Suggestion:20070601 Rail Stations

	Closed
	This suggestion has finished voting and has been moved to Peer Rejected.

20070601 Rail Stations

Nalikill 20:55, 1 June 2007 (BST)

Suggestion type
Giving a use to rail stations

Suggestion scope
Very oddly equipped survivors

Suggestion description
Railway stations ought to be able to run, even if in a limited capacity. Therefore, I suggest that the following is added in: Any railway stations that are within ten squares of each other, powered, and have radio transmitters tuned to the same frequency, a survivor can travel between the two at a cost of 5 AP. This could theoretically create a rail network for survivors to travel quickly across the map, and a new strategically vital target for zombies.

Voting Section

Voting Rules

Votes must be numbered, justified, signed, and timestamped. # justification ~~~~ Votes that do not conform to the above may be struck by any user.

The only valid votes are Keep, Kill, Spam or Dupe. If you wish to abstain from voting, do not vote.

Keep Votes

1. I am allowed to vote for my own suggestion, and this would add a great new layer to the game dynamic. Nalikill 20:59, 1 June 2007 (BST)
2. Change - You know those old-timey rail car things that are basically a platform with a see-saw in the middle? Why can't we have like one or two of those around? -Zed Ed 21:22, 1 June 2007 (BST)
3. Keep - Two powered, radioed train stations, with the same radio frequences even, would take some work setting up. - BzAli 13:58, 3 June 2007 (BST)

   Come on, I just need 2 more votes for this to be neutral! Give me 50% and I'll be happy for a first suggestion, and more than willing to rework it.

4. i really didnt like the thing about the radio transmiter... makes no sense... but this suggestion is good in the overall. (5AP to move from stationA to stationB which are close enough) --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 19:52, 3 June 2007 (BST)

   Well, the idea is, you need to communicate between railroad stations so that trains don't hit each other. They'd need to be on the same frequency to hear each other... and otherwise, this would be easily, easily abused. If this gets neutralled, I'll try again without the "frequencies being the same" part. And if that fails, I'll try a "pushcart" suggestion whose only advantage is reduced IP hits. I want to give RR stations SOME SORT OF USE, no matter how limited of one it is. C'mon, just ONE MORE KEEP VOTE, PLEASE! Nalikill 19:02, 5 June 2007 (BST)

5. Keep I like it. --Slowwber 20:32, 8 June 2007 (BST)
6. Keep/Change The radio transmitter does make sense. Like: "Hey, I got some passengers comin' your way". That sort of thing. Besides, there would undoubtedly be a group that manages railway stations. Make it 12-15 squares. I really like the idea. --Secruss 01:23, 10 June 2007 (BST)

Kill Votes

1. Kill No. Just would not be practiacl or work.--Seventythree 23:07, 1 June 2007 (BST)
2. Kill - I on't like the idea of having trains working on a quarantined cities. Next thing would be corner stores. Also, the "same frequency" idea on radio tansmissors is a really bothersome thing, and easy to grief with too. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 02:43, 2 June 2007 (BST)
3. Kill - No free movement. If it was easier to travel via land (that is, the only advantage of traveling by rail would be safety from zombies and not having to click as much), it might be acceptable. However, it says in the Spam/Dupe votes section, stuff like this has been suggested before. --Saluton 17:00, 2 June 2007 (BST)

   If I may point out, it's fairly rare that RR stations will be close enough (within 10 squares) and far away enough (Past 5 squares) to make land travel less efficient. Nalikill 05:16, 3 June 2007 (BST)

4. Kill - doesn't do it for me for most of the reasons given.-- Vista  +1  19:57, 5 June 2007 (BST)
5. Kill The intent is for more efficient traveling, regardless of whether or not it actually works out that way there are some cases where it does. I kill your vote for you lacking ther ability to actually follow through at all before making it. You wrote it as they travel twice as far for half as much and that is what I'm killing it as. --karek 22:00, 6 June 2007 (BST)

   No, the cost isn't HALF. The cost is FIXED at 5 AP. So if any of you voted "kill" or "spam" for that reason, please, change/remove your vote. Nalikill 03:43, 7 June 2007 (BST)

   The fact that you can do it up to 10 blocks away makes it possible to do half, I'm not changing my vote because you think having it work over 2-3 squares for 5 AP is a balance to letting them move 10 squares for 5 AP, that is just stupid. People aren't idiots and won't waste the extra ap so in the end all this is is you either insulting everyone or allowing survivors to have a situation where they can move more than 5 squares in less than 5 AP. Unless you force them to travel from railroad to railroad your downside isn't a downside and doesn't actually exist. My vote stands.--karek 05:04, 7 June 2007 (BST)

   Let's take this to the discussion page. And please, be civil. You and I both know I meant this suggestion in good faith, and there's no need to namecall or act hot-headed. And it IS railroad to railroad. Read the suggestion Nalikill 22:03, 7 June 2007 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. I do believe there are some good railway suggestion in PR, if not there then Undecided or Rejected. I can't be bothered to look, so unless someone gives a link, this will remain a spam vote, and not a dupe. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 00:57, 2 June 2007 (BST) The original rail travel suggestion was found by the author and is located on the discussion page. This suggestion differs from that, so my reason for spam...I'm against any method of traveling that cost half the regular walking cost. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 15:08, 3 June 2007 (BST

   (Replying to Axehack) I'm sorry, but if you check it, it says WITHIN ten squares. Look at ANY suburb map and tell me how many rail stations are actually exactly 10 squares apart and are powered with radio transmitters. It's not half the cost; it's 5 AP fixed, meaning if it's closer than 5 squares, you lose AP. Nalikill 15:12, 3 June 2007 (BST)

   There you go. You just made me against this even more. You're forcing survivors to waste an AP by taking the train. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 15:49, 3 June 2007 (BST)

   But they get compensation: Fewer IP hits and they never touch the ground that's infected with zombies. Nalikill 17:34, 3 June 2007 (BST) Sorry. One RE per vote. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 17:55, 3 June 2007 (BST)

2. This has been suggested many times before. Please check the peer rejected and peer reviewed sections before making a suggestion. --_Ducis ^Dux_Sloth^Talk 01:37, 2 June 2007 (BST)
3. Dupe - As above --Sonofagun18 09:40, 2 June 2007 (BST)
4. Dupe - I do remember a good RR idea before, that was a while ago though. Or did I think of one and never post it? I'm so confused, someone hold me? No? Fine :P. A dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 17:18, 2 June 2007 (BST).
5. Spam - Frequently suggested. --^T 22:40, 2 June 2007 (BST)
6. Spam - The idea railway lines working during a zombie apocalypse is laughable. And I believe this is dead in the water. --Anotherpongo 17:40, 15 June 2007 (BST)