksoul5:10 AM, 12 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep I like it very much indeed ;) Madalex 17:45, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Oh keep so hard --Donggrip 11:37, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Rending Talons

Timestamp: 22:37, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombies vs High Level Survivors
Description: The Zombie's claws become gnarled and jagged. Whenever the Zombie kills a Survivor, the claws rip through their backpack, destroying one randomly selected item they are carrying (possibly make it weapons and armour only). Aim is to give a point to carrying multiples of an item, and to punish hoarders.


  • SPAM This is just BS. If anything their hands should fall off since their necrotic not get sharp and jaggeed and become a weapon! Whats next magic or fireballs from zombies? This is just suggestion abuse. --PooBear 23:38, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Skill is bad in this form. Forces the server to now distinguish between zombies and survivors at death. Might be intended for "high level survivors and hoarders" but you can severely cripple a lowbie-midbie with this. Force them to wait to get revived AND go find another gun/axe/flak jacket? No thanks. Also, this would be a great way for a human spy (the opposite of a zombie spy, y'know) to really mess up Brain Rot zombies by destroying their Flak Jackets. Bentley Foss 23:56, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Cripple a lowbie-midbie? That's what headshot does to zombies which is why they all have to gain experience as humans to level at all. This seems like a good return to headshot, so I say keep it. If it isn't kept, maybe just change the effect a bit, because I like the idea. --Pyrinoc 00:14 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep There is no need for it right now, but this would be a good thing should the zombies go back to being outnumbered 3 to 1. This skill also helps with the accumulation of items in the game. The only thing I'd change is make it more likely to hit someone who has more items than the guy with a single fireaxe. --McArrowni
  • SPAM USELESS IDEA since it is overpowered and unbalances the game. --THOR 01:24, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Better than Headhsot. Ridiculous ability. --LibrarianBrent 01:24, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, I'm not sure I'd go as far as to say it's better than headshot, but I do think it's overpowered, especially seeing as zombies seem to be on the rise.Lucero Capell 02:23, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, Editing someone else's inventory, along with any skill that has to do with reduceing someone elses AP, should never be done without carefull balance.--Spellbinder 05:10, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Bad idea, on the face of it. This would ruin the ability for survivors to... well survive! --Alexei Yaruk 12:28, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Very problematic for starting characters (even if it's genre-appropriate; I've run into and killed rather a lot of starting survivors with my zombies of late; what if they were all losing a piece of gear?) Ofcourse, I feel Headshot should be killed too. Hitting someone in their XP is just about as bad as AP but there's no real justification in-genre for HS (the zombie skills mostly don't involve the brain) and HS takes reams of XP from you. -- Juntzing 15:10, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Better not mess with the inventory. --Seagull Flock 22:57, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Silly and unrealistic.-- Biscuit 02:51, 9 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - ESPECIALLY if it damages Flak Jackets. Whoops, you just deprived a fellow zombie of his protection from firearms, now he's going to want to be human even more.--Arathen 22:35, 10 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill If Kevan put grief suggestions like this one in the game, would there be anyone left wanting to play it? Slicer 02:33, 11 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Re: Kevan already has put a griefing skill in the game. It's called headshot. I don't see what's so wrong with this suggestion? Oh dear, the Zombie got my Flak Jacket - guess I'll have to go find another. All it does is cost a few AP of searching for the item that was destroyed. Better yet, just ensure you keep a few multiples of items instead of throwing stuff away. --Zark the Damned 12:06, 11 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • SPAM 3 spam votes means this idea is trash. --GodofGames 01:41, 12 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • SPAM LOL. See above. --Sauron the Deceiver 02:14, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I would like to see something that renders a Survivor's weapon unusable (a "reliability" factor?), but this isn't it. There is a fairly unlimited supply of items in the game (you just have to keep searching), so the hoarding argument is moot. --Squashua 00:20, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill As User:Spellbinder:Spellbinder said. Madalex 17:50, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Needs a probability based on the number of items carried. Change the name to Grappling something or other. PS: Three unopposed spams means three spams without a bunch of other votes in between them. --Dickie Fux 04:54, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Search X Times

Timestamp: 23:37, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Optimization
Scope: Survivors, Server Load
Description: Adds a search times box to searchable areas and malls. The default value in the box is 1. When a player clicks a search button or a search store button the player will search that many times. The character is charged an action point for each search, and the ip address is charged a hit for each search (to not encourage the making of more characters). Actual number of times searched is minimum(times entered, remaining AP, remaining hits, empty inventory spaces). Displayed action text could be the regular result action texts from all searches (easier coding) or a compact form stating how many times searched and how many of each found item were found.


