Suggestions/13th-Nov-2005

Closed Suggestions

1. These suggestions are now closed. No more voting or editing is to be done to them.
2. Suggestions with a rational Vote tally of 2/3 Keeps over total of Keeps, Kills, and Spams will be moved to the Peer Reviewed Suggestions page by a moderator, unless the original author has re-suggested the Suggestion.
3. Suggestions under the 2/3 proportion but with more or equal Keeps to Kills ration will be moved to the Undecided Suggestions page.
4. All other Suggestions will be moved to either the Peer Rejected Suggestions page or the Humorous Suggestions page.
5. Some suggestions may not be moved in a timely manner; moving Suggestions to Peer Reviewed Suggestions page will take higest priority.
6. Again, DO NOT EDIT THIS PAGE IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM. It will be used as a historical record and will eventually be locked.

13th November, 2005 - VOTING ENDED: 27th-Nov-2005

NecroTech Veteran

Timestamp:	00:08, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Skill
Scope:	Survivors, Scientific
Description:	Requires Lab Experience. Allows a Survivor to search specifically for any type of NecroTech item instead of just a blind search, much like the Shopping skill allows one to search a specific type of store in the mall. While you are searching for a particular item, the chance you will actually find something is lowered by 10%.

Votes

• Keep Personal preference. Lxndr
• Keep Useful, but unless I'm wrong...wouldn't that make the search percentage so insanely low that you would practically never find anything? Just a thought. --Kulatu, 00:59, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Too low a search rate. Besides, that nagging "How long will it take me to be revived?" question is part of the reason to avoid death. Bentley Foss 11:23, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill, Too low a search rate indeed. --15:26, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep Currently you have 20% to find something, and then a 1 in 3 chance for the different types of items (syringe, GPS, scanner). So basically the chance increases from 6.66% to 10% (the average AP needed to find a something particular (e.g. a syringe) drops from 15 AP to 10 AP). One might lower the percentage chance to 8.33% (i.e. average 12 AP per item) if the impact to the AP balance shouldn't be too high. Hell, I might even buy it with 6.66% as it still would stop me having to drop numerous GPS units and scanners (although my character claims he discards the old scanners due to their contamination ;). Madalex 16:01, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - See Madalex. I hate having to spend my server hits dropping things too. --Shadowstar 20:16, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - I think this is a good search rate for the skill. More than this, and than syringes will become quite widespread, and the zombie numbers will drop like a stone as a result. Even introducing this skill will probably drop the balance to 50-50. --Xamnam 21:22, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep We hates finding GPS Units, hates them.--Insomniac By Choice 22:02, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - See comment by Madalex. --Seagull Flock 13:39, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep except don't change the find percentage. I'm with Insomniac By Choice. --Argus Blood 05:59, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep But, as a tech, I'd prefer the find percentage stayed the same... X1M43 06:05, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - Nothing wrong with this, but like Shopping, don't change the find percentage. --Squashua 18:22, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - A slight increase in the chance to find a syringe, and less inventory clutter. Nice. --Dickie Fux 22:24, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - as is no. Good idea though. I was going to vote for spam since a variant of this has been suggested elsewhere. --Nov 08:17, 25 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---

Headshot Weakens Ankle Grab

Timestamp:	00:31, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Modify Existing Skill
Scope:	Survivors, Zombie Hunter
Description:	Currently, Headshot removes XP. Instead of doing this, I suggest having Headshot add 4 AP to a particular zombie's Stand Up Cost (unable to go over 10 AP). People say don't mess with AP, but I say don't mess with XP. This helps balance the hideously overpowered Ankle Grab as well as the sometimes lethally frustrating Headshot.

Votes

• Kill -- Good effect on Ankle Grab, but I think the change for headshot is far too extreme. You'd take it from deadly right down to near useless (from a survivor perspective). At least, that's how I feel the weight of it now vs. the weight of it then would be. -pinkgothic 13:52, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill -- Too big of an impact on the game. Headshot would become a mere shadow of it's former self --McArrowni 16:10, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Bentley Foss 16:47, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Suggestion is utter crap trying to remove skills. stop griefing the game noob! --PooBear 18:55, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill I don't think the game currently needs rebalancing. Madalex 19:25, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - More useful than current headshot against hordes. Actually makes the skill useful again. --Shadowstar 20:14, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - I like, but instead use 1x or 2x Zombie Level added to Stand Up APs. Keep in mind that Headshots just encourage Zombies to take Brain Rot. Of course, with all the Headshots, it's almost impossible for a high level survivor to accrue the XP. --Squashua 18:20, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - The current headshot is mostly seen as a way of griefing against those who decide to play as a zombie. With this suggestion, the headshot would ONLY be useful against the more experienced zombies who took the Ankle Grab skill, which is, by most standards, overpowered indeed. --Hexedian 18:58, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - The basic idea is good, but making Headshot do nothing at all unless a zombie has Ankle Grab is a little too much nerfing. Maybe if standard stand up cost was 8 AP, 1 with Ankle grab, and Headshot added 4 to either one. Any change away from losing XP would be good, though. --Dickie Fux 22:30, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - Agreed, it seems useless against those without Ankle Grab, but still seems better than the current system (it is far to easy for hunters to incapacitate the levelling skills of zombies). Perhaps slight tweaking like Dickie Fux suggested would benefit as well, but I feel this suggestion has significant merit to award a 'Keep.' Jean Gregoire 01:08, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - bookkeeping and griefing. Nuff said. --Nov 08:19, 25 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Yet another OMFG ANKLE GRAB IS TEH OVERPOOWERED! complaint. -- --Jorm 11:13, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---

Dedicated Fury

Timestamp:	01:39, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Skill
Scope:	Zombie Hunter skill
Description:	Like the above suggestion but not stupid. This option would be on the zombie hunter skill tree after headshot. In addition to the xp removed the zombie would lose 1 ap for every level that it had above the first. meaning that a level 8 zombie will lose 8 ap. This would only count towards levels obtained under the zombie tree. This method means that a level 34 character will not lose 34 ap and means a maximum loss of 14 ap. Being a zombie hunter means you are dedicated having seen the hell that has consumed marlton and striking out in a manner worthy of a true and noble hero against the rot festering like the smell of the sewers.

