Suggestion:20071205 Constant Pest

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

20071205 Constant Pest

 Swiers 05:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion type
Skill

Suggestion scope
Zombies

Suggestion description
Intro: This suggestion is a fairly direct derivation of Suggestion:20071201 Wretched Watch by Secruss, and so I'm giving credit before getting to the suggestion proper. As with his suggestion, "Constant Pest" assumes that zombies have taken an interest in holding territory and will do so "passively" when not actively feeding- say, by resting in doorways and on top of potential barricade materials, maybe. However, in doing so, they tend to make themselves preferred targets.

Mehcanics:

• "Constant Pest" would be a new zombie skill. It would be available to zombies who already have the "Ransack" skill.
• Zombies with this skill would always be at the top of the "attack pile" when inside any building. Among them, the zombie who had been inside the building longest would be at the top of the list, and so on.
• The presence of zombies with this skill inside a building makes it harder to build barricades; there is a chance (independent of the normal chance) that the attempt would simply fail "off the bat", costing the normal 1 AP. The chance is equal to a 10% chance that the first zombie will block construction, followed by a 10% chance that the second will (if the first does not) and so on. (This amounts to a 65% that the presence of 10 zombies who all have this skill will block an attempt at barricade construction). Construction not blocked by zombies has the normal chance of success (and so could still fail for the normal reasons, mainly when building heavy or stronger barricades).
  Note; to reduce server load, the server / game engine need not work "down the line" in this fashion. Instead, the chance of construction being blocked can equivalently be calculated as 1-.9^z, with "z" being the number of zombies present who have the skill. These values could be pre-calculated and stored in a table to save even more server load, perhaps.
• If a zombie DOES block an attempt at construction, all persons present would receive a report along the lines of "A zombie blocked Survivor's Name from (moving a drinks machine / nailing up boards / other barricade flavor text)", with a zombie being randomly selected from among the zombies inside the building who have the "Constant Pest" skill. This makes it possible to view the zombies profile, save it as a contact, and single it out for attack (although the zombie is already subject to attack, being at the top of the stack) or revives.

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. Authors Vote. And tho those who say it is to radical, I point to this peer reviewed suggestion that is much more radical - it allows no construction at all (100% failure rate per zombie) with no skill required, and got enough keep votes for peer reviewed not even a year ago!  Swiers 21:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
2. Keep - I kinda like it.--Anti Gorefest5^TMW!B! 06:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
3. Keep Very nice idea, Realistic too, you have my vote! --Happy doodle 05:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
4. Keep – Fascinating idea. Useful, yet balanced. Nice work. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 06:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
5. Keep - very radical barricade nerf, and perhaps totally insane. i like.... but, while pgun's kill vote is retarded, i don't like the name, either... i think of this as something like Frenetic, or Accelerated Re-animation or something, i.e. the zombie is more active than others, somehow... this is kinda like naming our own Magic cards, you know? --WanYao 07:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
6. Keep - Zombies need some way to counter barricading, and ruin is crap since it makes free running easier. This is as good a method as any. - Grant 08:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
7. Keep - Yes. As for the name - if Kevan decides to implement something like that he will make up a new name anyway. We are voting for the suggestion, not the name. -- John Rubin^{T! ZG} 08:27, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
8. Keep/Change - If you get their profiles, moving them to the top of the stack seems a bit redundant and vice versa. I'd say choose one or the other (I like the profiles more as it gives flavour and explains why the action failed). --Midianian|T|T:S|C:RCS| 08:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
9. Keep - Oh yes. Something like this is essential. Barricades are massively overpowered and this levels the feasibility factor by ensuring that regular barricading is unaffected, but when zeds are around (which would surely make barricading difficult, if not outright impossible, in any imaginable scenario) the 'cading is nerfed. Makes perfect sense to me. --The Hierophant 09:08, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
10. Keep - Read it again, there's a balance to everything. --Karek^maps?! 09:46, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
11. Keep --Karloth Vois ^RR 10:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
12. Just one question - Is there a cap to how many zombies can block the construction?Studoku 13:40, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
13. Keep - Because zombies eat harmanz. -- UCFSD 17:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
14. Keep/Change - I would decrease the percentage, but otherwise, not bad. For those Killing, remember that zeds in this game can target Generators and Radios, and Ransack buildings. This isn't that farfetched.--Druuuuu ^Ocular 21:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
15. Keep - Maybe an Ap to activate would help, but im fine with the way it is.--Zach016 00:44, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
16. Sure - why not? --~ /~WOOT~\ 02:04, 6 December 2007 (UTC) ~
17. Keep I'm honored that you have used my idea, Swiers. ----Secruss^|Yak|Brahnz!|CGR|PKA||EMLN|Templates|RRF|RFTM|Crap|WHOZ||MU|GN|C2008||02:06, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
18. Keep - It's reasonable. --Nikitis 07:01, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
19. Keep - As always Swiers just creates the most intelligent suggestions, however I like the Suggestion:20071203 Falling Into Disrepair more. --the wallaby^♥ 13:27, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
20. Keep - No doubt about it, this would change the way sieges work and further increase the zombie benefit for coordination. I love this idea. -- Rutherford 15:41, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