  • Keep, doesn't overcomplicate and lowers server load, which is good. Might need a bit of work on the interface for malls though. Shadowstar 23:44, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Good suggestion for reducing hits to the server. Definitely a keeper! Bentley Foss 00:06, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep, don't see how you can argue with this one.Lucero Capell 00:12, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Great idea, and original and it's not too complicated. Should work too. --Carfan7 00:26, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep This had to be suggested. And it has to be kept. --McArrowni 8 Nov 2005
  • Keep EDIT: I agree that this should be added as an option, as is. Once it is implemented (if it is), I would like to suggest an additional feature (this can be moved to a different section, if necessary): I wonder if a player could get small bonuses in searching results for using larger amounts of searches at once -- like +1% for each subsequent search up to, say, +10% (so, if someone searches once, their chance of finding an item is 30%, if they choose to search five times at once, the chance of finding something on the final search is 35% ... but even if they choose to search 30 times at once, their total chance rises to only 40%). It stands to reason that if you spend a lot of time searching, you would systematically eliminate places you'd already searched and therefore find items more often than someone who does only a quick once-over. The only problem would be if this creates a server load. --Ethan Frome 02:08, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Compleatly disagree with ethan, this is a not a SKILL, this is a button, and should not be any different then hitting the single search button over and over. you missed the point dude.--Spellbinder 05:12, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • ^^^ I see your point ... this should stay as a skill. However, I also think that, once implemented, it could be improved by having the elements I mentioned added to it. I didn't think it would be appropriate to start a whole separate entry just to add that tidbit, since it's generally preferable to keep things in the same discussion area, rather than farming them out. Sorry if anyone was offended, though. I'll edit my original to reflect this. --Ethan Frome 05:47, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep An excellent suggestion for reducing server load! -- Juntzing 15:13, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Wonderful idea worthy of fellatio, yes, yes. But it could probably be expanded to other things as well to reduce the server load on moving across the map, combat (though this could be abused), and dropping items. It might take extra coding, but it's obvious that it would do a lot to help make the game more efficient and enjoyable. --Insomniac By Choice 22:22, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Gosh I'd love for this to be implemented. In response to Insomniac: you can't really do it for dropping because its an interaction with each individual item, and you DEFINATELY can't do it with combat because me telling it to attack a zed 90 times with a pistol would result in the player instantly recieving something like 40 pistol hits, and instant death. You have to give the player a chance to recognize an attack and run away.
  • Keep Yes very good saves time gets people off the server quick allowing it to go faster User:Dignant
  • KeepA very good idea. I'm tired of hitting search over and over.
  • Keep Reduces my "search days" to 1 minute of server time, reducing the chance of being caught playing UD at work. Excellent suggestion. --Hazmat Tom 07:26, 12 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Good, but program flaws must be tested for so cheaters don't exploit it and become a mobile arsenal. --Sauron the Deceiver 02:15, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Reduces server load. Search X times or Search until "Z" is found? --Squashua 00:14, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep 'Nuff said. Madalex 17:53, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • KEEP No brainer. Page should offer # of searches <= remaining AP. --Pugh 04:56, 18 Nov 2005 (GMT)


Timestamp: 11:42, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: First Aid Skill Tree
Scope: Survivors
Description: This skill would be in the first aid skill tree. When used this skill removes infection from survivors. This skill does not restore HP and costs 1 Ap per use. This skill does not tell users who is infected so players must still rely on prognosis. This skill would be good since it enhances the use of that skill and removes the need too rely on a first aid kit.