Votes

• Kill - Sorry, but I hate AP loss suggestions. All that high-level zombie has to do is to wait for 7 hours to earn that AP back. This sort of effect is not worth the complication in the code for this. --Fixen 03:24, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill Seriously folks, don't mess with AP. And it's Malton.... Bentley Foss 11:25, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam You know when you said it was like the above suggestion, but not stupid? You were wrong. Slicer 15:53, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - The other suggestion if you read it modifies an existing skill so I agree with this suggestion that it is stupid. Please learn to read and maybe everyone wont laugh at you. stop griefing the game noob! --PooBear 18:56, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill As above ;) Madalex 19:27, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill, this sort of thing makes low level zombies stronger than higher leveled ones. Jirtan 20:19, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill "Like the above suggestion but not stupid." False advertising, ;) --Insomniac By Choice 22:06, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - This suggestion is even worse than the above suggestion. I have an idea, let's just make a SUPER ZOMBIE KILLING SKILL that actually destroys the zombie character completely and makes them start over. --Pyrinoc 16:03, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Do not make others LOSE AP. Instead, make it so that it takes additional AP to Stand Up. Level 8 Zombie? +8AP to Stand Up (Ankle Grab = 9AP, non-Ankle Grab=18AP). --Squashua 18:18, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam - So crap. --Dickie Fux 22:32, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam - AP killing isn't healthy for balanced gameplay. Jean Gregoire 01:11, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam -- Fourth Spam vote. This one is out of here. --Nov 08:24, 25 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam -- I'll add a fifth. -- --Jorm 11:13, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---

Grenade

Timestamp:	02:04, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Offensive Weapon
Scope:	Survivors, Military
Description:	A deadly (but rare) area-of-effect weapon that can only be found inside the armoury of a fort. The Grenade can only be thrown at packs of zombies with a 50% chance of landing in the right place. If it goes off, there is a 20% chance that all zombies in the pack will take 5 points of damage from the blast. Even if no zombies end up taking damage, a Survivor who immediately flees after using a grenade cannot be tracked using Scent Fear.

Votes

• Kill One: Mass attacking is stupid. Two: You're stupid. Three: This nade is weaker than a shotgun. It cant even take paint off a wall. Four: How does a nade exploding affect how zombies can track you? Ugh, forget it. Theres too many flaws with this. Also, coding for this is a nightmare. 50% chance of it landing in the right place and 20% that zombies will take dmg? God, you are stupid. AllStarZ 02:49, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • RE: And you are abusive. One: Mass attacking is not stupid, its unbalanced. Two: Don't attack the poster because the idea isn't up to snuff, that just makes you the "stupid" one. Three: You don't understand the mechanics of the game, this isn't weaker than the shottie, Its horribly overpowered. If it does go off, you have a potential to do massive amounts of damage to a horde. Now, coordinate an attack of about 10 surviors with about 10 gernades each, and you have the potential to wipe out a horde of ANY size. Thats 100 gernades, times a 50% chance of exploding, meaning you have more 50 gernades that probably will go off. Now with a 20% chance to hit, thats actually just 10 gernades that hit out of the 100, BUT there is one more step to the math; The damage which is 10x5 = 50. Meaning 10 survivors just did 50 damage to EVERY zed in a horde of ANY size. Thats a HORRIBLY overpowered item. Weaker than the shotty my ass. Try doing the math before you call someone stupid. --Vellin 09:08, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill. Group attacking is already done with, so just forget about it. Above that, it's just too complicated for any weapon. Fixen 02:59, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • RE: Exactly two of the few things i said mate AllStarZ 03:02, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Area attacks just aren't going to happen. They're too prone to abuse, bugs, and other problems. Bentley Foss 11:26, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam, Area affect attacks == bad. --Lucero Capell 15:28, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam Yeah, one grenade is going to do 5 damage to a horde of 200+ zombies. Slicer 15:56, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill --McArrowni 16:12, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill Didn't know we also got defensive weapons in Malton ;) Madalex 19:30, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Would like to see grenade done right; this isn't it. --Squashua 18:16, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam This would completely destroy the Hordes and end all the seiges at once. --Stroth 05:20, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam - Does not even resemble a good suggestion. --Dickie Fux 22:34, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill i totaly do not agree with this in any way, shape, or form. BUT, i want it around so we can deleat all future mentions of grenades--Spellbinder 01:01, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam - Hasn't this idea been killed off before? Jean Gregoire 01:12, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Response to above comment Yes, but many people continually believe that they will succeed where others have failed.
    • RE: Or they don't read what has been suggested before. --Nov 08:30, 25 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam -- Just adding more weight to this. --Nov 08:30, 25 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill -- Unless this is modified to also kill/damage survivors in the same square, NFW. --Jorm 11:16, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill Had a huge RE and totaly forgot to put forth my kill vote.

---

Engineer(Very last one)

Timestamp:	03:18, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Char Class
Scope:	Science
Description:	Guy who starts with Construction, crowbar, a GPS Unit and yeah. Thats it. HAPPY??????