    Keep - As Sir Jacob. I'd rather see Suggestion:20071203 Falling Into Disrepair implemented if it came down to a choice, but Ruin needs a buff. Unsigned vote struck. --Karek^maps?! 06:32, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

    Keep - This is needed! - WisuguyaImproperly signed vote struck(needs timestamp)--Karek^maps?! 06:32, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

21. Keep - Very good suggestion.--Thekooks 16:37, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
22. Keep - Personally I don't think humans should be able to recade with zombies inside the building at all. However, I wouldn't object to getting myself a new skill. --FigureFour 18:28, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
23. Keep - I like it, anyone who watches zombie movies would know that zombies in the building make it much harder to go about your daily business. --Bran Eating Zombie 18:32, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Kill Votes

1. Kill - Zombies are not Dennis the Menace. Watch more Zombie movies please. --Pgunn 05:55, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

   In the (numerous) zombie movies I've watched, having a zombie inside your shelter really DOES inhibit barricade construction, unless you kill it. They don't get tired... Please, if you just don't like the name, don't require 2 keep votes to make up for that minor disapoval.  Swiers 06:04, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

   This isn't minor disapproval. I think it's out of genre. --Pgunn 13:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

   Zombies kill eat and destroy things. It is not out of genre, I think YOU should watch and UNDERSTAND more zombie movies --Happy doodle 16:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC) - non-author re struck. --Funt Solo ^QT 17:40, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

2. kill/change I like it but... It needs to cost 1AP to use and last until 1AP is spent. Without this an active zed can both attack a victim AND defend the breach. The other way I could vote keep is if it only worked for 1AP tick after your last action, That is only active (or recently active) zeds can block the door, In that case I would make it a sub-skill of feeding drag "you drag your victim to the breach in the barricade and crush him for x damage".... "you attempt to build a barricade but zombie bob is active in the area... killing him first seems prudent!" Either way has a little something to balance an effect that the game does indeed need!--Honestmistake 12:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
3. Change - I'd like to see it based on a ratio of survivors:zombies, ie a 1:10 ratio means 10% fail rate, up to > 1:1 having a 65% fail rate or something. --Pavluk ^{A! E!} 14:32, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
4. Kill Grossly overpowered as Funt said. It's a bonus that a zombie earns for doing nothing and even worse it stacks with each new zed. Imagine a skill called "Constant Vigilance" that made it 10% harder for zombies to attack survivors for each survivor present. --Jon Pyre 14:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
5. Kill - I don't like to vote spam, but i was close on this one. --Jack13 16:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
6. Kill - While the concept is interesting, I think this could be too overwhelming. 65% chance to fail at barricading, and still having the zombie attack you? Granted, this would radically alter how survivors held territory - but it's a bit much for me. If there was a reasonable limit, then I might consent. Also, I see a gigantic problem of zergers leveling zombies to get this ability, and then have those zombies walk into a building with them to get maximum percentages - while the other zombies had a little feast. Add: As well, you shouldn't get something for nothing. It should cost the zed something to activate the ability. --Ryiis 16:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
7. Kill - Having every CP zed being at the top of the stack makes this skill detrimental to both zombie and survivor. Granted, no such thing as a free lunch of course, but there must be an incentive beyond merely encouraging more metagame organisation. –Ariedartin ^Talk 18:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
8. i don't like how it stacks up to 65%... biases sieges --~~~~ [talk] 20:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
9. Please kill - Ummm, when zombies aren't hunting for BRAAAAIIINNNNZZZZ they aren't trying to stop survivors from barricading buildings. That's kind of beyond their thinking capacity. And, since zombies should be hunting all the time, UNLESS they're useless MRH? cows or life cultists, they should just "slowly sway on the spot". --Officer 123satsitx 22:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
10. Kill - As below. Sorry Swiers. --Private Mark 00:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
11. Kill - I liked it up until the fact that the barricade nerf stacked, so that barricading could be blocked without ransacking. Put an upper limit on the percentage that barricading could be affected (anything over a 50% nerf would still get a kill from me) -- boxy ^{talk • I} 01:35 6 December 2007 (BST)
12. Kill - As above.--  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 02:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
13. Kill - It should be up to the survivors to decide whether to kill the zeds inside the building first or repair the breach first. Doing this basically means you have NO CHOICE but to kill or run away. And if you have construction, but no fighting skills, instead of being able to do *something* to help your comrades during a breach, with this suggestion you're now nearly useless. Try to make zombies interesting, not IMBA. --Ms.Panes 02:10, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

