Suggestion:20071128 Prestige

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

20071128 Prestige

Funt Solo ^QT 14:07, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion type
XP alteration.

Suggestion scope
All players.

Suggestion description
No player will be able to store XP above the value needed to max out their skills. Any additionally earned XP are added to a new score, called "Prestige".

Players who currently have a full skill set would have all their XP converted to Prestige. (And, yes, those with all skills except Brain Rot would keep 100XP banked.)

If a new skill is added to the game, people stop accumulating Prestige and start accumulating XP again, until they once again max out their skills, or have enough accumulated XP to max out their skills.

Reason: I believe that the current XP mountain amassed by many players is a detriment to adding new skills to the game. Say I'm a game designer, and I want to add 5 new skills (just look at Peer Reviewed to see how many new skills are at hand), but I know that many players will just instantly buy them. A delay of a few days or weeks for them to amass the XP, and in the process perhaps change their playing habits and thus reinvigorate the game, is the benefit to this suggestion. And people who measure their prestige by the amount of XP they've amassed, can still do so.

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. Author --Funt Solo ^QT 14:08, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
2. Keep - This adresses all the negatives with your last suggestion, tackles a big problem with the implementation of new skills and also provides the possibility of a sort-of currency, using prestige points to purchase flavour upgrades, like special clothing or something (while I personaly probably wouldn't use this, I could see it being quite popular). Good plan!--Seventythree^Talk 14:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
3. Keep - A very sensible suggestion, and it would address the XP problem with ease, it could be that one of the reasons new skills are not implimented is because of the high amount of XP that people have. Many people treat their XP like one massive extension of their genitalia, the bigger their XP is, the bigger their *cough* is/are. And personally i feel as though this should be implimented to cut down on people who have too big a ego, and it's a good suggestion as it still retains that hard fought XP. Acoustic Pie 14:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
4. 'Keep' - They're not doing anything with it anyways. Atleast this way they have "prestige" to show how big their (whatever Acoustic Pie was referenceing, i'm hoping ego) is. And besides, it prestigious. Antitribu 15:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

   Keep - My prestige is really big. -- John Rubin^{T! ZG} 15:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

   Vote withdrawn due to no one except Rotters being affected. -- John Rubin^{T! ZG} 13:31, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

   Re - See Wooty's vote for an easy solution. If the suggestion makes it to PR, I'd add a strong note along those lines. --Funt Solo ^QT 14:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

5. Keep – Y'know what? I like this. Good job on incorporating all the feedback from last time into a decent suggestion. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 16:01, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
6. Keep - A part of me says NO! A bigger part of me thinks this a good idea. What is all your excess XP for, except your ego? Huh? Really... The only thing is, most new skill ideas suck ;) but that alone isn't a reason to reject this. --WanYao 16:26, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
7. Keep - This keeps addition of new skills interesting. --Pgunn 16:37, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
8. keep - was going to vote keep anyway but Funts argument on the discussion page makes me want to vote keep twice! --Honestmistake 16:59, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
9. beep- Nice idea, definately better than the last one.Studoku 17:02, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
10. Dum dee daa, I like it. Whitehouse 17:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
11. Keep - an elegant suggestion that I hope will pave the way for the introduction of new skills. --Shazzelim 17:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
12. Keep - I'm not going to lie, this made it for me. Let's hope you are right Funt --Ryiis 17:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
13. Why not? Heck, maybe even make Prestige have some kind of beneficial effect - for example, the higher your Prestige, the more likely people are to listen to you (e.g., someone with, say, 1000 Prestige might be heard by 60 survivors instead of 50, someone with 2500 might be heard by 75, and so on.) --Sgt. John Taggart^{UNIT 11/5 WCDZ TJ!} 17:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
14. Keep - Much better.--  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 18:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
15. Keep - the issues i had in previous version were adressed. and i voted keep that time too... --~~~~ [talk] 18:40, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
16. Keep - All the problems of the old one were removed, leaving just the good parts of this idea. Also, i think John might be on to something--Corndoghero^T-S-Z 20:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
17. Keep - If it solves a balance problem it deserves to be included. --Karlsbad 20:14, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
18. Keep- I want prestige! --Darth Lumis^{T! A! E! SR} 21:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
19. Strong Keep - It's a perfect suggestion! Everything is balanced, and it solves with XP problem with imminent ease. It might also allow Kevan to implement some new skills without the knowledge of the ever-increasing veteran-newbie gap. I also vote that whoever votes keep automatically gets extra prestige :D --Erutan 23:16, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
20. Keep - Yes I love this. Omega 23:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
21. Keep - adresses the problem completly to the best possible solution--Zach016 00:05, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
22. Keep - Fun, interesting, and balanced. Thus far, anyway. --Private Mark 01:16, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
23. Keep - nice --Anti Gorefest5^TMW!B! 03:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
24. Keep - meh, Kevan will probably make it so everone can have 100 XP extra banked, rotter or not. Or change brain rot and headshot so they cost prestige. I don't know.--Wooty 05:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
25. Keep - Much nicer version. I like. --_Ducis ^Dux_Sloth^Talk 07:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
26. Keep - I can't believe it's not butter.--Cap'n Silly ^T/W/P/C 08:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
27. Weak Keep - I can't believe it's not stupid! But it's not. -- UCFSD 17:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