Votes

• Keep - Well, there you have my vote. Simplicity is gold.--Fixen 03:34, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - Yes. --Kulatu 03:38, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - Cool beans, think we got a winner here. --Zaruthustra 05:12, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - I like the idea (plus I don't want to be mauled in my sleep :P) - Jedaz 08:34, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - YAH, you finally got it balanced. Way to go. --Vellin 09:09, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep, Don't mind me, I just don't want to be killed in my sleep. --Lucero Capell 15:29, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep, HAPPY! --McArrowni 16:14, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep, looks nice. Jirtan 16:44, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep 'Nuff said. Madalex 19:17, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep Perfect! Jonesy 19:43, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep I'd prefer if he also started with BodyBuilding and Headshot (just kidding). --Squashua 21:47, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - I don't think it's realistic to have a different class for every single skill combination, but I like this one. --Seagull Flock 13:43, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • RE Excellent. You will all wake to see another day without severe bruising.
• Keep Very nice. --Argus Blood 06:02, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep I like it. Simple and easy to add on. Who wouldn't want construction starting out? Make your home into a zombie-proof shelter, help out the neighborhood. Only minor issue is that level 1 engineers would be more helpful to a team than level 1 privates. But it's not really a big balance issue. --Otona 10:34 PM (Seattle), 14 Nov 2005
• Keep Sure... that works. A character class that already can destroy and construct barricades. They should have hand to hand training so the crowbar is actually helpful. ALIENwolve 19:57, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep I doubt too many people would choose this class (first couple levels would be BRUTAL), but it's an interesting idea. I've thought about a class that starts with Construction myself. --CWD
• Kill Incidentally, I don't appreciate being threatened. --LouisB3 22:06, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)

RE Incidentally i think you should shut the hell up because the "maul u in the sleep" part is a joke. This is probably the best idea i ever had and ever will make. In any case im not going to vote for my own suggestion because that would be idiotic. Im happy to take suggestions for my idea though.

• Keep Please don't insult people. --Carfan7 04:21, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - Just don't implement until Zombie classes are added, though. --Dickie Fux 22:37, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • RE: Whoever the hell added on the name "sapper" to this should die. Its a scientist class, not one of your stupid military class sapper idea where the guy has a gun, barricade ability, and can set traps. If your sapper idea got shot down, too bad. My engineer idea beats whatever you made. AllStarZ 19:54, 24 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill -- Don't think we should get more survivor classes. This one is good though. --Nov 08:33, 25 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep -- I would prefer that this be a Civilian class instead and without the GPS unit, but yes, it would be nice to be able to start with construction, so yes. --Lord Kelvin 21:39, 25 Nov 2005 (CST)

RE: U know what. People said this would be better as a science class, so i changed it from civilian. No fucking way im changing it again. AllStarZ 05:22, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)

• Keep -- I think expanding character options is a good idea and this isn't overbalancing. --Jorm 11:17, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---

GPS Phone

Timestamp:	03:05, 13 Nov 2005
Type:	Item
Scope:	Survivor Item
Description:	As per my Item Combination idea, a GPS Phone is a combination of a mobile phone and a GPS module. When using this phone, your exact location in coordinates is included with your message to the receiver.

Votes

• keep--I think this would be useful for meeting up with someone and organizing a strike team, although you may not always want to give away your coordinats.
  • Keep - Voting for self. I agree, and I guess that would be a nice warning to choose your contacts well. --Fixen 17:49, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep-- I tend to find the GPS device itself useless, personnaly. This would solve that problem. --McArrowni 16:16, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep based on the assumption that mobile phones will eventually start to work this would be a great improvement to them. Madalex 19:19, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep Not bad. Useless for now, but adds functionality later. Nice work. --Otona 10:30 PM (Seattle), 14 Nov 2005
• Keep - No harm, no foul; of course, why can't a survivor with a GPS unit just type in his coordinates in his message? Also, what if the survivor does NOT want to transmit coordinates? Instead of auto-sending such a thing, add a checkbox "add coordinates" to the future GPS cellphone message entry field. --Squashua 18:14, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • RE - As much as I think that this is a good point, nobody in here has offered reasons why one won't want to send coordinates. --Fixen 02:51, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - Seems reasonable. If you don't want to send your coordinates, find a regular cell phone and use that. --Dickie Fux 22:41, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill -- Going against the flow. Combining this so we'll get one item taking up two slots with the same functions? What's the benefit of this? More work for Kevan and of little benefit to players. --Nov 08:36, 25 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep -- Everything has its use. -- --Jorm 11:18, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---

Stronger Zombies

Timestamp:	2:32,13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Skill
Scope:	make game play for interesting
Description:	increase zombies strength What i purpose, and i know a lot of people are going to disagree with this and want to shoot it down but here me out, if zombies were to happen in real life, there nerves would be dead. if there nerves were dead then they wouldn't feel any pain, now if they didnt feel any pain then they would be able to do thing human couldn't do. for example a zombie with out pain receptors would be able to bite harder then a human because he wouldnt have a nerve saying hey this hurts stop biting so hard so why not make every zombie attack one point higher, its not that much more but enough maybe to add some fear to the game becasue right now ive been playing a human character for the last two months and i have not died yet and im level 19, this would actually make it scarier if i knew the zombies would have an easier time getting into building or doing mor damage, tell me what you think.