    "Doing this basically means you have NO CHOICE but to kill or run away." Um, yes- isn't that rather appropriate to a zombie horror game? The current situation is really not much of a choice- barricading is ALWAYS the best move, so much so that all others are non-choices.
    Building a barricade at double or triple the normal AP cost during / shortly after a zombie attack is NOT useless. It still costs zombies more AP to destroy than it did to build, and you only need to consistently maintain one level (loose) to keep new zombies out. Barricading would still be the smarter move for most folks, but it killing would at least seem less of a dumb move.  Swiers 02:43, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

    Barricading/hiding *is* a recurrent them in zombie movies, so I think that choice is also appropriate to a zombie game. Weakening one option (barricading) is not the same as improving another (killing). And doing the same action over and over with little success is going to frustrate me. I wouldn't think "Well, gee, I used 30 AP to do this, but it'll take a zombie 50 AP to undo it," I'd think, "I'm having a heck of a time building up these barricades. I give up, I'm out of here."

    Anyway, it *should* be harder to kill a human than a zombie (that's why we have barricades). Zombie dies- 1-15AP stand up cost. Maybe they're back outside and have to tear down the barricades again, maybe not. Human dies-have to find someone willing to revive you, stand around for them to do it, the other person has to spend 10AP plus the AP cost of finding the syringe, getting to you, and maybe scanning you, and THEN you have to spend 1-10 AP to stand up, often with an infection, and since you were dead odds are you ran out of FAKs, so now, while losing 1AP per turn you have to find an open building with FAKs, find and apply them before you die again. You know what we need? More mindless destruction to entertain the zombies when they're not killing people. --Ms.Panes 23:58, 14 December 2007 (UTC) (Sorry about not signing that earlier).

14. Kill Zombies DON'T need it easier in Sieges... ~A`Blue`Jelly^TME*V*I*L*_? 05:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
15. Kill Sounds kinda like a free action. --Pdeq 09:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
16. Kill - and bury it. as mentioned by others, this makes it an autoskill. No thanks.--Ram Charger 13:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
17. Kill - I almost like it. My major problem is the stacking percentages. They should either not stack at all, or stack only to 25ish percent. --Steakfish 03:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
18. Kill Autoskill --Heretic144 18:04, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
19. Kill Zombies attack or sway. There is no defending. Inky 03:16, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

    Care to explain how a swaying zombie prevents a survivor from repairing a ransacked / ruined building, then?  Swiers 07:45, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam - it's an auto-skill, like having an auto-sentry. Where's the AP cost for the zombie? Where's the balance? This would allow (in theory) a single zombie to block all barricade attempts, for free. Even, for example, 100 barricade attempts. All for 0AP. I'm getting royally fucking sick of people suggesting uber-powers for zombies. If they actually get put in, you'll make the game crap, not balanced. Can't you think of something balanced? --Funt Solo ^QT 09:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

   One survivor in a mall corner with (arbitrary large number) of zombies prevents the zombies from ransacking the mall. Is that an auto sentry? Well, it doesn't have an AP cost. (Same goes for one zombie in a ransacked building.) Your numbers are silly; if the situation is one where the zombie would block that many construction attempts, the zombies lifespan would be measured in seconds, because the 1000AP you say was spent on construction (statitially required to get those 100 blocked attempts) could easily be spent on attacks (or on a revive, if the zombie lacks brain rot). And yes, I can make balanced suggestions; my weather suggestion had effects that directly impacted both sides. This one is a one sided boost, but a small one; pick any of dozens of one sided survivor boosts to counter it, or just look at the stats...  Swiers 11:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

   "One survivor ... prevents the zombies from ransacking". And two wrongs don't make a right. And the stats are misleading. Despite all the changes to the game, the ratio stats stay the same. All that tells me is that they normalise to that value despite the rules, probably due to social effects. Their basis as the cornerstone of the "power-up the zombies" argument is highly spurious logic. I treat it with the contempt it deserves. --Funt Solo ^QT 12:48, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

2. Funt nailed it. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 10:48, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
3. Spam -To your logic in your response to Funts RE, both sides have ONE instance of "auto-sentry"- if this is implemented, then logically survivors should be able to block barricade attacks- but they'd be too powerful if they could do it from inside, and it would be massively underpowered if they had too sleep in the street. Second, this is a double-edged skill, so no. --AlexanderRM 02:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

   The logically equivalent survivor skill would be one which allows them to block zombies from taking a ransacked building and further ransacking it to become a ruin; that is the zombie equivalent of survivors taking an open / secured building and barricading it. And in fact, survivors already HAVE that ability (for free, not as a skill)- they just very rarely use it. But I have seen it occur when survivors move in to counter a zombie strike.  Swiers 02:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)