Suggestion:20130327 Crippling Grasp
|
Closed |
| This suggestion has finished voting and has been moved to Peer Rejected. |
20130327 Crippling Grasp
Soul kai 14:23, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Suggestion type
Skill
Suggestion scope
zombies
Suggestion description
As the name suggests it slows down movement changing movement making a survivor walk for 2 ap instead of a standard 1 Ap.
Now before people jump on the kill wagon zeds start of with walking for 2 ap when there first in game as do survivors when there killed.
People get injured in zombie survivals and this gives it a bit more realism. If a zed has this skill and does attack with its hands it has the chance to cripple the survivor. The success rate is determined by HP below 30. The crippled survivor can be cured with a med pack.
ingame description : the zed attacking you cripples your left arm ( or leg) with a shattering grip.
healed survivor: you bandage your shattered bone in your arm ( or leg)
Voting Section
| Voting Rules |
Votes must be numbered, justified, signed, and timestamped.
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
- Keep- I actually like the concept, giving zeds some interesting choices of which attack to use, do I go for the damage, or the infection, or the cripple? Makes combat and my ap allocation more interesting. The actual effect on the survivors is also useful, hampering their ability to quickly get away and giving my zombie brothers some strategic options in addition to tactical ones. This concept makes being a zombie more fun. --Boneshred The Hungry 01:26, 5 April 2013 (BST)
- Keep - It would help out zombies a lot and I feel like they need it. This would make the game more fun and as well make you reconsider trying to take on zombies. Humans weapons do more damage then zombie attacks. Rupert Lang 18:08, 9 April 2013 (BST)
Kill Votes
- Realism in a zombie game.... good one.--User:Sexualharrison14:52, 27 March 2013
- realism as in damage the fact its a zombie game has nothing to do with it --Soul kai 15:23, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
- you bandage your shattered bone in your arm ( or leg), very realistic depiction, FAK=Magic! --Thadeous Oakley Talk 14:56, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
- how is it magic what else do you do with a fak and the depiction was just a example not to be taken seriously--Soul kai 15:23, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
- At this stage of the game, I'm interested in seeing suggestions that make the game more fun. I don't see how this does that in any way. It just makes more people annoyed. —Aichon— 15:07, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
- survivors are overpowered as it is if i was to please every survivor whim or favour survivors constantly the balance would be worse it technically is bad enough already.--Soul kai 15:23, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
- Regardless of whether they are OP or not, an imbalance in the game does not justify a bad suggestion, and crippling people is about the most not fun thing I can think of, which makes this a bad suggestion. If you think that things are imbalanced, the way you should fix it is by adding fun to the weaker side, rather than removing it from the stronger side. That's why I voted as I did. Hopefully that distinction makes sense. —Aichon— 16:08, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
- Aich's right. This makes sense and is fair--but the better solution would be to give everyone lurching gait for free and address the balance by removing restrictions, not adding them equally.
16:44, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
- Aich's right. This makes sense and is fair--but the better solution would be to give everyone lurching gait for free and address the balance by removing restrictions, not adding them equally.
- Regardless of whether they are OP or not, an imbalance in the game does not justify a bad suggestion, and crippling people is about the most not fun thing I can think of, which makes this a bad suggestion. If you think that things are imbalanced, the way you should fix it is by adding fun to the weaker side, rather than removing it from the stronger side. That's why I voted as I did. Hopefully that distinction makes sense. —Aichon— 16:08, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
- survivors are overpowered as it is if i was to please every survivor whim or favour survivors constantly the balance would be worse it technically is bad enough already.--Soul kai 15:23, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
- I'm all in favour of aiding zombies, but the mantra behind every successful suggestion is: Make the game more fun, not less. This suggestion clearly fails in this regard. -- Spiderzed█ 15:44, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
- Kill for the reasons above. Buff zombies, or weaken survivors in a fun way. Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 20:26, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
- Kill - Begrudgingly. I would have voted keep if you had given us some more specific statistics, attack rates, where it falls on the level-up tree etc. A ZOMBIE ANT 07:51, 4 April 2013 (BST)
- Kill The idea is nice but doesn't fit with suggestion guidelines, so Aichon is essentially correct here. Zombie skills seem to have a theme of increasing a zombies effectiveness, not decreasing survivors'. This does the later and not the former. --Zarak Goldleaf 19:03, 5 April 2013 (BST)
Spam/Dupe Votes
- Spam Have you read the "Frequently Suggested" or "Suggestions Dos and Do Nots" pages? Messing with action points makes for a bad suggestion. Lpha 16:26, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
