Suggestion:20070616 Fort Revision: dumping bodies over walls

	Closed
	This suggestion has finished voting and has been moved to Undecided Suggestions.

20070616 Fort Revision: dumping bodies over walls

21:06, 16 June 2007 (BST)

Suggestion type
location revision

Suggestion scope
forts

Suggestion description
Introduction: Many people seem frustrated that dead bodies can not be moved outside the fort walls. This suggestion aims to remedy that without intruding any mechanic that displaces bodies from the "block" they currently occupy. It does so via a logical extension of the current "dump body" mechanic plus a slight revision to the fort's "structure".

Details: When standing outside and next to dead bodies in any location inside fort walls, a survivor would have the option to "carry body to top of fort wall and dump it over: 10AP". As implied, this costs 10 AP, and it result in the body being moved to a new location type (created via this suggestion). Similarly, zombies and survivors standing in outdoor locations that are inside the fort walls would be able to jump from the walls (exactly as from tall building), landing in the same new location type as dumped bodies. This would reduce a survivor to 0 HP (killing them) but does no damage to a zombie.

This new location type is described as "At the base of the fort walls, outside the fort." For each fort, there exist 8 such locations, one for each fort block excluding the gatehouse. The gatehouse is considered (for purposes of this discussion) to be outside the fort. These are actually new locations (they do not currently exist in the game) but there is no change to the map, and they do not displace any existing locations.

From these 8 new locations, you can ONLY move to locations that are considered outside of the fort. Similarly, these 8 new locations can be reached by moving into them from locations outside the fort, or via the dump body / jumping mechanism described above. You could NOT move from one of these 8 new locations to another one. If a character was in one of these 8 new locations and tried to move in an illegal manner, they would get a message saying something like "Your path is blocked by the forts perimeter of barbed wire and earthworks. You will need to move to a less obstructed area before going any further."

The resulting movement limitations are easier to see with the help of the map below (please excuse the mis-spelling):

The Blocks with red slashes through them would be the ones that you could dump bodies into, landing them "at the base of the fort walls, outside the fort" - but still in that block! You could also move into these block from any location outside the fort, but would find yourself "at the Base of the fort walls, outside the fort" if you did so. Note that the 9th, unslashed block of the fort (the gatehouse) already allows you to dump bodies outside the fort walls, and can already be moved into from outside the fort; thus, it requires no revision, and continues to function exactly as current. Similalry, all locations inside the fort continue to function as current, with the minor changes noted above in regards to dumping bodies / jumping from the walls.

Conclusion: I think this change would help revive intrest in forts by making them somewhat more defensible, without introducing a mechanic that moves bodies from one block to another, and also without circumventing the need to move around forts when traveling.

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. Keep - I was going to suggest something similar, but this is a much better way of doing it. Forts are horribly biased in favour of zombies at the moment, and this will level the playing field. I want to see them become a worthwhile target for both sides. --IMacThere4iAm 23:06, 16 June 2007 (BST)
2. Keep - Author's vote. 23:40, 16 June 2007 (BST)
3. Keep - I'd prefer for zombies to be killed if jumping from the perimeter walls, but that's not a major point. - BzAli 04:51, 17 June 2007 (BST)

   There's a reason zombies don't die when jumping from buildings (or the walls in this case); they would then stand up again (for 1 AP) at full health. Having them NOT die keeps them from using "suicide" as a form of regeneration. 12:45, 17 June 2007 (BST)

4. Keep - I'd also prefer zombies to be, if not killed, then at least damaged when jumping off walls. - Shusamchen 10:37 17 June 2007 (GMT +1)
5. Keep - While Secruss' idea of dumping bodies outside the gatehouse is good. This idea sounds good too. --Sonofagun18 11:29, 17 June 2007 (BST)
6. Keep This makes a lot of sense and could potentialy create amazing pitched battles. ( I know you cant comment on other suggestions, but if this was coupled with a new item found only in forts, imagine the carnage!) It is complex, yes but only because if it wasn't people would be complaining that it is too vauge to vote on. Gets my vote.--Seventythree 11:40, 17 June 2007 (BST)
7. Keep - Forts are useless wihout it. Just remember that the fort's perimeter is, in fact, a wall, not barbed wire and earthworks as your failure message suggests. --Bobtheferret2004 14:01, 17 June 2007 (BST)

   My thinking was that there were high walls, with barbed wire (to keep pedestrians from assulting the walls with ladders) and anti-vehicle (to stop ramming / bombing / mobile ladder assaults) earthworks outside the walls. They may have designed the fort with just a wall originally, but they would have wanted that stuff once the zombie epidemic hit. 16:05, 17 June 2007 (BST)

8. Keep - Forts are only useful to zombies at the moment. This suggestion could turn that idiocy around. --Hhal 23:12, 17 June 2007 (BST)
9. Keep - I finally made it to a fort after close to 9 months or so of playing this game. What I saw when I got there was kinda stupid. I found out that the forts really are zombie biased. This would make holding these useless places easier.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 01:29, 18 June 2007 (BST)
10. Keep - Maybe not the best way to change forts, but hopefully Kevan takes notice and changes them in someway. Now it's just like a horibble zombie trap that captures zombies and refuses to let them go. Remember - if the gatehouse is caded, zombies inside can't get out either. Helps both sides. Not in a an equal way, but helps. Cannywizard 20:40, 18 June 2007 (BST)
11. Keep - The uncrossable walls of forts increase the distance to nearby resource points, making the forts tactically weak. This should even that out, paving the way for viable fort fights. --Toejam 22:56, 18 June 2007 (BST)
12. Keep - Forts are SLOWLY changing into the fortresses they need to be! :) --Bruce Torbaron 02:21, 20 June 2007 (BST)
13. Keep - I think we really need this as forts are pretty useless now. --Coco1993 01:55, 27 June 2007 (BST)
14. Keep - This looks like it will fix the forts if it's ever implemented. --Rodwy 11:14, 29 June 2007 (BST)

