Suggestion:20080403 Restricted AP

	Spam!
	This suggestion was voted as spam and closed for voting, with 2 keep, 14 kill, and 15 spam votes.

Restricted AP

Explodey 21:24, 3 April 2008 (BST)

Suggestion type
Action Points

Suggestion scope
Survivors/Zombies

Suggestion description

1. Create a second class of Action Points (called "Movement AP") that are restricted to movement and communications and thus cannot be used for attacking, searching, barricading, repairs or use of any inventory item.
2. The existing, standard AP are referred to as "Combat AP"
3. New characters start with 25 Combat AP instead of 50, but now receive 100 Movement AP as well.
4. Movement AP would be exempt from the usual maximum of 50, so a new character could still wait 12½ hours and then have 50AP for attacking as normal (making 150AP in total.)
5. Only new characters will have Movement AP. None will be issued to existing players, and no more will be given when the original ones are used up.
6. Once Movement AP are exhausted, moving, speaking and broadcasting will consume Combat AP as normal.

Suggested message format:

"You have 125 action points remaining, however only 25 of these may be used for attacking."

Pros:

• It would no longer be possible to create a throwaway PKer character, kill someone with the initial 50AP, get killed, then never log in again. This is perfectly possible right now. For those of us with Body Building and a Flak Jacket it is easy to forget this but this can and has caused low-level players to quit the game.
• New characters who have the misfortune to spawn in a red suburb will have time to find a safehouse as they can reach any block in the city.

Cons:

• Complicates the user interface for new players slightly.

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 Keep - See "pros" above! --Explodey 21:56, 3 April 2008 (BST)
2. keep Come on people! Help the little guy! I can understand it would help pkers but maybe after you have 3 high level player accounts like level 10 or higher you can not make any more new accounts, making this suggestion work. Personally I think we should only be aloud to make 3 accounts per computer, and that's it! As you can see I am voting keep on something and trying to give a sad reason why.--Jamie Cantwel3 01:31, 4 April 2008 (BST)

Kill Votes

1. Kill - Way too much AP. At most, neither sort of AP should exceed 50. --Pdeq^Talk* 21:49, 3 April 2008 (BST)
2. Kill - Current system is better than system proposed.  Billy Club Thorton  T!  RR  21:55, 3 April 2008 (BST)
3. Kill - So what this basically does if give new players 1/2 standard AP plus an additonal 100AP for movement and radio... NO! This would create a massive influx of alts; Humans can now move anywhere they want when they start and still have an additonal 26AP (assuming they went from [0,0] to [99,99]), REALGAMER accounts will now be able to spam the radio even more and zombies will be able to form hoardes of lvl 1s even faster and would create more ransack sentrys to soak up players AP! It would also not affect PKer throw-aways, in fact it would probably encourage them as they would now be able to reach you from anywhere on the map and still have 25AP to kill you with each alt they create. --Kamikazie-Bunny 22:08, 3 April 2008 (BST)

   Having 2 alts track you down and attack you would trigger the anti-zerging code and probably the IP limit (and if people are dodging that using proxies the game mechanics are irrelevant.) You're right about ransack sentries & radio spam though. --Explodey 23:01, 3 April 2008 (BST)

4. Kill- Allowing people to move new characters to anywhere in Malton is bad. Mkay.--Studoku ^W! 23:30, 3 April 2008 (BST)
5. Kill - Do you know how horrible that suggestion is? Also, why discourage PKing when it would happen in real life? --The Gecko PKer 00:51, 4 April 2008 (BST)
6. kill next suggestion = why bother to have AP limits at all? --Scotw 01:08, 4 April 2008 (BST)
7. Kill - Wait, did you say it was possible to create a new character and kill someone with your first 50 AP? I'd like to see that. (Proof please!) --Uncle Bill 01:25, 4 April 2008 (BST)
8. Kill - Don't like it -- boxy ^{talk • i} 02:43 4 April 2008 (BST)
9. Kill this is a massive change. The servers are already strained. --Airborne88^T|Z.Quiz|PSS 03:02, 4 April 2008 (BST)
10. Kill - If I were a new player, this would confuse me more than anything. HUGE change that isn't worth it.--KF 03:25, 4 April 2008 (BST)
11. Kill - this is way too convoluded. it would confuse too many people, and i don't think it will make the game better. however, i understand the frustration with AP refresh rate. perhaps the idea could be simplified to seem fair? --zempasuchitl 00:17, 4 April 2008 (EST)
12. Kill - Too complicated and too much movement AP. --ZsL 17:10, 4 April 2008 (BST)
13. Kill- There is no reason for the change and it is a terrible idea at that.
14. Kill - No massive, mechanics changing suggestion will ever go into effect ever. --Vandurn 20:22, 4 April 2008 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam - 50 AP limit is in place not for combat.. It's there at least as much to keep people from moving all the way across the city in a day -- which this suggestion would permit. Also, how the hell do you make "throwaway level one PK alts"? Hit %s are too low to kill anything sheesh. If anything, this suggestion encourages people to make throwaway zerg alts by letting them get across the city quickly. Also, don't tell me how to spend my AP: if I made a new Fireman, I may wanna spend all my AP missing with an axe. This just encourages zerging and screws newbies. There are other flaws in the reasoning and implimentation, but I've already debunked this all round -- spam-o-rific -- I believe. Next, please. --WanYao 22:00, 3 April 2008 (BST)