Votes

• Keep-I think its true. Zombies do seem underpowered for what they are. Of course, they are dead and all. Still, who knows?-Vladmyre 08:28, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Although I do agree that zombies are underpowered I don't think that this is the solution. If you bite down hard enough on something then your teath are going to break, so unless theres going to be a feature where a zombies teath can be broken I don't see this happening. - Jedaz 08:40, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - I get your logic man, but the zombie in this game draws its power from numbers, not strength. --Vellin 09:11, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Zombies in this game get their strength from horde behavior and relentlessness. Bear that in mind when you suggest anything to increase zombie abilities. You're not just increasing it for one-on-one zombie encounters, you're increasing it during horde attacks too--and that adds up VERY fast. Bentley Foss 11:31, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Waaaaaay overpowered. --Lucero Capell 15:33, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam - By the same logic, shotguns should do 50 damage and cause permadeath, because let's face it, you're not getting back up after your head is simply gone. But that sort of realism isn't in this game, and there's no in-game reason to overpower zombies in this way. Ergo, this should be scrubbed off the Suggestions page post-haste. Slicer 16:04, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill Think high-level survivors can handle anything? Take a walk to RiddleyBank... McArrowni 16:17, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• KillI like to have some measure of realism in games, but please no more suggestions alon the lines of "If Zombies were real then..."bbrraaiinnssi 16:31, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Zombies are supposed to swarm, not roam individually like satanic monsters in godmode. --Fixen 17:47, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam - Makes absolutely no sense even from an IC pov. Just because you don't feel pain doesn't mean you're superman. Also completely screws up balance. --Scyld 18:20, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam - No skill whatsoever i dont even know what that pile of crap is supposed to be. Zombies can do alot of damage their called forums and since their weak and innefficient they result in using horde tactics since their not smart enough to do it on their own afterall that is why they are brain dead. --PooBear 18:58, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill I think Kevan already followed your logic to a great extend - a bite currently deals more damage than being hit by a fire axe. Madalex 19:33, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - Understand that a Bite has less of a chance to hit than Claws do. --Squashua 18:12, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Agree re: horde problems. This works in a one-on-one situation but turns even a small horde in a much bigger death machine than it already would be. --Jorm 11:20, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---

Zombie moves count less towards daily hit limit

Timestamp:	12:19, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Balance change
Scope:	Zombies, obviously
Description:	It seems like there's not really enough zombies walking around the game to make stuff really icky for the survivors. If you look at the stats, you'll notice there's more survivors than zombies out there. To give a boost to the number of zombies in Malton, you could change it so that hits to the main page from a zombie account count as half. That way a player with multiple zombie accounts could operate more of them at the same time. Ergo, more zombies in the game. Of course, Kevan could finetune the hit limit so that he can still generate enough income. Bottom line is, we need more zombies.

Votes

• Kill - Nuh-uh. I'm zorry, but zombies don't need a boost at this moment. --Lucero Capell 15:39, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill, zerging is too common as it is. --LibrarianBrent 15:46, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - No. Just, no. Besides, zombies are not that outnumbered right now. Bentley Foss 15:58, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Nah...I kinda like the 3:2 ratio right now. If you want proof that this is going well, let it be known that two of my three characters just got overrun in two different suburbs. --Fixen 17:45, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Lame attempt to try and make zombies stronger when their really just rotting pus bags. Zombies have increased from 7% since the start of statistics so get a clue at this rate the city will be crawling with no good degenerates in no time. --PooBear 19:00, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill Pay a visit to Roftwood or Ridleybank any time soon, and let us know if you still think there aren't enough zombies tin the game. Madalex 19:43, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill If you want more hits, pay for your account. --Shadowstar 20:10, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - 1-Incourages zombie zerging, 2-I think Kevan will raise the hit limit spontaneously when resources will allow. --Seagull Flock 13:45, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Zombie zerging ahoy! --Otona
• Kill - That's not the way it works; invest five bucks to Kevan via PayPal instead! That's what I did. --Squashua 18:08, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam Don't mess with IP. --Stroth 05:21, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - We need more zombies, but this is not the way to achieve that. --Dickie Fux 22:49, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill If used, it would be easy to cheat when you are a zombie character with multiple characters. --Carfan7 04:24, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam Encourages zerging. --Jorm 11:21, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• SPAM The Hit limmit is to prevent abuseing character usage. Also third spam your outa here. --Deathnut 22:20, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---

Batteries

Timestamp:	14:20, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Item
Scope:	Survivor Item
Description:	Used for powering the battery operated items. Comes in packs of 4, found in malls, police stations, fire stations, hotels and hospitals.

Votes

• Kill - What batterie powered items? btw, I'll read this again. Please explain, maybe in description, just what items we are talking about. --McArrowni 16:20, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Presumably batteries would function as ammo for any battery-powered items. However, there are no battery-powered items currently, and no workable suggestions have been proposed. Bentley Foss 16:44, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - Mobile phone, Flashlight, Laptop (necronet?)...I know you don't like these items, Bentley Foss, but these are the doable suggestions that I can think of. --Fixen 17:52, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - With a stretch of belief (not uncommon in this game or any game) GPS units, Cellphones, and any other item that gets into the game which is electronic could use generic "batteries". They should last a REALLY long time for some items, and other items could use them up quickly or use more of them. -- Amazing 17:56, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill This would require severious reimplementation of the game structure. Basically, you'd turn a already existing items into items requiring two item slots instead of one (� la weapons with ammonition). Madalex 19:46, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep I find the fact that GPS units seem to run on nothing odd. AllStarZ 12:46, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - Will require a tweak on the current battery-operated objects (DNA Extractor, etc.) but it's a good idea. --Seagull Flock 13:48, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Flashlights, GPS units, phones, etc. could have "ammo" in the form of battery charges that get used up. But as soon as it was implemented, it would F**K every single human using any of those items until they got batteries. You'd have like two days of no revives for anybody. --Otona 10:41 PM (Seattle), 14 Nov 2005
• Keep - the potential for new items is interesting; obviously items that would use batteries that are carried by players when the implementation hits (per Otona immediately above me) would be revised to begin with full batteries (just to be fair). Batteries could be useful for laser sights (below) and other items. --Squashua 18:07, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - With the new options coming forth in portable generators and fuel cans, it may be a long while (if it even happens) before another fuel source is considered --Andrew McM 19:50, 19 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - Original suggestion could have been more clearly written, but not a bad idea. May also require GPS units to have an on/off switch, so they aren't running constantly. --Dickie Fux 22:53, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Obliviates the strategic value of generators. --Jorm 11:22, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---

Torch

Timestamp:	14:20, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Item
Scope:	Survivor Item
Description:	Uses 1 battery per use. Can illuminate darker areas, conferring a combat bonus of 10% unless in open land for the next AP. Can be found in malls, police stations, junkyards, hotels and fire stations.