Kill Votes

1. No - Forts aren't meant to be defended against by zombies, forts are meant to keep the people inside and the people outside seperate, thus high walls that can't be climbed makes sense. --karek 22:13, 16 June 2007 (BST)

   The walls can be "climbed" only from the inside; this reasonably assumes wall-top access from the fort interior via fire escapes on fort interior buildings adjacent to the wall, walkways to sniper perches along the wall interior, and so on. The suggestion still ensures that you can't exit the fort without either being dead / committing suicide, or going through the gatehouse. And no matter what, the suggestion ensures you can't enter any locations inside the fort except by the gatehouse.
   Indeed, the main difference between a fort and a prison is that prison walls can't be climbed from the inside. What we have right now is a prison, more than a fort. ... 23:03, 16 June 2007 (BST)

2. Kill Needlessly complex. I am one of the Creedy Guerilla Raiders and I still believe that the forts are the only part of the game which is broken towards zombies. Why not just dump the bodies outside the gatehouse every time? Once again, needlessly complex. --Secruss 23:13, 16 June 2007 (BST)
3. Kill' - As Secruss. --User:Axe27/Sig 23:21, 16 June 2007 (BST)
4. Change I beleive that dumping bodies out of forts is a necessary feature, but I do think your way is needlessly complex. I think it should be simple; you can already dump bodies outside the gatehouse for the regular 1 ap cost, so I think if your in one of the five fort blocks only one space from the gatehouse it should cost 2 ap to put you in the gatehouse and the body outside the gatehouse. With the three buildings two spaces away from the gatehouse, it should take three ap to move your own character to the gatehouse and the body outside. All other rules applying to forts should remain the same, and of course bodies must be dumped out of fort buildings before they can be dumped from the fort itself. If you revise your suggestion to match this post, I'll vote Keep otherwise I'll suggest it myself.--Wee Sonny MacGregor 02:25, 17 June 2007 (BST)

   Such revision would go against the basic premise of this suggestion, which is that bodies should not be moved from one block to another. Imagine being a new player on a slow connection, loading up maybe one fresh window a minute. If you got killed in the NE corner of Perryn and then dumped from the gatehouse in between fresh page views, it would be VERY confusing. I'd also argue your AP costs are to low; moving yourself AND another person to a new block should cost more than 1 AP, if its ever allowed. 12:51, 17 June 2007 (BST)

5. Kill - overcomplicated --Duke Garland_T^{LCD SSZ} 09:23, 17 June 2007 (BST)
6. Kill Survivors don't need another two malls. Slayerofmuffins 14:10, 17 June 2007 (BST)
7. Kill Why not just throw them into that next square? Way too complicated and stupid. --Magentaine 06:00, 20 June 2007 (BST)
8. Kill - Funt's solution is better.-- Vista  +1  19:20, 28 June 2007 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Dupe - It's in PR, but I can't be bother to look for it. And I also remember that the PR one was Funt Solo's suggestion, I believe... --Axe Hack Talk 14:44, 17 June 2007 (BST)

   It would seem you are referring to this peer reviewed suggestion by Funt Solo. That suggestion and this one are quite different; the one by Funt is a "drag bodies" type suggestion that moves dead bodies to a new block, in this case from any fort interior location to outside the gates. My suggestion, on the other hand, is designed so that you avoid the need to allow one person moving another persons character to a new block, by instead moving them to a third location type ("at the base of the fort walls, outside the fort") to be created in certain fort blocks
   Also, "For a Dupe vote to be valid, a link must be provided to the original suggestion.". 15:55, 17 June 2007 (BST)

   Note - Users are allowed to vote dupe without link, But the effects only kick in when a link is provided. So if users vote dupe without link they are gambling on that somebody else will later provide it. If not, the vote is simply wasted.-- Vista  +1  19:26, 28 June 2007 (BST)

2. semi-dupe modified for the worse -Have you noticed what actuall gameplay effects staying in the same square will have? 1-4 AP moving to the place where funt solo's suggestion would have sent you anyway. The only other real difference (apart from being needlessly complicated) is doubled AP cost for the survivors to do this. --AlexanderRM 17:17, 22 June 2007 (BST)

   You assume the dumped body, once it stands up as a zombie, will even want to move to the gatehouse. That's not always the case. And I'd argue that not having your character "teleport" (from your perspective) to a new block after you die is more than a flavor difference. Yes, this is a more complex way to achieve the same thing, but it doesn't violate any of the assumptions the game leads players to make- one of which is "you won't move to a new block without making yourself do so". I'm pretty sure I voted "keep" on Funts suggestion, but this does offer a good degree of improvement and is substantially different in the "feel" to the player. _. ^. _. 13:43, 29 June 2007 (BST)