    Very Weak Keep I now kinda like it, having read some of the keeps, but I think the XP cap should be 100+(100*(maxLv-curLv)), so if a new Zed skill is implemented, those with all the Human, Zombie, AND BR can still buy it. Yes, I did really change my vote. ~A`Blue`Jelly^TME*V*I*L*_? 03:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC Removed by me. I'm flipping again... ~A`Blue`Jelly^TME*V*I*L*_? 01:41, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

28. Keep - Sounds good to me. JoTheMonkey 21:52, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

    Keep - Makes sense to me. Allows people to bank their XP. Ariedartin ^Talk 14:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

    Changing because it makes level 20s + 21s get a field trip in accumulating their share of prestige. Ariedartin ^Talk 14:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

29. Keep - Makes sense, prevents the pointless buildup of XP and detrimental effect it has on adding new skills which acknowledging veteran players. RichterFury 20:53, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
30. keep - Would prestige effect the stats page? Im not sure if its right, but i think the lack of new skills may be down to the great chunks of xp out there.--Rosslessness 20:56, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
31. Weak Keep - Only because it might make the addition of new skills more likely. --Steakfish 04:20, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
32. Keep - Exactly what was lacking from the last try. --Heretic144 04:56, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Kill Votes

1. Kill Don't touch my freaking XP. CharonX 14:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
2. Kill I don't really see the detriment of having a large amount of xp. I can earn 50xp a day if I want to. What does a two day delay really matter to the game? So the entire maxed out population gets Super Headshot or Mega Tangling Grasp on Friday instead of Wednesday. They'd still get it all at once. --Jon Pyre 16:08, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

   Re I don't dispute what you're saying at all. I refer you to the last paragraph of the suggestion, and also to the discussion page, for a broader explanation of my motives. --Funt Solo ^QT 16:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

3. Kill As last time, I reason that whenever a new skill is available to purchase, I just go with the idea that my character probably learned that skill sometime back, but never really needed it until now (thus justifying insta-buy). When I started playing UD, I was surrounded by long-time players with high XP, and it didn't hurt me in any regard - I just had to be better than them. Finally, my high XP IS my prestige!--Actingupagain 16:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
4. Kill - It doesn't really serve any purpose, and a maxed out character can get even 150XP inside of a day anyways. It's not necessary. --Psiborg 17:07, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
5. I seem to like it better if the excess XP was used to gain an extra level, like the one I suggested. Which reminds me...I got to make a Version 2 to that suggestion... --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 20:29, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

   Re - I'm trying to only Re where I've got a new point to make. I think both ideas can live side by side. You could have suggestions that allow players to spend their Prestige on special upgrades. But, y'know, one thing at a time. --Funt Solo ^QT 20:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

