Suggestion:20080521 Fort Gatehouse Tower View

	Dupe
	This suggestion has been found to be a dupe of Gatehouse tall building (already in Peer Reviewed). Dupes are easily found by searching for them in the main and suggestion namespaces.

20080521 Fort Gatehouse Tower View

Tselita 04:53, 21 May 2008 (BST)

Suggestion type
Building/Binoculars Improvement
Suggestion scope
Gatehouses of Forts
Suggestion description
Gatehouses should be considered 'tall buildings' only for the purposes of using Binoculars - not for suiciding. The binocular vantage point would be built for viewing but would be covered and the view windows would be too small to jump out. It makes sense to assume that a fort would have an area to use as a lookout point, and the Gatehouse is the most appropriate place for this, since it is the bottleneck for the entire fort.

Benefits:

• Gives Fort Dwellers an idea of the zombie numbers in the extended surrounding suburb squares of the fort.
• Logical - Forts should have a lookout area - lets them know if a huge invasion force is coming to give time to prepare for a siege (or to run).
• Gives binoculars more application in a situation where it might actually be useful (other than NT buildings).
• Gives survivors an in-game way of telling numbers in the surrounding area without having to rely on metagaming.

Detriments:

• People might ask why it hasn't been able to be used this way until now, roleplay-wise (My answer would be that survivors have managed to since build butresses and perches, or maybe a makeshift lookout point/view window for lookouts from which to use their binoculars).

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 - Author Keep --Tselita 04:56, 21 May 2008 (BST)
2. Keep-ok (-:--Airborne88^T|Z.Quiz|PSS 06:18, 21 May 2008 (BST)

   vote changed It still makes sense but a legitimate dupe has been found--Honestmistake 13:37, 22 May 2008 (BST)

3. reluctant keep - I can't believe I'm voting keep on a Fort buff.... :P But this is perfectly sensible, it's part of how a gatehouse is constructed to allow one to see outside. And, Grim is wrong: binocs are not merely a flavour item. I use them for scouting all the time. Their efficacy is limited, sure -- that's the trade off for not having to step outside -- but they are useful. --WanYao 12:03, 21 May 2008 (BST)

   Keep I can't see any harm in this (although I almost never visit forts.) --Explodey 12:19, 21 May 2008 (BST) Vote changed to dupe --Explodey 14:45, 22 May 2008 (BST)

4. Keep Sure, why not? Hardly game breaking, it's a handy way of spotting how many zombies are parked outside the gatehouse when someone has barricaded the doors to EHB. Moyes^{T RPM} 13:38, 21 May 2008 (BST)
5. Keep - its a start...gabdewulf 15:04, 21 May 2008 (BST)
6. Keep - No reason why it shouldn't already be included. It's not a huge buff, but adds a little realism to the game. Ioncannon11 15:41, 21 May 2008 (BST)
7. Keep - It seems fair enough. It also lets survivors know if people are just panic-mongering when saying "TEH ZAMBAHS ARE INVAD1NG LULZ!"--Medico 18:06, 21 May 2008 (BST)
8. Keep - Kind of trenchy, but it isn't that big of an addition. --ZsL 17:40, 21 May 2008 (BST)
9. Keep - Glass can be broken, Iscariot. Trenchies + trenchplace buff + fort = slaughter. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 18:44, 21 May 2008 (BST)
10. keep - i agree --Scotw 20:13, 21 May 2008 (BST)
11. Keep - Fort buff! Yeah... Will probably attract even more trenchies there... More trenchies in forts => less trenchies everywhere else :) -- 
    •  Nevin McAvoy 
    •  (talk) 
    21:00, 21 May 2008 (BST)

    Keep - Its amazing what bullshit reasons those spam voters make up, keep all the way. Unsigned. --ZsL 02:03, 22 May 2008 (BST)