Votes

• Kill 10% bonus, available to all on top of the current 65% to hit? Add to that a confusing sytem, and you get me voting kill --McArrowni 16:24, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - It's a bad idea for one action to temporarily affect any other action. Such actions require too much from the server and an annoying amount of workaround code to accomplish. Good actions are complete within one request/response cycle-- i.e. "reload the gun", "move one square", "attack one time", "consume one medkit", "buy a new skill that permanently changes your odds". Each of these are discreet actions that can follow one another in any order at all. Things would be much more complicated for the server if you had actions such as "Open the medkit" (1st action) --> "Use the medkit" (2nd action), or "remove the empty clip" --> "reload the gun". Bentley Foss 16:43, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill, for reasons stated above. Jirtan 16:46, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - My idea of a Torch is for a slight item search bonus, not a combat bonus. Besides, it won't make sense. --Fixen 17:46, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill Also, I think your logic is flawed. The open land is very probably also dark as there still is no power in Malton. Madalex 19:43, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - A torch would be more helpful in a search than in a combat; keep in mind you need to hold it steady. --Squashua 18:05, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - As I mentioned in the above suggestion, with the new portable generators and fuel cans providing light in all building types a torch is (at the moment) obselete. (By the way, if you ever played Doom3, you should know that the shotgun or pistol can not be used with the torch to shoot zombies :) ) --Andrew McM 19:50, 19 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Yet another "Make survivors more powered" crap suggestion. 65% is enough. --Jorm 11:23, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• kill - One word Generators. Also its a F l a s h l i g h t --Deathnut 22:23, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---

Headshot Revision

Timestamp:	19:33, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Mechanic change
Scope:	Zombie Hunters
Description:	Two stages - first make headshot a multi-leveled skill. Second, for each level of headshot, the survivor has a 5% cumulative chance of instantly downing a zombie when he successfully attacks with a firearm. XP gain would not change from a normal shot. This would allow high level survivors to get rid of that extra XP they were carrying around, would make Zombie Hunters extremely beneficial in defense, and at the same time serve to slow zombie hunter growth (as the better at headshot you get, the less XP you get per zombie.) In essence it would allow a zombie hunter to gain less XP in exchange for spending less AP searching for ammo, etc.

Votes

• Keep - My idea. --Kwil 19:33, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill So basically we would soon have Level 38 humans downing zombies everytime they hit (with 65% to hit a zombie). Madalex 19:38, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill No instantkill please. At least not with 100% chance. And this would remove a skill that is unfortunately needed for the human faction, and replace it with overkill. --McArrowni 20:15, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill I'll try not to be mean since you seemed to put effort into this, but its a really, really bad idea. --Zaruthustra 01:28, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - "Insta-Kill" is not a good idea. "Cause Additional Damage" is more balanced. --Squashua 18:02, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - No automatic kills. If this maxed out at 25%, maybe, but probably still no good. --Dickie Fux 22:56, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam - OMFG HEADSHOT FOR TEH WIN! --Jorm 11:24, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---

First-Aid Revision

Timestamp:	19:36, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Mechanic change
Scope:	Survivors
Description:	Instead of increasing the amount a person can heal with a first-aid kit, the first aid skill would allow a person to heal 1 point of damage without having a first aid kit. This would also grant them one point of experience. They would not be able to heal infection.

Votes

• Keep - My idea. --Kwil 19:36, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill This actually has potential for abuse. You could bring somebody up to 49 HP (or 59 HP for those body builders out there), and then apply a first-aid kit for an additional 5 XP. Also, this would shift the AP balance for Survivors without Shopping or Bargain Hunting, as basically you'd get 1 XP per AP instead of an average of 0.5 XP per AP (they have to search in hospitals, with a 20% chance to find something, and 1 out of 2 is a first aid kit. So they need to spend 10 AP for one first aid kit which gives 5 XP.) Madalex 19:54, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Needs a % chance to work. See you again in two weeks --McArrowni 20:16, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Seems prone to abuse, sorry. --Squashua 18:01, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Two in a row man, two in a row... Madalex is right man. AllStarZ 00:24, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Unnecessary. Don't fix it if it isn't broken. --Dickie Fux 23:02, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill Easy to cheat with. EG: "Jack is a zed. He makes a 2nd character named Jon, he levels up Jon and makes him buy the skill. Now everytime Jack gets hurt, Jon comes and heals him, until he is at full HP." Also, would this skill carry over if you're a survivor dying and becoming a zed? --Carfan7 04:30, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill I'd be more apt to like this if it were a skill in and of itself. 1 HP heal per AP spent, no FAK needed, no chance to cure infection. --Jorm 11:25, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---

Resource Conservation

Timestamp:	20:27, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Skill
Scope:	Survivors, Scientific
Description:	If a suvivor tries to revive a brain rotted zombie instead of wasting a revivification syringe they will abort the procedure. They still expend 1 AP.

Votes

• Kill I think there are other better fixes for the underlying issue (not being able to distinguish one zombie from another although there is even nowadays a description they can fill in). Providing you with a link to their profile when scanning them is one (a previous suggestion if I remember right). Madalex 20:58, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep Anything that draws attention to this issue is important considering that the search values were lowered making syringes harder to find. The other suggestion uses to many server and IP hits which is unfair to survivors so get a clue and stop griefing on survivors its not a zombies only game and if it was noone would play since their the lowest lifeform of the city. -- GodofGames 00:01, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Agree with Madalex. You could just use that 1 AP to scan the zombie and see if it's brain is there. --Fixen 00:40, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - If Madalex is correct and a profile link will solve this without being unbalancing, then I agree with him/her. --Squashua 18:00, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Just scan them first. More often than not, that'll tell you; and sometimes, there should be some uncertainty. --Dickie Fux 23:05, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Perhaps if it were easier to find syringes this would be better than 100% success with expended syringes. Jean Gregoire 01:18, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Syringes are the most powerful weapon in the game. No need to remove the one and only defense against them in a seige. --Jorm 11:26, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---

DNA extraction gives information on previously scanned zombies

Timestamp:	21:15, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Improvement
Scope:	Survivors, Scientists
Description:	When a player uses a DNA extractor on an already extracted zombie they get information anyway, in addition to message telling them it has been scanned. They still do not get xp for it.

