Talk:Operation band-aid: Difference between revisions
From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Lucas Black (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
: For the record, I'm the guy that started the 'S.O.S.' movement. I may not have been clear, but I was not asking or expecting a major rule change in favor of survivors - I felt that a number of minor rule changes in favor of Z's had unbalanced the game and just wanted a couple of tweaks back into survivor's favor. Right around the time I started it up, the search rates seem to have changed - this doesn't seem to have been followed by any announcement and as I was not searching, I didn't notice it. I see that the survivor numbers are rising again - perhaps that's all that is needed to bring the game back into balance, though I think that ruin should have a cutoff point - no more than 25AP to fix a building perhaps. I don't at all think the game should be easy for survivors and never spend much time in green 'burbs other than to run there sometimes for supply runs. I prefer to be on the front lines. I think the biggest thing that survivors can do is get over this idea that there is something wrong with a combat revive. Z's use every single rule they can for max advantage - why should we hold back? If they don't want a combat revive, let them get brainrot and stay out of NT buildings. Z's need to get over themselves if they get offended by a combat revive - especially as so many rotters think it's totally all right to hang out in revive points. I suspect with needles being easier to find, there is going to be a new propaganda campaign by Z's to make people feel bad about Combat Revives. Don't fall for it - and don't be intimidated by their threats to go on PK or GK sprees. So what? All that means is that they'll have to spend time killing you as a human not banging on barricades as a zombie. [[User:LucasBlack|LucasBlack]] 21:05, 6 December 2008 (EST). | : For the record, I'm the guy that started the 'S.O.S.' movement. I may not have been clear, but I was not asking or expecting a major rule change in favor of survivors - I felt that a number of minor rule changes in favor of Z's had unbalanced the game and just wanted a couple of tweaks back into survivor's favor. Right around the time I started it up, the search rates seem to have changed - this doesn't seem to have been followed by any announcement and as I was not searching, I didn't notice it. I see that the survivor numbers are rising again - perhaps that's all that is needed to bring the game back into balance, though I think that ruin should have a cutoff point - no more than 25AP to fix a building perhaps. I don't at all think the game should be easy for survivors and never spend much time in green 'burbs other than to run there sometimes for supply runs. I prefer to be on the front lines. I think the biggest thing that survivors can do is get over this idea that there is something wrong with a combat revive. Z's use every single rule they can for max advantage - why should we hold back? If they don't want a combat revive, let them get brainrot and stay out of NT buildings. Z's need to get over themselves if they get offended by a combat revive - especially as so many rotters think it's totally all right to hang out in revive points. I suspect with needles being easier to find, there is going to be a new propaganda campaign by Z's to make people feel bad about Combat Revives. Don't fall for it - and don't be intimidated by their threats to go on PK or GK sprees. So what? All that means is that they'll have to spend time killing you as a human not banging on barricades as a zombie. [[User:LucasBlack|LucasBlack]] 21:05, 6 December 2008 (EST). | ||
::Hey LucasBlack! For the record, I don't have any problems with S.O.S. I think you've done a great job spreading the word and mobilizing everybody. I guess Kevan responded with some unannounced changes, so good on ya' mate. | |||
::Despite the tweaks, I still think there are some fundamental problems (metaphysical angst, if you will) with the way survivors tend to operate. Without any relatively agreed upon endgame (even if that endgame meant periods of peace with major zed groups), or a strategy to enable such a thing, the game loses its zest. Where is our mall tour? Where is our March of the New Flesh? This is why I've thoroughly enjoyed the last few weeks of play. Total ruination is looming over us! | |||
::I agree with you very much about combat revives. It amazes me how pissy some zeds get aout CR. As if I enjoy being eaten and feasted upon:) I think you might have some good input as to how to make effective mobile CR teams, so please let us know what you think. | |||
[[User:Capsid|Capsid]] 21:56, 6 December 2008 (UTC) | [[User:Capsid|Capsid]] 21:56, 6 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 01:26, 7 December 2008
Hi all! I hope there is at least one other person that feels the way I do about this S.O.S. stuff :p Please help me format the page if you got leet wiki skills:)
- For the record, I'm the guy that started the 'S.O.S.' movement. I may not have been clear, but I was not asking or expecting a major rule change in favor of survivors - I felt that a number of minor rule changes in favor of Z's had unbalanced the game and just wanted a couple of tweaks back into survivor's favor. Right around the time I started it up, the search rates seem to have changed - this doesn't seem to have been followed by any announcement and as I was not searching, I didn't notice it. I see that the survivor numbers are rising again - perhaps that's all that is needed to bring the game back into balance, though I think that ruin should have a cutoff point - no more than 25AP to fix a building perhaps. I don't at all think the game should be easy for survivors and never spend much time in green 'burbs other than to run there sometimes for supply runs. I prefer to be on the front lines. I think the biggest thing that survivors can do is get over this idea that there is something wrong with a combat revive. Z's use every single rule they can for max advantage - why should we hold back? If they don't want a combat revive, let them get brainrot and stay out of NT buildings. Z's need to get over themselves if they get offended by a combat revive - especially as so many rotters think it's totally all right to hang out in revive points. I suspect with needles being easier to find, there is going to be a new propaganda campaign by Z's to make people feel bad about Combat Revives. Don't fall for it - and don't be intimidated by their threats to go on PK or GK sprees. So what? All that means is that they'll have to spend time killing you as a human not banging on barricades as a zombie. LucasBlack 21:05, 6 December 2008 (EST).
- Hey LucasBlack! For the record, I don't have any problems with S.O.S. I think you've done a great job spreading the word and mobilizing everybody. I guess Kevan responded with some unannounced changes, so good on ya' mate.
- Despite the tweaks, I still think there are some fundamental problems (metaphysical angst, if you will) with the way survivors tend to operate. Without any relatively agreed upon endgame (even if that endgame meant periods of peace with major zed groups), or a strategy to enable such a thing, the game loses its zest. Where is our mall tour? Where is our March of the New Flesh? This is why I've thoroughly enjoyed the last few weeks of play. Total ruination is looming over us!
- I agree with you very much about combat revives. It amazes me how pissy some zeds get aout CR. As if I enjoy being eaten and feasted upon:) I think you might have some good input as to how to make effective mobile CR teams, so please let us know what you think.
Capsid 21:56, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
I like it. :) (But "high cost" of combat revives? Now that syringes have gone back to being a dime a dozen, they've become rather cheap again). --Jen 23:46, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
