Suggestion talk:20080205 Trashed (Ruin Buff)

Discussion Moved From Talk:Suggestions

This is content moved directly from Talk:Suggestions and is no longer an active discussion

---

---

Trashed (Ruin Buff)

Timestamp:	Jon Pyre 22:38, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Type:	Ruin Buff
Scope:	Who or what it applies to.
Description:	As many other suggestions have pointed out, some currently below, ruin costs zombies lots of AP but doesn't do too much more than ransack. Ruining causes so much damage that's it's still a bit messy even after a repair. You know what a room can be like after some construction works been done. There's still furniture out of place, a few small items toppled over, debris that hasn't been cleared out yet. Nothing that requires repair ability or tools, just simple labor to clean. I suggest that after a ruined building is fixed it is described in its profile as "trashed." A trashed building doesn't have the same penalties as ruined or ransacked ones. It doesn't prevent barricading or free running at all. Instead it reduces search percentages in the building by 50%. Trashed buildings are also fixed differently - they're fixed by searching. It's assumed that as a survivor pokes through the structure they also straighten things to make their life easier. So a searching survivor might see: "You search the building, lifting a shelf off the floor to gain access to equipment behind it. You still find nothing." or "You search the building, clearing some debris from a stack of boxes. You find a first aid kit." After five searches, successful or not, the trashed status is repaired. The last survivor's search message has the line "The building is now neat and clean" or something similar. This change would give zombies an incentive to trash a building, at least a resource building. Even if it's fixed immediately for 1AP a survivor needs to spend 5AP for 2.5AP worth of searching in order to get the building back to normal percentages.

Discussion (Trashed)

Lol, I just had some thoughts about Ruin below. Anyway, this is an interesting idea...so it makes the effective AP cost of repairing a ruined building more like 2.5 AP or something, whatever the amount the survivor uses on "wasted searches" in some sense, hmm? -- Ashnazg 0213, 5 February 2008 (GMT)

Yes. It's a little different because it isn't an outright wasted action - theoretically they could find something all five times. Someone searching would be aiding both themselves by finding items, albeit at a lower rate, but also doing something altruistic by untrashing the building for other people. --Jon Pyre 04:09, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Lol, that's not really an accurate way to say it, and I'm pretty sure you should know that too. In the long run, what this suggestion does is to increase the cost of fixing Ruin by 2.5 AP, since that's the effective amount of survivor AP wasted in searching and finding nothing when they would have found something had they been in a normal building. -- Ashnazg 1309, 5 February 2008 (GMT)

Sounds fun. Searching is pretty boring, but this would give me a sense of accomplishment and make it more fun, and I like how anyone could do it, even item/skill-less people. Maybe the trashed text could say, "This place is trashed, making it hard to find things. Maybe you could clean it up while searching for items?" and when you search, "You search the building, lifting a shelf off the floor to gain access to equipment behind it. You still find nothing, but at least it's a little tidier in here." Oh, and maybe 1 XP when you finish cleaning it up? --Ms.Panes 04:58, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't thinkk this would be to un balancing and would make sense as well. You have a yes from me--The Jack of Diamonds 07:00, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Super! UCFSD 14:21, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

How about each FAILED search counting towards un-trashing the building? It seems a bit good to both get an item, AND improve your future search odds. Also makes for simpler action report strings.  Swiers 19:22, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

---

---

Discussion above the line is from Talk:Suggestions and is no longer active.

Discussion on Voting

Discussion on Voting goes under here

Discussion on the suggestion page

Discussion on the suggestion as submitted goes under here

Re Spam

Nonauthor or additional Res go under here

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam - zombies need a buff like survivors need a sniper rifle. Oh, and there's fuck all point in searching some buildings. And what if the survivor already has >=100% encumbrance? This has been thought out about as far as the designs for a chocolate hat. --Funt Solo ^QT 18:53, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
   • Re I'll admit that zombies don't need a buff right now but this is really intended more to fix Ruin. Maybe this shouldn't be added until after survivors get something new. As to 100% encumbrance, perhaps clicking the search button would give you a message like "You're too encumbered to carry anything else, but you explore the building, lifting a collapsed shelf that's in your way." Although there's really no reason why you'd want to altruistically untrash a building for others. It isn't like you need to clean it up to hold the barricades, why not let someone that actually wants to search spend the AP? --Jon Pyre 19:44, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

   • Re - Oh, right, so you want me to tidy up a bank, that has no searchable items at all, by searching for those non-existant items? Boy, that'll make for a fun gameplay device. What you doing over there, George? Why, I'm searching this empty building, Phil. Flavour-wise, this is the shittest suggestion since Moronic Bob suggested a Zombie Godzilla possessed by an undead Kal-El. If you want to fuck up the survivors (and you clearly do) why not just double the encumbrance cost of the toolbox? Of course, the sensible method of doing this is to just make levels of repair, as there are levels of ransack. Thing is, that's been suggested and shot down on numerous occasions because the toolbox does balance out the gameplay. This is like Dupe + Stupid flavour to hide it from being a dupe. Transparently crap. --Funt Solo ^QT 20:53, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