Votes

• kill - I guess theres nothing wrong with it per se, but it just doesn't seem like it justifies a recoding. Why? --Zaruthustra 21:21, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - Finally a way to identify already-scanned Brain-Rot zombies. Just make sure it requires Lab Experience, or at the very least NecroTech Employment. --Xamnam 21:27, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Re It's not a skill, just a change to the way extractors work. You'd still need to be able to use extractors in the first place--Jon Pyre 21:46, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - What Xamnam said. --Lucero Capell 22:12, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep As I already mentioned this in the know bugs section in a side note :) Madalex 23:49, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep This just plain makes sense. --McArrowni 23:59, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - Makes sense to me. --Kulatu 00:26, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - Simple and clean. --Fixen 00:42, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - Doesn't need massive recoding, which is good in itself. Not a must but nice to have. --Seagull Flock 13:51, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep Makes logical sense...there's no reason the extractor shouldn't return results even if the zombie's been extracted and the xp bonus taken. --Argus Blood 06:12, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - Nothing wrong with that, just emphasize the section where it says "No XP Granted" so the player knows. --Squashua 17:59, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---

Laser Sight

Timestamp:	21:40, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Item
Scope:	Survivors
Description:	Found only at Armories, for 1 AP laser sights could attach to pistols and shotguns (but not flares) and add 10% accuracy to every shot fired (15% min - 75% max). There is a realistic explanation for finding them only at Armories and for them increasing accuracy, but for the sake of game mechanics, once attached, the laser would "run out of power" after twenty-five shots fired, though that's a flexible, arbitrary number, obviously. This would make Armories useful to hold and visit, but only have a relatively short term effect on the game to avoid abuse of it. Armories and the surrounding area would become easier to defend, but of course this would be tempered by the increased zombie interest that would be sure to follow. The ultimate effect is that forts would once again become beneficial to survivors, and meaningful to the game as whole

Votes

• Kill - Unbalances ranged weapons versus melee, would require more databases and server hits. --Zaruthustra 23:10, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill Got nothing to add to Zaruthustra. Madalex 23:58, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill What they said. Plus a set number of uses for something other than guns is weird for this game. Better use a % chance of not working like books. But even that would not save this from kill. --McArrowni 00:00, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - I stopped reading after the "run out of power" part. And since when do people attach a laser sight on a shotgun? --Fixen 00:43, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Re: To answer all of the above, it unbalances ranged weapons around Armories only, making them actually desirable to survivors. As for the item being perishable, it is a game mechanics issue, in the same way realistically a spray can (which also has a set number of uses) should get more than two uses regardless of someone's skill level with it, but for the sake of game mechanics, does not. And of course "who puts a laser sight on a shotgun?" "Who can't hit a zombie standing a few feet away with a weapon that fires buckshot?" Insomniac By Choice
    • Re: Just as an aside, the same people who use sights on shotguns. It may fire a load of shot, but you still need to know where you're aiming. The idea is no good for the game, but there is nothing fundamentally wrong with it in that respect.
• Kill - Suggestions that temporarily modify aspects of the game are bad. I really need to get that put up right at the top of the page or something. The stateless nature of good ol' http is the reason behind this. Good game mechanics require one request/response cycle, the effects are permanent, and they do not affect other actions in any way. They are discreet. This doesn't work from a technical standpoint. Bentley Foss 01:37, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - I could see an additional 5%, but not 10%. And maybe 5-6 shots. Plus, you might want to state that laser sights could be recharged once electricity is back in Malton. And once that happens, recharging could cost 5 AP, which is a serious drain on one's AP finances, easily equalizing any benefit. Then-again, they could be powered by batteries, which I guess are an item out there. --Squashua 17:58, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Make it pistol only, for one thing. --Dickie Fux 23:15, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Seems overly powerful for something that only costs a few AP in an armoury. Jean Gregoire 01:22, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - 65% is enough, thankyewverymuch. --Jorm 11:27, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - no thanks --Vellin 00:54, 27 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---

Further Zombie Hunter Skill Mechanic

Timestamp:	22:40, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Game Mechanic
Scope:	Zombie Hunters
Description:	The main problem with making additional Zombie Hunter skills is that, stacked with headshot, they're too powerful. For this reason, I suggest that we make it so a Zombie Hunter can select one out of his zombie hunting skills from a dropdown menu. For example, suppose an extra-AP-to-stand-up ability called "Ankle Shot" was made available, and a Zombie Hunter bought it. Then, at the bottom of his screen, he would see "[Ankle Shot/Headshot] [Change]". It would cost no AP to change, but it would use a server hit.

