Suggestion:20080121 Mk. 3 revivification syringe

	Spam!
	This suggestion was voted as spam and closed for voting, with 1 keep, 9 kill, and 15 spam votes.

20080121 Mk. 3 revivification syringe

LCpl Hicks 21:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion type
Item

Suggestion scope
Introduction of new revivification syringe type affects the areas where revivification can take place.

Suggestion description
If approved, the Mk. 3 syringe shall be introduced as an item. The current Mk. 2 syringes will be phased out since they can no longer be found. The Mk 3 syringe will only allow revivification in 3 terrain type squares: cemeteries, INSIDE Churches and INSIDE NTs. The rationale for the restriction is that the new syringe requires an authentication signal from a transponder that can only be found in these 3 locations. The transponders themselves cannot be jammed, destroyed or otherwise manipulated. The search odds for the Mk. 3 and the AP required to manufacture and utilize it will stay the same as the current ones for the Mk. 2.

If a survivor attempts to revive a zombie outside of the allowed terrain types, they get this flavor text: "You cannot receive the proper authentication signal here, the revive attempt fails." The survivor will get to keep the syringe in inventory but it will deduct 1 AP for the action. All rules for reviving Brain-rotted zombies still apply. Attempting to revive a brain-rotter outside of a powered NT will result in the loss of the syringe as well as the AP to use it.

The implementation of this change will force both survivors and zombies to utilize new strategies. It will have the effect of making getting revives harder for survivors while at the same time virtually eliminating combat revives. If numbers start going back way in favor of zombies, a vote can be cast to reimplement the Mk. 2 syringes.

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 Vote - My suggestion. My vote. -- LCpl Hicks 21:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Kill Votes

1. Kill - Don't see the need for this. --Druuuuu ^OcTRR 21:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
2. Kill - This is a terrible idea. --Pdeq^Talk* 22:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
3. Kill - While many players and groups do oppose combat revives there are a lot of players that rely on them (eg. very new players or opportunists and dual natured players). This would ram the random revive policy down everyone's throats and eliminate alternate ways to play. Delete Me 22:26, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
4. Kill - I cover the inside of a church,a wasteland,cemetary and an avenue in my suburb, all are clearly marked, with this, the two revive points I could still cover would be overflowing and take forever to hit everyone, meaning less playtime for them.--Zach016 00:00, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
5. Kill Why? ----Secruss^|Yak|Brahnz!|CGR|PKA||EMLN|Templates|RRF|RFTM|Crap|WHOZ||MU|GN|C2008||00:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
6. Kill - Pure bad idea--Corndoghero^T-S-Z 00:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
7. Kill - Why would NecroTech do that? --Pgunn 01:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
8. Kill - For two reasons: revive system is fine as-is and rejected on the principle of KISS.  Billy Club Thorton  T!  RR  03:58, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
9. Why do people seem to forget it costs 10 AP to do a revive. That's a significant cost to do. Also a a transponder? Why would it be in cemetaries?--Pesatyel 05:06, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam - Overpowered and, among other things, the current version of syringes is Mk. 3.--Karek^maps?! 21:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

   No, the current version is Mark II. Mark I was the 1 AP's, Mark II are the 10 AP's.  Nalikill  ^{TALK  E!  W!  M!  USAI}  21:57, 21 January 2008 (UTC) Non-Author RE struck.--Karek^maps?! 22:06, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

2. Spam - Uneccesary nerf to survivors everywhere. --Ciaran Deckardson 22:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
3. Spamtastic - Yeah, to be honest this just won't work at all, pointless nerf. Simple as. Acoustic Pie 22:13, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
4. Spam - DONT NERF MAH COMBAT REVIVES!!!!1 ...not to mention that the flavour makes no sense whatsoever. --Midianian|T|T:S|C:RCS| 22:24, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
5. Spam - Let's just make it so Survivors can't get revived. Wait! Let's just take Survivors out entirely! --Themanwhocares4 22:46, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
6. Spam - The Sacred Ground Policy is a metagaming solution, just because it is widely followed, does not mean it should be part of the game rules. This is the zombie apocalypse, GTFO with yer rulz, man! -- boxy ^{talk • i} 22:48 21 January 2008 (BST)
7. Spam - no magic or mysticism (even with hidden transponders) in my science-based zombie apocalypse game, please. (I'd make a template for this vote, but if I did, Grim would only steal it and pretend it was his idea.) --Funt Solo ^QT 23:02, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
8. Spam - Would be utterly game breaking.--Seventythree^Talk 23:27, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
9. Spam - Oh god no. --  AHLGTG THE END IS ACTUALLY NIGH! 00:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
10. Spam-tastic - stupid, plus most Combat Revives happen IN NECROTECHS! so this suggestion is flawed, in many ways <_< -+-/~Rakuen~\ 00:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
11. Spam – Next time, please take it to Talk:Suggestions first. I actually have a "Mk III syringe"-type suggestion lurking in the back of my brainpan, but haven't suggested it because I'm pretty sure it'd never pass Suggestions. Hmm... maybe I should take my own advice here? ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 01:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
12. Spam - incredible pain for survivors everywhere, and is essentially forcing a (somewhat) lesser version of brainrot on the entire game population. --Ms.Panes 01:35, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
13. Spam - terrible --~~~~ [talk] 07:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
14. SPAM - Ridiculous, Arbitrary and Inexplicable! --Honestmistake 09:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
15. Spam - As above --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 09:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

---