Suggestion:20070629 Necrotic Bite
From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
|
Closed |
| This suggestion has finished voting and has been moved to Undecided Suggestions. |
20070629 Necrotic Bite
armareum 01:00, 30 June 2007 (BST)
Suggestion type
New Skill
Suggestion scope
Zombies
Suggestion description
This is a suggestion for a more powerful infection caused by zombies.
Prerequisites:
Infectious Bite
Tangling Grasp*
*see below for more details
Description and Effect
- Necrotic Bite can be purchased by zombies for 100 XP after purchasing Infectious Bite. "Some zombies now have flesh eating bacteria in their mouths, which gets into a bite wound and eats away at the the survivors flesh."
- To inflict a Necrotic Bite, a zombie has to have both Necrotic Bite and Tangling Grasp. A zombie must first successfully grab the target, and then inflict a successful bite. This amounts to an maximum average success rate of 20% after 2 AP. A Normal Infection has a maximum average success rate of 40% (after also successfully grasping a survivor).
- A Necrotic Infection works in the same way as a Normal Infection, except that it can only be cured by a another survivor who has the Surgery skill. Being in a powered hospital or building is not required.
- FAKs applied by a survivor without the Surgery skill, or the player themselves, restore HP but do not cure the Necrotic Infection.
- Upon death, a survivor with a Necrotic Infection will have the infection downgraded to a Normal Infection. Ie. Upon revive, the survivor will only have a Normal Infection that can be cured in the familiar way - with a FAK.
- If a zombie with the Necrotic Bite skill bites a survivor without having grabbed them first, then the infection caused is a Normal Infection.
- A Necrotic Infection can be given to a survivor who already has a Normal Infection.
- A Necrotic Infection cannot be downgraded to a Normal Infection, except where the survivor dies.
- Zombies with Scent Blood can distinguish survivors who have a Necrotic Infection from survivors with a Normal Infection, or survivors with no infection.
- Revivification syringes DO NOT cure the Necrotic Infection. Although a Necrotic Infection does not return after revivification, this is because a zombie is completely dead flesh, and the infection naturally dies out in the flesh of the undead zombie. The bacteria persists in the mouth of appropriately skilled zombies because of the amount of survivor flesh they've been eating - feeding the bacteria present.
- A Necrotic Infection cannot be given to a zombie (infections have no effect on zombies, and a Necrotic Infection will not appear in a revived zombie)
Justification
In most zombie movies, if a person gets bitten they will eventually turn into a zombie. It is possible to sustain life, but in the end, they will die.
The current Infectious Bite is a low-powered skill. If a survivor has their HP reduced they will use a FAK to restore their HP regardless of whether they are infected or not. Having an infection that is removed with the application of just one FAK means that survivors will can one FAK on them to heal an infection, so that they can use their AP to achieve what they wanted to that day ('cade, shoot zeds, etc) and then go sit somewhere to let another survivor patch them up.
This new skill makes it more imperative for survivors to cooperate, places more value on survivors who have the Surgery skill, and encourages all survivors to buy even just the First Aid Skill, to get the extra 5 HP benefit. (Currently, many survivors will avoid buying First Aid, in order to maximise the XP they can gain from healing other survivors.)
Additional Notes
Please note that just because Boosts to Zombie Bites appears on the Frequently Suggested page, this does not automatically mean this is spam. From the page: "This isn't to say that is is impossible to come up with a workable variant of these broad ideas... but coming up with one, fixing the innate flaws of the concept, and getting it past an unfriendly jury just isn't very likely." This suggestion doesn't affect AP or HP in a different way than a Normal Infection does - it just makes removing the infection harder.
Voting Section
| Voting Rules |
Votes must be numbered, justified, signed, and timestamped.
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
- Keep - Not overpowered, adds an incentive for survivor co-operation. What's not to like? Oh, and the unsigned vote below? 1) This suggeston is about modifying the infection, not the bite 2) THe frequently suggested list is merely a guideline, If a suggestion breaks the frequently suggested guidelines it does'nt automaticlay get the spam vore as it is not automaticaly a bad suggestion. There is an exeption to every rule.--Seventythree 01:36, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- Keep - Reminds me of something I hate, co-op, but I like the suggestion. --JudeMaverick Talk +1 Jobs 01:40, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- Keep - Oooooo a new zombie toy!-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 02:33, 30 June 2007 (BST)
Keep - interesting --Duke GarlandTLCD SSZ 07:41, 30 June 2007 (BST)Vista's comments in Spam are so convincing --Duke GarlandTLCD SSZ 07:59, 2 July 2007 (BST)
- Keep - Most interesting --Midianian 09:41, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- Change - Improving bite is good, giving purpose to Surgery is good, but a few things are of issue. The requiring of two skill trees to get one skill is considered a no no, it's a bad thing and you don't do it. The healing of themselves, survivors better be able to heal themselves otherwise the skill makes little sense, just require them to be in a hospital, not powered, but in a hospital. And you might want to consider dropping the it becomes normal infection thing.--karek 12:41, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- It only becomes a normal infection if they die and are revived again. This is what happens at the moment if a survivor dies with infection. Do you mean lose it to make it less powerful - so that zombies have to choose between the Normal or Necrotic Infection?