Votes

• Spam So basically you suggest how possible future suggestions should work in general without knowing what they might be. Simply include this in the description of your future suggestion. Thanks! Madalex 00:02, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - This is a suggestion for interface alteration; For selecting stuff from a short list, I prefer radio boxes and check boxes to drop-downs. Also, you're making the assumption that further Zombie Hunter skills will take affect at zombie-kill-time. Wait and see. --Squashua 17:54, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill -Dickie Fux 23:17, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam - Yet another Ankle Grab nerf call, only vague and pointless. --Jorm 11:33, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---

Drag Corpse

Timestamp:	22:55, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Skill
Scope:	Survivors, Corpses
Description:	This skill would be located below "Body Building". When a Survior has the Drag Corpse skill, they will be able to drag any dead body to another block for 1AP. When a Survivor is on a block with one or more corpses, there would be a drop-down box containing possible directions (North, South, Northeast, etc.) and a "Drag Corpse" button next to it. When clicked, the user will move in the direction selected, with a non-descript random corpse from that block. This would primarily be used to move dead bodies away from safe houses so they don't respawn on the doorstep. For those worried about abuse, remember that when you are killed, you are a dead body and are therefor vulnerable to being moved. Users will need to spend 1AP to move every body by itself, so if one wants to clear a block of multiple corpses, they will only be able to move each corpse one or two tiles. Plus, a Survior won't know if he's dragging away a zombie player or a player who would like to be revived and kill zombies again. All corpses would simply be "a corpse".

Votes

• Kill What would prevent zombies with Body Building and this skill (how about calling it Body Dragging btw ;) from dragging bodies to your doorstep? When I see bodies start to pile up in front of a building, I simply relocate a.s.a.p. Let them tear down the barricades to find an empty building. Madalex 00:32, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Um...NO. --Fixen 00:44, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - If only because survivors need a way to break sieges, and this hardly unbalances the game. There is still the risk of dead survivors standing up in RiddleyBank, many APs away from a not-dead revive clinic. But I'm not too sure someone would do that. (especialy since they'd be lunch, and don't know who they're hurting, if hurting at all)--McArrowni 06:11, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - I know what you mean, Amazing, and I like the concept, but unfortunately this is not an ideal world. This skill has a high griefing potential. --Seagull Flock 13:55, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - What McArrowni said. Brizth 20:57, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - No. This was already suggested and pretty heavily shot down, as I recall. There is FAR too much potential for PKers/griefers to mess with survivors. If people are standing outside, they run the risk of getting eaten. Just leave it that way. Bentley Foss 01:24, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - I see nothing wrong with this; don't kill something based on PK action; fight back against the PK'ers instead. Plus, this wastes PK'er time anyway - moving would cost them 2 APs, and how many APs do they have left after they took you down in the first place? --Squashua 17:52, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep Voting for my own to tie the votes. The way I see it, Ankle Grab has made it impossible to hold any fort against a zombie mob -- at all. They can keep coming until every survivor falls. This lets people get those damn corpses away from the front door. -- Amazing 22:05, 16 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Heh, I can't get out of my head the image of dragging a bag of burning poop in front of a door and running away. Now replace the words 'burning bag of poop' with 'dead zombie' and 'a door' with 'your enemy�s fort'- major use of corpses as an exploit. --Andrew McM 19:50, 19 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill As mentioned, zombies could get their living buddies to move them for free. Also, survivors could drag them to a heavily defended area, so they could keep getting put down. Works both ways.--LouisB3 02:11, 20 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - I don't think this would cause too many problems, actually. Plus, it would keep survivors out in the open longer, so they could get eaten more. --Dickie Fux 23:23, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill *throws up the devil horns* Griefers TO THE MAXXX!!--Spellbinder 00:57, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - Brilliant idea. There should be a way for survivors to move those bodies away from a location - if you can drag a body outside of a building, you can drag it down the street, too. Even if you up the AP cost, or make it usable only by survivors, I think this idea has great merit. --Cthulhu 10:51, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - To prevent something because cheaters would abuse it is not a good reason. I think this has great merit for survivors who want to keep their suburbs clean. --Inkling 11:02, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Encourages griefing. --Jorm 11:35, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---

Tear Gas

Timestamp:	22:55, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Item
Scope:	Survivors, Zombies
Description:	Found in armories, possibly police stations. When used, the Tear Gas Canister would be dropped and the block would fill with gas. During this time, all humans will appear as 'a human' to Zombies, much like zombies are seen as "a zombie" by surviors. It obscures the zombie's senses so that they can no longer smell weakness. The down side for survivors is that all in the gas cloud will lose 10% off of their ability to hit a target while zombies will not. This is because Survivors will be more affected by the gas as living beings. The reduction in hitting targets would not be perminent! It would only affect people in the cloud of gas until it dissipates or they leave the gassed block.

Votes

• kill - Area of Effect = bad. Destroys strategic value of the zombie horde. Obscene server load addition that could singlehandedly murder the servers again from the sheer number of status checks that would have to be done and constant checking of the cloud status = bad. Human weapons that harms humans more than zombies = bad. --Zaruthustra 23:04, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Re: - Current in-game "area of effect" items include Barricades which can prevent entering or leaving a building and add a new target to the attack list, Fences which can block entry or exit and can be cut, and Corpses which show everyone a new button if they lie in buildings. I don't know about murdering the server, but showing Zombies what Survivors already see sounds to me like re-using existing elements. Negating skills is also ingame because a barricading skill is negated when you are outside a building. I think the harm is equal. For a lesser chance of hitting a target, humans get to protect their weak from attack. -- Amazing 23:15, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill I think zombie spies would love this more than anyone else. Also hardly seems worth it --McArrowni 00:03, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill Really not a bad idea though but how long would it last? I would vote keep but this is still unfinished and as it gets refined i may change my vote. Also why wouldnt it affect zombies? This I dont understand since we have no understanding of what kevans ground rules are for them. THey would still have lowered visibility from the smoke given off so why not both survivors and zombies be penalized the same. -- GodofGames 00:05, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill Like most area affects, this has one big problem. Either you base it's duration on a real world time span (in which case I could log out, log in a couple of hours later and not notice a damn thing), or on the vague concept of AP spent in it (who has to spend them, when do they do have to them, which actions count towards that AP number, etc. etc.). Also, I have a hard time imagining a Survivor actually using something more harmful to himself than the zombies. Madalex 00:25, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - That's just freaking annoying. --Fixen 00:45, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill Got Grief? Slicer 01:00, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Redo as a Smoke Grenade; Tear Gas is a little more painful and you really need to evacuate the area. --Squashua 17:50, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - The timing issue for any tear gas/smoke bomb weapon sounds like a permanent killer. --Dickie Fux 23:29, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill Absolutly NOT. but at least you have provided a very nice link for other similer skills that can now be removed if they follow the same guide line as either this or Grenade--Spellbinder 00:55, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - I fail to see how tear gas would affect zombies at all. --Jorm 11:36, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---

