Suggestion:20071028 Another Ruin Suggestion

	Revised
	This suggestion has been withdrawn for revision, the new version is Suggestion:20071029 Another Ruin Suggestion(v1.1).

20071028 Another Ruin Suggestion

Zach016 23:56, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion type
Ruin change

Suggestion scope
Survivour's/zombies

Suggestion description

There has been a lot of controversy on how to improve ruin to make it more useable to the zombie's. Out of the blue I decided upon undead barricades, now I bet your thinking, what in the hell is an undead barricade? Well it's not what the name suggests.

It's just that when a zombie ruins a building, rubble falls every-where, making a barricade that survivors (and zombies alike) have to get through. Now we come to the survivor’s screaming about how it already takes them forever to get the building back up and running. The survivors with a toolbox (just because they have the tools) can clear a path through for two Ap. zed's can clear a path for 3 Ap (because they don't have the necessary tools for the job), and player's without a toolbox can clear a path for 4 Ap (because they don't want to cut up their hands, and lack the tools). To clarify, once a zombie leaves it also has to get back through the barricade, to get back inside (so once they leave they are gone, unless they want to make it easier on survivors). To try to cut down on zerging, (leaving 80 alts in a pd plus this) in order for the place to barricade, the zed's inside cannot reach a number over three, or the door is unblocked again right away (a.k.a. it doesn’t happen) ( explanation: The foolish zombies push the debris out of the way to make room for themselves). Although zombies have to push their way in, they do not have to push their way out. During the ruining process each zombie happens to make a small hole some where in the building’s walls (look at the piece of text you get sometimes when trying to free run into a ruin, it's something like "you are stoped by a collapased wall" this already happen's, it's just no useable to anyone). Due to the amount of rubble it looks covered on both sides (i.e. why survivors don’t see it) but the zombie remembers where it is (they made it). Once they leave through the hole, rubble falls and fills it behind them. Un-Fortunaly for survivors inside (can you ruin with survivor’s? I'll cover this as i don't know) they don’t know about the hole so they have to push their way out.

Messages: Once leaving, the zombie gets a message like this “you leave through a small hole you made, but rubble closes it behind you”

If there are more then three zombies inside once it’s ruined “rubble fall’s in front of the doorway, but another zombie accidentally pushes it back out of the way”

Once a survivor/zombie goes outside they receive a button to clear the rubble and the message “rubble blocks the entrances inside, and will have to be moved before you can pass”

If a survivor is inside (?) they can repair the building or they have to clear the path (free running through rubble does not work, although they can after it is cleared) with the message “the building lies in ruin, and rubble blocks all the entrances out, it will have to be cleared before you can leave”

And of course once ruining “Rubble falls in all the entrance’s, blocking the way inside”.

Believe i covered everything i had in disscustion, although it feel's like I missed something, feel free to take it up on the assoiated talk page.

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--Zach016 00:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

   Re: Due to a high misunderstanding, the suggestion is explained better in the talk, a revisied version will be made, but please include change for a better version in kill votes, or don't bother voting at all and wait for this version. This is just a way for it to be continued to be looked at, and hear the opinion of when a clearer version is in place. If no one wants a clearer version (the talk should explain everything to the best way possible) then i will not waste anyones time. The only reason im not bringing this back to the developing suggestion's page as no one seemed to give it a second look to see if their questions had been answered

Kill Votes

1. Kill Rambly suggestion with bad grammar (please, please learn how apostrophes work, also learn to spell), not that great of an idea to begin with. --Pgunn 00:03, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

   Re- funny i made it with microsoft word, it actually changed alot of it to this way--Zach016 00:50, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

2. Kill - Didn't make sense in the talk page doesnt make sense now. Sockem00:05, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

   Re- why doesn't it make sense? I already explained how it works, how it fits, need some more info before i can help or revise--Zach016 00:50, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

3. Kill - I just don't like it, sorry. --Sonofagun18 04:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
4. Kill - Interesting ideas here. Why not bring it to talk pages for a bit?--Seventythree^Talk 07:42, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

   Re:I did but no one gave it a second look before I had time to re write it like i said i would--Zach016 11:06, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

5. Meh - It reads stupid, and it's too conviluted to make all that much sense. BoboTalkClown 19:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam - Why doesn't anybody understand Ransack/Ruin? In a Ransack/Ruined building, the Zombies ARE the barricades. The building can't be fixed until no Zombies are left standing inside. If all the other Zombie players would spend their last couple AP finding a Ransack/Ruined building to sleep in (preferrably a resource building), Survivors would have a very hard time. --Steakfish 00:05, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

   Re- only works if 3 or less are inside, others have to remove it to get inside, it has benefits for both sides, and this is an old arguement which = less fun, I'll explain further on the talk--Zach016 00:50, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

2. Spam - Could barely understand it and it doesn't look very good anyway.Studoku 00:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
3. Spam I really have no clue what's going on up there. Be CONSCISE. Tell me exactly what it does. I fixed or REs (you need to add the # at the beginning or it throws off the count) and REing every vote is NOT good.--Pesatyel 01:16, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

   Re-sorry, just giving important info (don't kill on my grammer, as a tool was actualy used and asking for more info) and the third was over an actual point. I didn't realize i wasen't conscise enough, it must be because everything's in one big paragraph, i'll explain more in the talk to avoid it getting booted--Zach016 01:28, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

4. Spam - Aboot up thar.--  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 03:09, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
5. Spam - Remove it and stop wasting our time. Also few points, never use the word zed in a suggestion, it shows your POV, never try to justify part of your suggestion with "zeds are stoopid", cause in UD they aren't, never try to make it even harder for zombies to move, and never try to make it harder for zombies to hold buildings.--Karek^maps?! 06:50, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
6. Spam - sort out your use of past and present tense. I got lost trying to figure out things you were suggesting should be in the game as opposed to things you think are already in the game. At that point, I stopped reading. Clarity, is what a suggestion needs. --Funt Solo 09:20, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
7. Spam - It hasn't been removed yet, so I can still halpz!-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 09:50, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
8. Spam - cloudy, very cloudy and unclear what you are actually suggesting --~~~~ [talk] 11:10, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
9. Spam - LOLZ, hai guys, can I 4 fun hav teh spam 2??? No really, does the author need help removing this? --Ryiis 14:51, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
10. Re: i did what i did to get past the removed because of edit. You read the votes and talk page at your will but do not vote on it. It's just a way of having people get a little idea of what im going for (it must just make sense to me because I wrote it) so they only have to skim the revised version to answer any question's that they may have--Zach016 22:06, 29 October 2007 (UTC)