And make them heal only in a hospital, as long as it's not ransacked? Sounds viable, however that would mean is work similar to reviving rotters (needing the equipment only found in that building. I fear that if it was that specialist that you couldn't take it with you (and we can carry more than a few gennys, remember) there'd be calls to make it used only with Surgery Skill (even *with* self heals allowed). 'arm. 04:29, 4 July 2007 (BST)- I'm saying drop the normal infection effect, they give different tactical advantages and choosing between them should be the zombies choice and it is possibly overpowered by having both. Survivors need to be able to heal themselves, it would be absurd if they couldn't. And the losing of the powered hospital thing is for practicality. It is kinda hard to keep a hospital powered if someone wants it unpowered and since this ability would end up being used with malice and the intent to cause damage you need to lessen the damage, if a zombie is in a hospital spreading infections odds are there is no generator. Reviving rotters and healing infection are completely different areas and levels of gameplay, so yeah, no powered hospitals, normal self healing, and curing the infection in a nonransacked hospital would, in my view, help this suggestion a lot.--karek 09:12, 4 July 2007 (BST)
- It only becomes a normal infection if they die and are revived again. This is what happens at the moment if a survivor dies with infection. Do you mean lose it to make it less powerful - so that zombies have to choose between the Normal or Necrotic Infection?
- Keep - Makes a lone zombie something to worry about, and adds a tactical element to arranging your defences against a horde, and makes your group's doctor a resource to be defended to the hilt. Even "multiply it by a million" doesn't seem to overpower things compared to normal infection, where the supply of FAKs becomes the limiting factor. --Pestilent Bob 15:26, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- Keep - I'll be honest--I'm keeping because this makes a science skill more important. --Magentaine 15:36, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- Keep - Promotes co-op reminds you that there are other players out there. But I guess a tweak that it'd be 75% to infect a survivor with the necrotic bite and 25% that it'll be just a normal infection...because transfer of a viable colony isn't always 100% --Packer 17:32, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- Keep - Very good suggestion. --Nikitis 19:39, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- Kill......the harmanz!!' - Funtimes!! I likie this. --Bruce Torbaron 19:54, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- Keep - One of the best suggestions I've seen. --wooty 19:59, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- Keep - An excelent suggestion indeed. I would like to see a separate item for curing it other than a FAK though, maybe Necrotech pills or something! - Werewolf32 20:23, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- Keep/Change - I definitely like the idea. I'm not sure about the two abilities for one. I would also consider adding the Necrotech Pills, but at a very very low search rate. --Druuuuu 21:06, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- Keep - I like this idea a lot. -- Mordac the Refuser 07:52, 1 July 2007 (BST)
- Keep -- Not quite as powerful as I'd like, but one can't have everything, I suppose. --Firemanrik 12:31, 1 July 2007 (BST)
- Keep - Good suggestion. Some real thinking has gone into this one. --Ducis DuxSlothTalk 04:45, 4 July 2007 (BST)
- Keep - Sure, I like it. --Bassander 09:41, 10 July 2007 (BST)
Kill Votes
- Kill - First, you've done a great job on this suggestion, and I commend you for it. However, I still don't like it. I feel it may end up being to harsh on newbie survivors - arranging heals or revives, etc.. As well, making it so it has to be cured by another survivor seems a little rough too. If all you needed was the surgery skill, well that might be fine... but I see what you are trying to accomplish, and allowing 'self-heals' is what this suggestion is seemingly trying to avoid. However, I still feel I must dissent. --Ryiis 09:18, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- Reply posted on discussion page. armareum 12:27, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- Kill - I like the general idea, but having it cured by ANOTHER survivor? To me, that's a little harsh, why couldn't they heal it themselves with the surgery skill? I do like the science skills being needed though. Having another survivor heal you EVERY TIME is just bleh, and I think this could encourage zerg abuse. (Oh, I'll just have my zerg heal me! No problem!) Vault 16:29, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- The reason they can't heal themselves is because that is the reason that the current infection is so low powered. If you make it that you can heal yourself, but only with the Surgery Skill, then you make life harder for newbies, but just as easy for max-out players. How would that be balanced?
And there are already anti-zerg countermeasures in place that apply to using FAKs. What makes you think that they wouldn't apply in this case also? armareum 16:50, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- The reason they can't heal themselves is because that is the reason that the current infection is so low powered. If you make it that you can heal yourself, but only with the Surgery Skill, then you make life harder for newbies, but just as easy for max-out players. How would that be balanced?