Helmets

Timestamp:	22:55, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Items
Scope:	Survivors and Zombies.
Description:	Helmets would serve two purposes. They would be wearable like a flak jacket and would have a chance of deflecting attacks. (lower than a flak jacket, but a good suppliment) Zombies would be able to wear them as well, at which point they would also reduce Headshot attacks to 5 XP per level. They could be found in Fire Stations (fire helmets), Police Stations (riot gear helmets), and Armories (regular military style) though the name would still be "a helmet". I think it would be fun to have each helmet type named as such, but I know a lot of people are down on multiple items that have the same use and stats.

Votes

• Kill - But we all ready got a flak jacket, ya? If flak jacket only takes 1 damage off pistol shots, how are we going to shave half points off with this? Sorry man, redundant idea and poor mechanics. PS: Dont worry, if I thought this was totally redundant it would be spam or just plain delete instead of kill. --Zaruthustra 23:01, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Re: - How can you have less than one? Simple - Zero. For larger weapons this would block damage, for lower-level damage it wouldn't. Not redundant due to Headshot damage reduction. -- Amazing 23:08, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill This negates headshot too much and alters the skill rendering it inneffective. This would be a keep vote for me if it say took 1 HP from a bite attack or blocked infection since a zombie would target the brain. That and for zombies take 1 point off of the flamethrower. -- GodofGames 23:55, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill I'm personnaly against human stuff that really only helps zombies. --McArrowni 00:05, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill For one, my understanding is that flak jackets are "wearable", but always worn when you have one in your inventory. Besides that, mixing a headshot and a generic damage reduction (e.g. headshot only applies on the killing attack, a flak jacket protects on all ranged attacks)? Also too complicated, too unspecific about mechanics. Madalex 00:12, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Heavy duty army helmets can only protect the head from grenade shrapnel. What kind of helmet would stop a bullet? --Fixen 00:47, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Re: Flak Jackets don't stop bullets in the game, they simply take some of the damage. Therefor the proposed item doesn't stop bullets at all. -- Amazing 00:54, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Survivor Equipment useful for zombies only is not my bag, baby. --Squashua 17:49, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - Not needed until zombies get an attack that targets the head. --Dickie Fux 23:33, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill Yea. you know, this isen't really usefull for survivors. The flak vest is only usefull against PKers, zombies get much more use out of them. This is a zombie item. and similer zombie skills are getting shot down like clay pigions--Spellbinder 00:53, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Kill - As said above, not useful to survivors at all (currently), and a bit of a kick in the balls to zombies with Brain Rot. Jean Gregoire 01:30, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - I like the Headshot reducto - it only helps midrange zombies, though. I'm a minority in this opinion. --Jorm 11:41, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---

Bullhorn

Timestamp:	23:18, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Type:	Item
Scope:	Survivors
Description:	Characters with a Bullhorn would be able to amplify their voice and will be heard by anyone, human or zombie, on the map view. In other words, they will be heard on the current block as well as the surrounding square of blocks. Users inside a building will be able to hear only bullhorn users on their same block outside or inside. By the same token, if you use a bullhorn inside a building, only people in the building and outside on the same block will hear. Found in Police Stations and Fire departments. This is useful for announcing trouble, calling aid, and directing organized attacks or defence. 1AP to use. User with a bullhorn will have an additional "Bullhorn" button next to the "Speak" button. fill in the box as you would to simply talk, but click "Bullhorn" and it's broadcasted as previously stated. It has a shorter range than a flare, but is multi-use and lets you explain the specific warning.

Votes

• Re: Do not delete my suggestion again, Zaruthustra, unless it is voted Spam by others. Please abide by the guidelines. -- Amazing 23:18, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Spam Suggestion Guideline says "2. Repeats of Suggestions under consideration or already considered may be deleted without warning unless there are substantial differences.". I noted this in my deletion. But if you really think this is different than yell I'll let others decide. --Zaruthustra 23:25, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
  • Re: -- Indeed, I understand - but it's not a repeat of a suggestion basically because it's an item. Comes close, I guess, but it's not the same suggestion. Plus I think Yell said something about a larger area of effect, but I could just be having a brain fart. -- Amazing 00:24, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• keep A good suggestion that may work out with a few modifications. I think people dont like it due a possinility of spam abuse. Maybe also include an ingame item ear plugs to block bullhorn messages so players arent overloaded with text. I like reading what happened since my last login though I may be alone in that respect but good idea! -- GodofGames 23:53, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep I'm not sure what the impact to the server load would be though. Madalex 00:19, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - It's going to be difficult to implement as it needs another DB query to get the people in the surrounding areas (the "flare" function doesn't need it as it writes in all characters' screen) and I'm concerned about the "since your last turn" summary length, but in principle I'm ok with it. --Seagull Flock 14:01, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - I like, but I think that uses should be limited to 10 (at most) unless it's re-charged up with electricity (once the power is back). I would allow players 1 block away (inside OR outside) to hear "You hear someone speaking on a bullhorn to the southwest" or somesuch. --Squashua 17:47, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep - Seems like there might be some difficulty coding, and it might load down the server, but it's a good idea. -Dickie Fux 23:37, 21 Nov 2005 (GMT)
• Keep, suprisingly good idea. This is different enough from Yell that it should count as a different suggestion, I think, since they are based on different ideas (item vs. skill). --LibrarianBrent 04:28, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)

---