Suggestion:20070624 Weapon Modifications

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

20070624 Weapon Modifications

Konuso 13:31, 24 June 2007 (BST)

Suggestion type

Some weapons.

Suggestion scope

Survivors.

Suggestion description

Alright.. Some of the weapons are complete bs on accuracy. You're a cop who empties an entire pistol clip at a zombie and guess what.. not a single shot hits. I think the damage is satisfying for the pistol but for those who have had weapons training such as the cops/military should get a bonus to accuracy for all weapons. and the shot gun.. you're not going to use that like a pistol. Stand back and shoot no, you're going to get right up next to them and pull the trigger.. do that to yourself and see if you have a thirty percent chance of dodging shrapnel.. I just came to another thought.. they should have a guage that shows a range how far a zombie/target is. You can stand at probably mid range and have a 50-50 chance of hitting with a pistol or risk it run up close with a shotty and blast away while the zombie could get a chance at you for coming so close. As for the fire axe.. That is completely messed up. Again I like the damage but the accuracy is messed.. I can see a zombie leaning to the side missing maybe a few swings but we're not fighting ninja zombies! Think of a tree or a stationary target.. are you going to miss 9 out of 10 times? We're talking about slow shambling zombies. Not ninja zombies.. Not Matrix zombies.. Near stationary targets. They need to rethink their targeting percents.

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

Kill Votes

1. Kill - sorry, but current percentages are fine and don't need tweaking --Duke Garland_T^{LCD SSZ} 14:21, 24 June 2007 (BST)
2. Kill - same as Garland. Anything else will piss off zombie players. Glenstone 14:43, 24 June 2007 (BST)

   Re: See thing is Im a surivivor and it pisses me off to spend 10 ap to find one clip that hits one shot out of six. 16 ap for 5 damage if you're lucky.. Thats fair. Edit. Or better yet! Start going with your fist. Even tho they are just shambling along apparently they can dodge like hell! 9 swings out of 10 are likely to miss! Oh! You landed one! Woo! One damage! --Konuso 15:22, 24 June 2007 (BST)

3. Kill For realism's sake, your argument has merit. For the game balance's sake, it does not. If the game was totally true to most original zombie movies, the only way a zombie will munch some brains is if the survivor is a moron. In this game, the survivors are all well prepared and from an RP standpoint would have a great chance at wiping zombies out entirely.Some things have to bend, and game balance is more important. --Magentaine 15:34, 24 June 2007 (BST)
4. Kill - This is a simple game, so keep it simple. Getting in close would have no downside, seeing as 95% of "combat" is one sided, while the target is off-line. The damage and accuracy isn't realistic, but if it were it wouldn't be a very fun game. I could kill you with one pistol shot... meh, where's the challenge in that? -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 15:45, 24 June 2007 (BST)

   Re: You spend one day gathering ammo which is about four clips no shot gun. Go out find one lone zombie by himself full health lets say 30% around 2 shots a clip actually hit. 40 damage.. for two full days work and didnt kill a single zombie... wow.. now to run back and wait another day for more ammo if you dont run out of ap first. Im not saying this is the only up that has to be made. If things do turn south and start getting bad could always up the zombie health a bit. After all dead from the neck down should be able to take more damage.

   You forgot to sign. Yeah, I know, being a newbie at any game pretty much sucks until you get a couple of levels. Zombies have the same problem. But a game has to be a challenge. I've found healing to be the best way to level up a new survivor. FAK's are 100% to hit, once you find them and have diagnosis (even before diagnosis, just go out on the street and heal those newbies that are getting locked out of buildings) -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 07:55, 25 June 2007 (BST)