   Re Sorry to double re but I'll be brief. You don't need to untrash buildings with no items since for those trashing is cosmetic. If nobody wants to spend AP to untrash a bank it just remains as a kind of zombie decoration. --Jon Pyre 21:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

   Re - it's not just decoration, JP - anyone knows that. It messes up the Free Running network, and those buildings can be used as safe houses. I thought you actually played the game? Or are you just pretending you don't know all this already? --Funt Solo ^QT 21:31, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Read it again Funt... the search only repairs the newly instigated damage to searches AFTER the ruin has been fixed in the normal way! What Jon is suggesting is that buildings have the following statuses: normal, ransacked, ruined repaired but messy, normal again! if you don't care about the mess and can't find anything usefull then leaving it messy (ie not searching 5 times!) makes no difference except to the building description! --Honestmistake 00:21, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Yup. --Jon Pyre 02:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay, HM, you're right on that. It's the same old story, though - the original complaints I had against the suggestion (and there are many) are overlooked by JP. If there's nothing for me to search for, because I'm at 100% encumbrance, then the only reason I would search is actually to tidy up. But I can't keep anything I find whilst I'm tidying. At least, when fixing using a toolbox, you're spending AP with no secondary purpose that you sometimes can't achieve. Plus, the ransack and ruin thing is already really powerful - this is adding more power to an already powerful zombie weapon, that as far as I can tell, requires no buff. Apart from because everyone is under the delusion that tidying up after zombies is somehow fun, what's this suggestion for, exactly? Honestly, I feel like I've woken up in Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Maybe this is the perfect week to put in my revised Sniper Rifle and Zombie Catapult suggestions. --Funt Solo ^QT 13:44, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd like a zombie catapult. --Ms.Panes 21:44, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

To simplify it further-> trashed = completely normal safehouse, except for lower search rates. Ransacked + trashed = the building was ruined, but somebody repaired it (without untrashing it), then later a zombie ransacked it. This in no way affects free running, because trashing only affects search rates. --Ms.Panes 08:02, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

"Naturally, ruin replaces a trashed status." means that if a trashed building is later ruined by a zombie, it is no longer trashed, it is simply ruined. --Ms.Panes 08:08, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Whatever - it's still horribly overpowered and not needed or wanted by me. --Funt Solo ^QT 08:59, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, if you do the numbers I think you'll find it's not really that big of a deal(even if it seems like a lot). See, over the last year or so search rates on everything useful have pretty much doubled. With this for 5 AP searching is basically what it was in 2006. --Karek^maps?! 14:28, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Your logic is flawed. If search rates have doubled (and that's a big "if", because your word isn't the same as hard evidence), then they've been doubled for a reason. Cutting them in half for no reason at all remains an odd thing to suggest. Obviously, you're in favour - you're always in favour of powering up zombies, whether there's a logical reason to do so or not. --Funt Solo ^QT 15:03, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I don't think there's anything in this suggestion that makes zombies better or helps the balance, it's pretty much pure flavor and I am for it because this encourages a conquest play style type mechanic, I like conquest. And also, I'm in favor of balancing the game, not super powered zombies, there's always a reason for why I vote for something usually based on numbers and past experience(which, I will admit, has been mostly zombie for the last year or so). I'd rather say you're the one who votes based on your belief that survivors are somehow magically weak, you frequently ignore what numbers and evidence there actually is throughout the game to make claims like "Toolboxes are too heavy" without actually considering why they are heavy, or "Encumbrance is bad enough" without actually thinking about how little encumbrance actually does.--Karek^maps?! 16:26, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't recall ever saying "toolboxes are too heavy" or "encumbrance is bad enough". (I may have said that both things are balanced as they are.) Don't make shit up. I note that you completely ignored the point I made about search rates, instead playing a ridiculous game of bounce off me, stick to you. --Funt Solo ^QT 16:57, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

You take things too personally often, you should work on that some. And I ignored the point you made because I think it's ridiculous, the only thing that you can even make an argument for it being increased, for any reason, is the Necrotech Revivification Syringes, if you weren't so dead set on claiming this is overpowered even you would realize that.--Karek^maps?! 17:43, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I didn't make any argument to increase search rates, though. You're making more shit up. --Funt Solo ^QT 19:45, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Totally, because it's not obvious from the context that I mean for it having increased from 2006. The government isn't out to get you because your name start with an F Funt.--Karek^maps?! 20:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Look at it this way- it adds 5 AP to the cost of repairing a ruined building. That is a good thing; ruin mechanics suck now, and saying other zombie strengths balance them is pointless, because ruin might as well be removed from the game as it is now. And the extra 5 Ap can come from ANY survivor; you don't need a toolbox or construction skill to search. That ALSO is a good thing.  Swiers 20:58, 6 February 2008 (UTC)