  • Kill Sadly, this isn't a Hong Kong action theatre game; this isn't in-genre, much as I'd like it to be... -- Juntzing 15:43, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Spam See This Suggestion for a better version (IMHO) -Kitty soft 15:59, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep This sounds good and provides a cure for infection without restoring hp so it is not too overpowered as other suggestions.-- Boron 15:43, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Nice idea, but IMHO not appropriate to the genre (also I'm bnot sure if I should expect it to be in a seperate tree from first aid). --Madalex 22:34, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill, Kitty's right, there is a better version. and even THAT ideas being shot down--Spellbinder 02:40, 9 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Uhh... also, you know that acupuncture doesn't do anything remotely like curing infection in real life, right? --Biscuit 03:05, 9 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - OH GREAT IDEA! I think ill use it to cure an HIV infection! --AllStarZ 06:08, 9 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - First Aid Kits take care of infection even without having the First Aid Skill. Unnecesary Suggestion. --Squashua 00:21, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Supply Drop

Timestamp: 20:44, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type: Event
Scope: Search chances at a particular building for a limited time
Description: Once a month the powers that be (ie Kevan or an algorithm created by Kevan) would chose a building where items are normally found, and for an hour that building would have a 100% search chance, meaning you could grab as much as your AP and inventory space allows. This event, including time and Building would be posted in the new two weeks in advance. This provides a sort of incentive to swarm for both survivors and the zombies who want to eat them. This idea isn't a joke.


  • Keep I wrote it so of course I like the idea--Matthew-Stewart 20:44, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep in theory Flashpoints are good--they make for action and big battles. If the bonus only lasts for an hour, it might work balance-wise, although I'd suggest even shorter than that. The only problem is that the short window would mean everyone there would carefully plan to log on and start searching at the exact same time, and every time they did that the server would have to load a hugenormous namelist--I doubt it's doable.--'STER 21:54, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill I agree that it sounds like a good idea. However, the technical aspects involved probably make this unworkable in its present state. Perhaps it could be changed so that survivors in certain areas simply log in to discover they've been the recipients of a supply drop, meaning they now have, say, 10 more random items (weighted towards ammo/first aid kits) in their inventory. This reduces the server load and name display issues, but lacks the "create a flashpoint" advantage. Needs work, but good in theory. Bentley Foss 22:21, 7 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep in Theory I like the idea of this happening randomly and survivors being notified when they log in. Perhaps it could say something like, "X hours ago (determined by server time) you heard a helicopter fly low and drop supplies near the Y building." Then, a building within one square of the Y building (which one it is would be determined randomly) would have a much higher percentage of certain items being found there. No "flashpoint" problems, but also makes people search for the items rather than just giving them for free. This is realistic in-game because people outside Malton would presumably be dropping supplies, and it's realistic also that people wouldn't know exactly where the items were dropped, but would have a general idea. Ethan Frome 01:44, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Change I don't like the fact that any survivor on at a particular time gets so huge advantage- its artificial, and besides, survivors don't need another boost over the zombies. A simpler (and more realistic) change would be to have a new "building" occasionally appear in currently open areas called "supply dump", and give people who search in that area a big bonus to find certain item types- probably first aid kits. I say in an open area, because that's the only way it could be air dropped, and also because it keeps folks from baracading it, meaning it will always be accesable to noobs, and vulnerable to zeds. Swiers 08:24, 8 Nov 2005 (CMT)
  • Kill It could easily be abused if it was 100% it should be something like 80%. --Carfan7 03:22, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Re: Could people please remember that Change votes are not valid votes? Please change to Kill or Keep If you don't like it in it's current form, Kill is the correct vote. -- Odd Starter 03:40, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep, and i voted keep because i belive this idea has merit. now, if i didn't belive this idea had merit, i'd vote kill. and if i wanted to talk about all the wonderfull ways i wanted to change this and that, i'd go over to the Suggestions page, <--like this. --Spellbinder 06:07, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Its good, but needs work, the Suply dump thing sounds like a better version. --Alexei Yaruk 12:36, 8 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill/Change The idea is appealing to me, but basically the game would be unplayable if 3/4 of the player base tried to access the server at the time of the drop. I'm for Ethan Frome's version 100%, though. --Biscuit 02:56, 9 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - If it's never announced, and happens at odd intervals (maybe it's already implemented? :p). Also, it should only occur in warehouses.
  • Kill - Because these votes are for the proposed implementation; I like the idea (same as "defend building mission"), but I think this needs some sort of work and definately an advance announcement. --Squashua 00:22, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill I think this would simply kill the server during that particular timeframe as everybody tries to access it at the same time instead of more or less evenly distributed over the 24 hours of a day. Madalex 17:58, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Two weeks notice is way too much, though. I'd suggest a few hours. And only in open areas, not buildings. You can't air drop stuff inside a building. --Dickie Fux 05:00, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Personal tools