Suggestion:20071006 Show True Accuracy When Attacking Barricades

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Stop hand.png Closed
This suggestion has finished voting and has been moved to Undecided Suggestions.



Suggestion Navigation
Suggestion Portal
Current Suggestions • Suggestions up for Voting • Clothes Suggestions
Cycling Suggestions • Peer Reviewed • Undecided • Peer Rejected • Humorous
Suggestion Advice • Topics to Avoid and Why • Help, Developing and Editing


20071006 Show True Accuracy When Attacking Barricades

Vkkhamul 01:12, 6 October 2007 (BST)

Suggestion type
Visual change (no change to game mechanics)

Suggestion scope
Applies to anyone attacking a barricade.

Suggestion description
When targeting a barricade, the actual percent chance to damage the barricade will be shown for each weapon. This means that the accuracy of melee weapons (except for Crowbars) and zombie claws would be displayed as halved, and firearms and teeth attacks would be displayed with 0% chance (ineffective).

Why, you ask? Well, it would make much more sense to show exactly what your chances are of damaging the barricade, and not how it would work against a player. That way the newbies will be a lot less confused.

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- Author vote --Vkkhamul 01:13, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  2. Keep - Nice and simple, helps newbies, doesn't harm anyone. --Pestilent Bob 01:15, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  3. Keep-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 01:21, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  4. Keep Because I know somebody will attempt to kill/spupe this. Crazylilvietguy 01:22, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  5. Keep - Spupe? Anywhoo, I'd not known the real accuracy m'self until I'd been on the wiki for a few months.  Nalikill  TALK  E!  W!  M!  USAI  01:29, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  6. Keep - Useful --Pavluk A! E! 02:15, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  7. Keep - Very good. The current system isn't particularly friendly to new players.--Jiangyingzi 02:57, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  8. Keep - Save teh AP. Sockem 03:21, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  9. Keep - this can be done with javasciprt, no need for ajax or what else was call "dynamic pages" below --~~~~ [talk] 09:57, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  10. Keep - Newbs need all the help they can get. Rebel147 11:48, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  11. Keep - Keepish vote--  Savant  Chit-Chat  13:12, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  12. keep - nice and simple... Oh and just to answer Shadowscopes point. whats to stop Kevan continuing to manipulate those chances? If it does happen now we all put it down to luck so why would that change? --Honestmistake 14:51, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  13. Keep - It'll stop the "HAY GUYS WHY CAN'T I TEAR DOWN BARRICADES" thing that newbies complain about. Glenstone 19:14, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  14. Keep - As above, but at 50%. --Uncle Bill 22:10, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  15. Keep - It would make sense to let people know what their true odds are. By the way, many of the kill votes are invalid. The rules say that programming complexity and server load ARE NOT valid reasons for kill votes. If it can't be done, it can't be done, but that's for Kevan to decide. --Steakfish 02:41, 7 October 2007 (BST)
    It's not the complexity of programming, nor the server load (javascript wouldn't practically increase the server load at all), it's the inconvenience of using it. --Midianian|T|T:S|C:RCS| 12:07, 7 October 2007 (BST) Non author re -- boxy • talk • 13:02 7 October 2007 (BST)
  16. Keep - Makes sense. --Kikashie ELT 10:35, 7 October 2007 (BST)
  17. Keep - Very good idea! And most of the nay-sayers have not read the suggestion, they're responding to something other than your actually suggestion, sheeeeeeeeeeesh. --WanYao 14:02, 7 October 2007 (BST)
  18. Keep -About all the kill voters had valid points, but the pros outweigh the cons/difficulties. --AlexanderRM 01:19, 8 October 2007 (BST)
  19. Keep - Maybe technicaly difficult to implement, but help newbies it's ever a good idea, it's only cosmetic so don't affect gameplay at all and we're not talking about revealing any secret information, only to show the halved values. --Kaipirinha 04:22, 9 October 2007 (BST)
  20. Keep - yeah, removes the need to meta-game that knowledge, removes frustration at incomplete knowledge of chances. I swear, I still don't fully understand the benefit of a crowbar over a fully-charged fire axe. --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 11:26, 13 October 2007 (BST)
  21. Keep - I leik it1!11! -J. A. 16:29, 14 October 2007 (BST)
  22. Keep - Sounds reasonable -- Mordac the Refuser 17:25, 19 October 2007 (BST)

Kill Votes

  1. Rumor has it that Kevan modifies the barricade attack odds, as a way to balance. So it may be that it may very well not be 1/2-effective, it may be less, it may be more. Therefore, I have to vote kill (as it may help reveal Kevan's inner-workings), even though it may be a good idea.--ShadowScope 02:06, 6 October 2007 (BST)
    Read the suggestion... and see the talk page for discussion... I don't think you're voting on the actual suggestion... --WanYao 14:09, 7 October 2007 (BST)
  2. Kill - The chance to erect and dismantle barricades should be left "tweakable" to help balance the game on the run -- boxy • talk • 02:29 6 October 2007 (BST)
  3. Kill - I swear Kevan messes around with it sometimes. As Boxy.--Wooty 05:10, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  4. Kill - As Wooty. -- John RubinT! ZG FER 09:22, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  5. Kill - This would require dynamic webpages, which is baaaad. It's the same list of accuracies no matter who/what you're attacking. --Midianian|T|T:S|C:RCS| 09:26, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  6. Kill - As above. I swear that not too long ago I failed to 'cade at QSB, which has never happened before. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 17:18, 6 October 2007 (BST)
    What the heck are you talking about?! --Vkkhamul 20:38, 6 October 2007 (BST)
    Nothing important.--  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 20:45, 6 October 2007 (BST)
    I mean, why did you vote kill..? I don't get it. --Vkkhamul 01:26, 7 October 2007 (BST)
    My reason was above, or below. Not a bad suggestion its just there's probably a lot of stealth changes to 'cade attacking. Some things are better left unknown.--  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 02:41, 7 October 2007 (BST)
  7. Kill - Concur with Midianian - not implementable w/o using javascript or other ugly solutions. --Pgunn 18:12, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  8. Kill Nothing's ever certain. --SeventythreeTalk 21:12, 6 October 2007 (BST)
  9. Is math that hard that you can't divide by two? And, to comment on Karek's vote, the suggestion is about BARRICADES not "other targets".--Pesatyel 18:43, 8 October 2007 (BST)
    The problem is that most newbies are unaware that the accuracy is halved against barricades. --Vkkhamul 01:55, 9 October 2007 (BST)


Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. Spam - Cause no one thought of how this would work with other "targets" in the block which means it's not worth voting on.--Karekmaps?! 05:52, 8 October 2007 (BST)
  2. Spam - I agree with Karek on this one. While well thought out, the suggestion is, in fact, incomplete because it does not address the issues that Karek brings up. --the one, the only, sushiknight (talk contribs HARD E.N.D.) 06:18, 18 October 2007 (BST)
  3. Spam – Incomplete, as Karek said. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 13:39, 18 October 2007 (BST)


Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Suggestion:20071006_Show_True_Accuracy_When_Attacking_Barricades&oldid=1896289"