5. Kill - This is ALMOST a dupe of the one i suggested, but i will let it slide, sicne mine kinda involved shooting from a RANGE. Anways, i'm all for helping newbs, but this is not it: it just complicates things more. --Bruce Torbaron 16:44, 24 June 2007 (BST)
6. Kill - I agree with all of the above Kill votes. Your realism standpoint does have merit, but there has to be game balance to keep playing either side fun. --Ryiis 16:56, 24 June 2007 (BST)
7. Kill -- The Random Number Generator is thy friend. What it taketh away it doth also give. Monkey with it not. -- Firemanrik 17:14, 24 June 2007 (BST)
8. Kill - Well, the way you proposed the suggestion sounds like one big complaint, but thats not why I voted kill. If you think about it, no one would be able to think or aim straight with tons of zombies milling about them anyway. And you didn't give any base changes. All you did was complain, without offering a solution to the problem. Maybe if you actually through some percentages in with your complaint, it wouldn't have been so bad.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 17:40, 24 June 2007 (BST)
9. Kill - Big, fat kill for this one. Not only does your 'suggestion' contain very little with regard to how the issues raised should be changed, it is also completely one sided and would unbalance the game to a huge degree. It is my opinion that you should try to play as a zombie before you start to make suggestions about the game. The game is supposed to be balanced so that there is no advantage to playing as either survivor or zombie. The contents of this suggestion would basically make it impossible to play as a zombie, since survivors would be able to do high amounts of damage with 50AP, whereas zombie players would have the same. unchanged attack probabilities. Before you say, "Well, that's not my problem, I'm a survivor!", without anyone playing as a zombie you wouldn't have much fun now would you...(PS. sorry I forgot to sign!) - Werewolf32 18:25, 25 June 2007 (BST)
10. Kill I like the fighting the way it is. Simple. There's room for maybe one additional gun ( a rifle or something) That's it.--Seventythree 19:45, 24 June 2007 (BST)
11. Kill - Trenchcoater? No way. --User:Axe27/Sig 20:13, 24 June 2007 (BST)
12. Kill- Same as kill 9. At this rate zombies will go back on strike. I may be human but I want zombies to have a fair and fun time on the game.--Dragon fang 22:39, 24 June 2007 (BST)
13. Change - It's a good idea, except that your proposal doesn't state any exact figures, nor does it up the accuracy of zombies, I agree that it is a bit unrealistic for all 6 shots to miss, but if this is going to be implemented, then the accuracy of zeds will also have to be increased, otherwise, count this as a kill. -- EchelonThree 12:16, 25 June 2007 (BST)
14. Kill - As boxy. --^T 16:29, 25 June 2007 (BST)
15. Kill Just as logically, my zombie should be able to dismember you in a single blow and then you should be forced to play as a zombie forever. --Secruss 18:37, 25 June 2007 (BST)
16. Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you actually suggesting anything, or just complaining about your character's fear-addled aiming? And besides, we're looking for believability, not realism. Realism is a futile point when we've got a complete cycle of immortality within this closed ecosystem. (meaning, people die, but not here, which is unrealistic) Kalir FTW! _{Z/S UD Potato Words} 21:55, 25 June 2007 (BST)
17. Kill - as Zombie slay3r.-- Vista  +1  20:32, 28 June 2007 (BST)
18. Kill - Why am I bothering to vote on this killed suggestion? Because it's yet another poorly thought out suggestion from someone frustrated with a game they don't fully appreciate. I am tired of those. armareum 20:52, 29 June 2007 (BST)
19. Kill I agree that the current accuracy is very unrealistic and stupid. But if we increase the accuracy too much like that, it wouldn't be fair. --RayHanley 09:48, 8 July 2007 (BST)
20. Above and up. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 22:36, 8 July 2007 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam Who even bother to vote, you ask? Because I'm surprised noone has yet pointed out that this is not a suggestion as such, more a loose idea! What increases to hit? Exactly how is this range-thingie going to work? Unfinished, I tell you, and that means spammy. - BzAli 21:56, 4 July 2007 (BST)
2. Spam - Painful to read. If you don't take the effort to make it easy to read/understand, why bother suggesting it? --Saluton 02:26, 8 July 2007 (BST)