   You can get a kill. I've played both sides of it. Create a Private, search the nearest PD, if you're lucky with the search you'll get 2 clips (for 30 rounds in total) and maybe a shotgun or flare. Find a victim (avoid hospitals.) Kill (maybe change target if the first one you hit ends up on 56HP.) If you're unlucky with the search then create another character and try again. --Explodey 22:47, 3 April 2008 (BST)

   Some of us... consider the last sentence something called multi-abuse. As I said... your suggestion encourages zerging... as, apparently, do you personally. Goooong! Next, please. --WanYao 13:17, 4 April 2008 (BST)

2. Spam - As WanYao for the second time today. --Trav 22:09, 3 April 2008 (BST)
3. Spam - Encourages zerging, and there's nothing wrong with the existing system. --Jasonjason 22:38, 3 April 2008 (BST)
4. Spam - Throwaway PKer accounts are entirely plausible, I've dealt with them personally before, and this would only encourage it. --Banana reads Scoundrell for all of Yesterday's News, Today! 22:52, 3 April 2008 (BST)
5. Spam - This idea blows. --The Hierophant 02:30, 4 April 2008 (BST)
6. Spam - Encourages zerging. --Druuuuu ^OcTRR 02:49, 4 April 2008 (BST)
7. You're telling us to bump the max AP to 100, just by adding in a different set of AP for different actions? Suggestions Dos and Do Nots clearly states against this. I'll get you the link to the part, but I thought it'll be more fun to let you dig it up yourself. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 03:21, 4 April 2008 (BST)
8. Spam max ap to 150? hell no! --~~~~ [talk] 07:14, 4 April 2008 (BST)
9. Spam - Complete with can of worms. ~Ariedartin • Talk • A KS J abt all 16:50, 4 April 2008 (BST)
10. Spam - game-breaking bullshit. have you played urban dead? do you enjoy urban dead? because this blows the genre out of the water, changes the entire flow of the game, infact, in changes the entire game. "combat ap"? and "combat related actions"? searching for ammo, weapons and FAKS, is combat related. Movement in and out of hostile areas, from your safehouse to the horde outside waiting to eat your brains, is combat related. Communicating with allies, and fellow besieged survivors is combat realted. YOU GET 50 AP!!! wtf, i can't say enough bad things about this suggestion, and the fact that you are admitidly a zerging multi-abusing, tard pk'er takes the cake. who cares if you pk, it's part of the game, but do it with the character you created. @#%! what's wrong with people, and their complete lack of ability to accept responsibility and consiquence for thier choices and actions? even in a FICTIONAL GAME!!!! i'm seathing... really. BS, pure unbridled, senseless bs. and just so you know, i've written such a long reply because you made me read through your suggestion. As all kill / spam votes above and below. this is garbage. -- Jack ^{S13 T! PC} 17:24, 4 April 2008 (BST)
11. Spam NO pro-Zerg suggestions!!! -- 
    •  Nevin McAvoy 
    •  (talk) 
    17:46, 4 April 2008 (BST)
12. Spam - NO! You should never have more than 50AP. EVER! Reminds me of Nexus War though; but that isn't good... -- The Lethal Trio ^{[Tlk|NTCS|RRF] U! E!} 21:36, 4 April 2008 (BST)
13. Spam - Horrible zombie nerf. You can't even get through VSB 'cades with only 25 attacks. - Grant (talk) 21:58, 4 April 2008 (BST)
14. Spam - Bad. Very bad. Does anyone read the whole "Suggestion Do's and Don'ts" anymore? 'Cuz I'm pretty sure it says something about modifying APs. DON'T DO IT. The system is fine the way it is and does not need fixing. --Toastrlord^{T TSA} 01:58, 5 April 2008 (BST)
15. Spam - How 'bout no. Way way overpowered in every way. The newbs'll get shot to pieces by the older guys with their 50AP and Firefighters are horribly nerfed. It takes about 45-50 AP to kill a full HP zombie with a fireaxe. This would make that impossible. And also, zombies wouldn't stand a chance against barricades. Not a chance in hell this would be a keep I'm afraid. Way too much wrong with it. -- Cheese 11:24, 5 April 2008 (BST)