Suggestion:20080313 Bodybuilders are Stronger, Duh?

	Spam!
	This suggestion was voted as spam and closed for voting, with 3 keep, 14 kill, and 10 spam votes.

20080313 Bodybuilders are Stronger, Duh?

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tselita (talk • contribs) 20:51, 13 March 2008 (UTC).

Suggestion type
Improvement on Skill

Suggestion scope
Survivors (and I guess Zombies, though they don't need anything they carry anyway)

Suggestion description
This is my first time I've ever posted anything, but I've been trying to figure why it wasn't implemented when Bodybuilding was first made. When you purchase Bodybuilding, you get 10 more HP. Fine by me. But wouldn't all those muscles also make you stronger? I mean isn't that one of the main things people think when they think 'bodybuilding'? You don't look at, I don't know... Tony Atlas or Cory Everson and think 'boy I bet he/she has a lot of health points' No, you think 'Boy, I bet he/she is really strong'.

When they first started putting burden limits on inventory, I'm assuming it was for realism's sake. Because the more you're carrying, the heavier it is. That's why a shotgun or generator or radio transmitter are more burden than a pistol or mobile phone or radio. They weigh more. Okay, so my suggestion is this - a very logical one... when you get bodybuilding, it raises the burden that you can carry. Since they raise your HP about 20% have it raise your strength (by raising your max burden capacity, also by 20% (from 100 to 120)

I don't see how this would be unbalancing, and it definitely adds to the realism. I have a hard time believing that Joe Shmoe without bodybuilding and Arnold Swartzenegger, former Mr Universe can both carry the same amount of stuff.

Again, this is my first time I've done a suggestion, so be merciful on me. Thanks.

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 You guys have got to stop killing and spamming everything you read, the game is already unbalanced, all I care about is role-playing stuff and this would make the game more realistic. All you “kill” and “spam” people make really good points, but I am still voting keep.--Jamie Cantwell3 02:42, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

   RE: -I agree Malton is falling apart, but lets not just vote for any suggestion that buff up survivors.. (ie: nuclear hand-grenades or carrying 300 shotguns) This will only create more problems down the road.--Airborne88^T|Z.Quiz|PSS 03:53, 14 March 2008 (UTC) Non-author reply. --ZsL 04:00, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

   Keep Well it is my idea.... Unsigned vote. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 07:05, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

2. Keep Why the hell not? Pro zombies are all going "Oh noes teh kn kry moar wapuns!"--Carnexhat 16:03, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

   Fucking Idiot...--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 18:14, 14 March 2008 (UTC) Non Author RE. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 19:41, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

3. Keep (1) UD is rare among RPGs in not having a skill that boosts your carrying capacity. (2) Not really overpowered. Survivors pay the AP searching for the extra ammo meaning they spend less time killing. If you're a zed and think its too powerful, well infect them to slow them down! (3) More frequent clearing of buildings (more kills per session) + more frequent break-ins (while survivors are busy shopping) = more fun. --Explodey 21:33, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Kill Votes

Kill I'm being nice. I didn't vote spam. Increasing encumbrance by 20% is hugely unbalanced. Suddenly I can carry 10 more pistol clips or syringes? And there's no offsetting buff to zombies? Sorry. Not balanced. - Headshot Hal ^Talk 21:02, 13 March 2008 (UTC) - vote changed

1. Don't mess with other people's skills. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 21:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

   RE: -How the heck is this unbalanced? There's no offsetting buff to zombies because uh... they don't USE anything they carry? If there's a future update where zombies get to use stuff they carry then it becomes useful to them. Every pro-zombie kill commenter always kills because they say 'this isn't realistic' Bodybuilders = stronger, how's that not realistic? And the 20% was based on the 20% equivalent to HP. And if you think every buff for survivors should have a buff for zombies, pray tell me where the buff for survivors was when the 'zombie cade blocking' and 'brain rot' updates were given? Do survivors have an equivalent way to make zombies lose health after hitting them once until they use digestion? As for carrying more syringes and pistol clips vs zombies not carrying more, when have zombies been using pistols or syringes in the game? And if the problem is a 'sudden increase', then just make it an addon to the Bodybuilding tree instead (ps I think I did this commenting on other comments wrong) Unsigned RE. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 07:05, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