- Kill The Idea's cool but for Humans and Zombies who bite Pkers it sucks. To overpowering for zombies I mean zombies are already dead they dont care if they die since they dont carry anything. All zombies have to do to get Xp is shamble around find lvl 1's which isnt hard these days to find and bite and kill these trapped lvl 1's one for XP. On top of Getting combat revived and being able to be Pker Death Cultists I say zombies have it pretty good. Also think about the Pker class here if we get bitten whos gonna cure us ? we Pkers are like the lowest on Malton Society lower than zombies so if a zombie bites a Pker well never get our infections cured and we would just keep dying. We Pkers are self Sufficent only relying on ourselves and we need to be able to cure our selfs with FAKS and go and hide --Johnny Reb 20:49, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- Kill - vote changed after reading Vista's comments --Duke GarlandTLCD SSZ 07:59, 2 July 2007 (BST)
- Kill - For several reasons, first- wiki says that improvements to bites are unnecessary, and I agree. Infection now is fine. Not everyone ALWAYS carries a FAK, and SMART survivors would just set up a new system to deal with this new threat. Then in 3-6 months, you'd be here again, whining that Necrotic Bite is overpowered- and look at this. [1] A human's mouth is about as disease ridden while alive as it's EVER going to be, making it nonsensical for RP reasons as well Nalikill 11:33, 3 July 2007 (BST)
- In that case, perhaps you'd be happier with a permanent change to the current bite, rather than new skill with new 'powers'. Or perhaps all bites should be infectious without a skill, hmm? Come on, a zombie is dead - so no antibiotic saliva and no immune system to keep the mouth in check. I note your link said nothing about the cleanliness of dead or zombie mouths!
Oh wait, let's look at the example of living Komodo dragons - creatures who's bite contains virulent bacteria. So for RP reasons, this can be included now. (thanks to Seventythree for telling me this on the Talk:Suggestions page. 'arm. 20:26, 3 July 2007 (BST)
- In that case, perhaps you'd be happier with a permanent change to the current bite, rather than new skill with new 'powers'. Or perhaps all bites should be infectious without a skill, hmm? Come on, a zombie is dead - so no antibiotic saliva and no immune system to keep the mouth in check. I note your link said nothing about the cleanliness of dead or zombie mouths!
- Kill - Vista convinced me. - BzAli 21:22, 5 July 2007 (BST)
Spam/Dupe Votes
- Spam - The frequently suggested page says no boosts to zombie bites, as they already do 4 things. Vault 01:15, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- SPAM -THIS SUGGESTION WOULD MAKE AN SUCCESSFUL INFECTION AN AUTOMATIC KILL IN UNDERPOPULATED SUBURBS This a extremely bad suggestion and I'm bemused why people don't seem to pick up on this. This terribly broken suggestion transforms what is meant as a simple flavor addition to bite into a unstoppable attack. A successful bite attack would cause unparalleled damage to the survivor without any comparable investment by the zombie.
- An infection is not an attack in itself, it is a side-effect of the bite attack, which is already quite potent. It features a 1.2HP/AP damage similar to an axe attack plus it has an infection and healing side-effect, making it a far superior secondary attack compared to the survivors axe.
- The limited damage current infection does is offset by the non-existant AP cost to the zombie. People are forced to take damage or spend AP's healing themselves without any further action of the zombie. Increasing the damage and AP's infection would be similar to simply lowering the maximum AP and HP of survivors in balance terms as there is no balancing cost on the other side.
- All other cooperation mechanics in game reward, the most you can do with this mechanic is postpone punishment. Groan and drag increased the positive rewards on one side for playing a certain way, this would force people to play a certain way simply to stay on the same level. It carries a negative incentive. negative incentives reduce the fun in gaming. See the headshot mechanic for comparison.
- the information needed for the cooperation is withheld There is no way to see who has the infection and who doesn't. It's very strange to make "teamwork" the solution without giving any way for people to know who is actually in need. The only way for people to cure this is starting to heal random people and hoping that they have the bad version. There would be no tactical possibilities and the teamwork would depend on uncoordinated random actions.
- this would be an automatic kill or a day wasted in lowly populated suburbs As this is depended on other people healing you any suburb that doesn't feature a lot of random healers would become instant death traps. You'd need to spend a lot of AP & HP finding an healer who would be off-line. all further action would be impossible without killing yourself. You'd be unable to contribute anything to your own and others safety. You'd need to log-off and wait until you are healed. For a lot of people the next possible opportunity to resume playing would be a day later.
- This would encourage survivors to flock together in malls. The only real defence against this lays in numbers. The game would degenerate into an even more mall centric mode. Small safehouse and lowly populated suburbs would become less economic as they would have little defence against this. Big groups would be favoured over small groups and
- Spam -This is so spammy that I'm not even going to waste time explaining.--AlexanderRM 21:56, 30 June 2007 (BST)
- Read the votes in spam and kill. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 22:50, 8 July 2007 (BST)
- RE:I did. I agreed with all but one, and I replied where appropriate. But it's interesting to note that you can read all of the above in the minute you had since you last voted for a suggestion. 'arm. 20:13, 9 July 2007 (BST)