6. Kill - I understand what you're trying to do, but all this does is slow down the time it takes to get a new skill by one or two days. I doubt that there will ever be more than two skills introduced at the same time, and as long as I don't have Brain Rot I can already grab one of those right off the bat. In other words, this won't help. --Uncle Bill 03:33, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
7. Kill - I just don't buy your reason for this being necessary, so it just seems pointless -- boxy • talk • 12:08 30 November 2007 (BST)
8. Kill This kinda screws over Rotters, and those of us who would have to pay 150 for some skills. ~A`Blue`Jelly^TME*V*I*L*_? 01:41, 1 December 2007 (UTC) PS: Hopefully, I won't change my vote again...
9. Change -Though the main problem with the old one (and not, I may mention, the other problems) has been fixed, you created far more: The XP limit has been lowered, and this gives a definite disadvantage to buying useless skills. Raise the cap back to a steady 200 and look through the old version for any other problems. This would solve virtually all the spam votes, just about the only major (and VERY major) problem is that, as many people said, this would have no practicall use ROLFLAMO! --AlexanderRM 01:30, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
10. Change - Level 20s and 21s (basically, those who only use Survivor or Zombie skill sets) are going to take forever in accumulating prestige. They would have to bank a heck lot of XP first. Ariedartin ^Talk 14:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
11. Kill - Fear of God (Kevan) is no reason to sacrifice your virgins (XP) to the volcano (prestige, XP cap, "levels", or any of its incarnations) on the slim hope that by doing so God (Kevan) will rain his blessings (new skills) upon the people (Urban Dead players). I will not sacrifice (kill my XP) based on the fear that God (Kevan) will cast famine (lack of cool new skills) upon us if we do not. *Leave my (soon to be) mountains of glorious XP alone!* I'm sure Kevan is smart enough to figure out how to introduce new skills in a way that doesn't destroy the game. He's done it before, hasn't he? --Ms.Panes 13:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
12. Kill - Relatively few people actually max their skills compared to other games. That is a GOOD THING. -- Rutherford 15:50, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
13. Kill - I've seen a few different ideas on what to do about this problem, and this seems to be the most thoroughly pointless. --Mister Nathan Marbles 22:18, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam - Doesn't really affect people who haven't bought Brain Rot and screws those who have. --Midianian|T|T:S|C:RCS| 19:55, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

   Re - I know. It's the one real sticky point, and I didn't even want to mention it in my suggestion text, but figured I should be up front about the problem. I did think about solutions, like allowing everyone to keep 100XP above their needs - but then Rotters would have 200XP to everyone elses 100XP - which would also be unfair. I finally settled on it not mattering too much. Brain Rot has obvious advantages for those who have it, anyway. The other point (made by many voters) is that it's not going to take them long to generate, well, somewhere beteen 75 and 150 XP (dependant on their class type, and the new skill on offer). The new system would always work best if several new skills were introduced at once. Nevertheless, I understand that it's not perfectly balanced. --Funt Solo ^QT 20:34, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

   My point is that while this screw rotters, the bigger problem is that this has no practical effect on non-rotters. Unless it's a cross-class skill or several skills are implemented at once (digging in the news reveals that this hasn't happened often), they could still insta-buy it, defeating the purpose of the suggestion. As a sidenote, if everyone would be allowed to keep 100XP above their needs, it would be non-rotters who would have 200XP and rotters would have 100XP, not the other way around. And Brain Rot's disadvantages are at least as big as it's advantages. --Midianian|T|T:S|C:RCS| 07:40, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

2. Spam - Congratulations! You thought up a new way to screw rotters!--Karek^maps?! 03:26, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
3. Spam - As Midianian and Karek. -- John Rubin^{T! ZG} 13:33, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

   Re: See Wooty's vote for an easy solution. If the suggestion makes it to PR, I'd add a strong note along those lines. --Funt Solo ^QT 13:49, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

4. Spam Because spamming ideas with similar objectives requires the favour to be returned. - Pardus 01:52, 30 November 2007 (UTC)