2. Axe Hack - What he said. -- Cheese 21:35, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
3. Kill - no thanks--Corndoghero^T-S-Z 22:11, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
4. Kill - The name body building always sat wrong with me..... It wouldn't actualy be that much help, and I think it is supposed to relate to just general increase in level of fitness. Anyway, no. Wouldn't help you carry stuff.--

   RE: - Okay so... having more muscles doesn't make you stronger? Seventythree^Talk 23:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC) Non-author RE. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 07:05, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

5. Kill - It's fine the way it is now. If we were to throw too much "logic" into this game, then by all rights I should have died some 200 hundred kills ago. That, and there would be many, many decapitated zombie bodies lying around... --Private Mark 23:37, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
6. Kill -Player can already carry way more than is realistic, can you carry 8 shotguns and still run around in real life? No.--Airborne88^T|Z.Quiz|PSS 23:53, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

   RE: - Actually yes you can. It's called a duffel bag. No one saw Falling Down I guess. :) Unsigned. --ZsL 20:26, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

7. Kill - Don't mess with encumbrance.  Billy Club Thorton  T!  RR  02:56, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
8. Kill - Encumbrance takes into account weight as well as size and storage capacity of items. --ZsL 04:00, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

   Kill - how strong you are doesn't matter. it's that you don't have the place to keep your stuff. no idiot is going to carry huge loads of ammo with thier hands (showing off their muscles). even if you are strong, you have to have a bag or something to keep them. and in Malton, so far til now, everyone has only one bag that carries 100% encumbrance weight. --RayHanley 10:36, 14 March 2008 (UTC) Improperly signed.
   --ZsL 20:26, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

9. Kill - I am quite enthusiastic about "messing with other people's skills", but this isn't a good way to do so. Renaming "Bodybuilding" to "Resilience" or similar might be a better solution. --Pgunn 13:31, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
10. Kill - As Private Mark. Also, keep in mind that this game has been running for (two and a half?) years, and those who were playing it then will be very surprised by it. Oh, and the zombies will be angry. • DS • ^{Tlk•Dev•W!•+1} 19:10, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
11. Kill - When you look at buff, studly men I for one don't think "hit points". Yeah, no, this is too far. And probably Spam. --Vandurn 21:36, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
12. Kill - Bodybuilding is strong enough -- boxy ^{talk • i} 14:57 16 March 2008 (BST)
13. Kill - Everybody who thinks the game is unbalanced and that zombies are more powerful then survivors is an idiot and deserves to be buried alive. --The Gecko PKer 02:44, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
14. Kill - Too many benefits from one skill. Personally I don't think encumbrance needs to be diddled with at all, but if you're going to diddle with it, then diddle with it in a new skill. --_└^Frozen_┘^┌_Flame^┐ 14:53, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam, it does a body good - Well, actually, no it doesn't. +20% Encumbrance is way overpowered. And maybe the skill was misnamed... But I think of Bodybuilding as more general fitness/endurance training, than pumping iron and taking the juice... I mean we've got Necrotech syringes, we've got Grim... why do we need Roger Clemens, too? --WanYao 21:32, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
2. Spam - no need to overpower Bodybuilding. --Funt Solo ^QT 21:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
3. Hell no! - As people in the Kill and Spam sessions. -- John Rubin^{T! ZG} 22:06, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
4. Dupe/kill - I'm fairly sure I've seen this before. If not, treat this as a kill vote.--Studoku 22:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
5. Spam. encumbrance <> weight --~~~~ [talk] 22:29, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
6. Spam - It's not about how much you can carry, It's about how much you can fit in your backpack.... which is already unrealistic <_< --/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 23:37, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
7. Spam – Encumbrance doesn't need a buff. Learn to pack better. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 07:05, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
8. Spam - This is so unbalanced that there's no modification you could make that would make it an acceptable suggestion. I think voting kill isn't fair to you because you might think there was some hope you could someday tweak this enough to make it work, and you can't. - Headshot Hal ^Talk 13:18, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
9. Spam/Dupe - Suggested before, and forever NO. --Druuuuu ^OcTRR 20:04, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
10. Spam - As everyone else. This hasn't been spaminated yet? -- Iscariot 18:57, 20 March 2008 (UTC)