12. Keep - As Viktor and Medico. --H The Person 23:49, 21 May 2008 (BST)
13. Keep - I like the idea--Jamie Cantwel3 ^TalkAll glory to the Hypnotoad! 00:33, 22 May 2008 (BST)
14. Keep - I like the idea a lot! I can't believe a girl could come up with it all by herself - wonderful! --#147 - KaeseEs^TMG 21:49:15 21 May 2008 (EST)
15. Keep - Wow bullshit spam reasons here. This is a good idea and worthy of being peer reviewed. --Pvt human 12:12, 22 May 2008 (BST)
16. keep - some people will spam anything --Frednotyetdead 13:47, 22 May 2008 (BST)
17. Keep - You'd have to be an incredibly shitty tactician to design a fort without some sort of lookout point. --Heretic144 01:46, 23 May 2008 (BST)

Kill Votes

1. Kill Gives Fort Dwellers an idea of the zombie numbers in the extended surrounding suburb squares of the fort. You mean only in one direction right? As the rest of of the gatehouse would be in the way on 3 sides.

   Also. You can leave the fort, you do know that? Scout around and then come back. Maybe we should put a note on the top of the two fort pages about that? Save no end of problems with people thinking they can never leave. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 17:49, 21 May 2008 (BST)

   • Re - Actually, you can't leave the fort unless the gatehouse is barracaded VSB or lower. Above VSB++, you can't go in -or- out of the fort. Also, in response to the first paragraph, no, you can see in multiple directions - a binoculars lets you see 9 squares in any direction. The only direction that would make little sense to use is when you look back at the direction of the fort itself, since you'd only be able to see 3 squares outside of the fort. But if you look in the other 7 directions, you'll be able to see farther than you'd be able to see from the fort confines. --Tselita 05:19, 22 May 2008 (BST)

2. Kill - Existing 'tall buildings' are within the realm of towers and skyscrapers; Fort gatehouses / watchtowers are nowhere near that height and would likely have obstructed views over any real distance. Also, it is horribly impractical to watch out from a tall structure only through 'eye slits' or other small openings, as it severely limits the watcher's field of view. Any viewing points would almost certainly be large enough for a human to pass through. --#4 - Haberdash ^TMG 20:15, 21 May 2008 (BST)
3. Kill - As Gardenator.  Billy Club Thorton  T!  RR  20:19, 21 May 2008 (BST)
4. Kill Worst idea ever. No, nailguns was worse. Still, I have not yet seen a fort gatehouse that was useful for binoculars but not for suicidal jumps. --Capt Schwartz 03:22, 22 May 2008 (BST) (FIRST CLASS)

   • Re - Ask and ye shall receive. Here's one where they boarded up and reenforced the viewpoint so there was only a small area to look out of - enough to look out, not big enough to jump out. The intended reason was to give a lookout additional protection from attack.
     Image:ghousefortifiedview.jpg --Tselita 06:57, 22 May 2008 (BST)

5. Kill - I just don't buy it.... Apart from anything else I thought that a lot of modern forts where built kind of low to the ground, so they're not a massive target, anyway leaving that aside I don't think that forts need a buff, they would already be the strongest buidings in the game if they where used properly, they have access to pretty much everything apart from NT stuff, and are very srong (theoreticaly) places to seige. Now I know its a small addition but quite apart from anything else I always pictured fort gatehouses to be kinda squat buildings. Maybe if you suggested the addition of a new building, watchtower, say?--Seventythree^Talk 10:51, 22 May 2008 (BST)

   • Re - Actually 73, that's what I was implying with "The binocular vantage point would be built for viewing but would be covered and the view windows would be too small to jump out." - the idea would be that survivors would have learned to build a vantage point... a type of watch tower... by the gatehouse in order to use it for checking out the surrounding area. The 'effect' gamewise would be gatehouses being treated as tall buildings for the sake of binoculars. --Tselita 10:56, 22 May 2008 (BST)

   Hmm. I still don't quite like it... Anyway, a dupe has been found, so I guess the point is kinda irrelevant. Good news is the dupe is apparently in peer reveiwed!--Seventythree^Talk 13:43, 22 May 2008 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam - To point 1 of benefits: Radios and communication. Stepping outside the fort and looking around. point 3: Binoculars are flavour, not super duper gear. Point 4: See response to point 1. Your understanding of the game is demonstrably weak, and its a senseless uneeded buff to forts, the trenchcoat capitols of Malton. --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 05:14, 21 May 2008 (BST)
2. Spam - I can see this being useful for about 1% of the survivor population. -- LABIA on the INTERNET ^{Dunell Hills Corpseman} #24 - |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ^TMG 09:02, 21 May 2008 (BST)

   • Re -' Wow, actually using a directed insult as your sig... I remember when Riseabove had his vote struck as inane for using that picture as his vote reasoning - how Trollish of you --Tselita 06:47, 22 May 2008 (BST)

   Wow, actually using short, to the point sentences as your reply... oh wait your Re - above really was about nothing. Keep trying though, I'm sure eventually you will figure out how to make a reply since you already figured out that less "wall of text" is more. -- LABIA on the INTERNET ^{Dunell Hills Corpseman} #24 - |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ^TMG 08:28, 22 May 2008 (BST)

3. Spam - Internal logic failure. Office buildings have glass in them to stop people falling out, yet they're still allowed to jump from them in the game. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 17:27, 21 May 2008 (BST)

   • Re - Glass can be broken far easier than boards and reinforced concrete, Iscariot. Fort gatehouse parapets/watchtowers/etc. can be designed with small view windows in various directions - big enough to see out of, not big enough to jump out. --Tselita 08:18, 22 May 2008 (BST)

4. Spam - As Grim. --The Hierophant 23:38, 21 May 2008 (BST)
5. Spam - As Gardenator -- #34 - robotsinmyhead ^TMG Team Captain 02:12, 22 May 2008 (BST)
6. Spam - As Robots --#19 - DrPain ^TMG 02:15, 22 May 2008 (BST)
7. Dupe (already in Peer Reviewed), with the only difference being the negation of the suicide ability, which is a fairly meh part of it anyway. --Funt Solo ^QT 12:04, 22 May 2008 (BST) I've added a note to the linked-to dupe, regarding the question of suicide use, and linking back here. That way, we lose nothing by sending this to the great Dupe graveyard in the sky. There's nothing saying we shouldn't add notes to prior suggestions in this way, and it seems to make sense to do so in this case. --Funt Solo ^QT 17:31, 22 May 2008 (BST)
8. Dupe - As Funt, l2research.--Karek^maps?! 12:17, 22 May 2008 (BST)
9. Dupe - As Funt. --Metabob 13:33, 22 May 2008 (BST)
10. Dupe - vote changed from a why not type keep as the Link is valid (this version is better though as military watchposts do only have narrow viewing points, makes the viewer a harder target to spot!--Honestmistake 13:37, 22 May 2008 (BST)
11. Spam/Dupe - As above, plus I object to the image in the voting section --Explodey 14:45, 22 May 2008 (BST)

    • Re - Sorry Explodey, but if I had added it to the suggestion, Grim would probably have stricken the entire suggestion a second time. Personally I wasn't aware of the original suggestion (I tend to rely on Iscariot as a dupe finding machine) but I still think it's different because of the lack of ability to suicide. Still, nice to see that the original got to Peer Review. --Tselita 15:07, 22 May 2008 (BST)

12. Dupe - I know I promised a keep, but I never thought you would prevent suiciding too. ~Ariedartin • Talk • A KS J abt all 15:57, 22 May 2008 (BST)

    • Re - 'Sokay. If it didn't have suiciding in it, it actually -would- be a dupe. I felt it was necessary to put that in, in order to prevent people killing it because of it being a boon to spies coming in as survivors, jumping to their deaths, then bashing down the cades with almost full AP and giving inside info, and others killing it by saying it's a boon to life cultists getting bored inside, jumping out and killing zeds with almost full AP. --Tselita 16:01, 22 May 2008 (BST)

13. Spam - If any 'tall' building is ever created, I want to jump from it. Phail sir, Phail. -- T^HEL^ORDG^UNS^LINGER 16:46, 22 May 2008 (BST)
14. Pointless/Spupe - Meh, no need.... other wise as Grim/Funty--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 18:50, 22 May 2008 (BST)
15. It's a dupe. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 00:17, 23 May 2008 (BST)

    • Re - Well, like 73 said, at least it's one that had already gotten to peer review :) --Tselita 00:19, 23 May 2008 (BST)

---