Suggestions/15th-Dec-2005

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

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.
Suggestion Navigation
Suggestion Portal
Current Suggestions • Suggestions up for Voting • Clothes Suggestions
Cycling Suggestions • Peer Reviewed • Undecided • Peer Rejected • Humorous
Suggestion Advice • Topics to Avoid and Why • Help, Developing and Editing

Current Days' Suggestions

READ THE Suggestions Dos and Do Nots BEFORE YOU POST A NEW SUGGESTION.

Add new suggestions to the bottom of this page - duplicate suggestions WILL be removed.

Refresh

Spam - No skills that build onto each other. Keep it simple to code. This would also blatantly tip the balance of the game. (By the way, my vote was the third spam vote, in case anyone's looking at the history). --Zacharias Cross 01:50, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)

  • Well if it makes you happy I was about to Spam it so that would have been the third spam vote. --Deathnut 01:54, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I would also like to add, for the purposes of explaining the removal, that this also violates the concept of No Combos, doesn't perform the necessary Number Considerations, and Overpowers Bite. Please read the guide before posting suggestions - it'll help cut down on ideas which are already known as vote-killers. --Drakkenmaw 01:57, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Monkeys

Removed to Humorous_Suggestions. The dog pet may have been a serious suggestion, but I can't see anything that flings dung being counted as one. --Drakkenmaw 18:32, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Something that the GPS can do

  • Removed by creater. Looked over it and thought I must have been high or something --Deathnut 05:47, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Zombie Starting Classes

Timestamp: 02:38, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: classes
Scope: New zombies
Description: I had this idea seperately but it's like the Zombie Classes one from a few weeks ago. Basically, in addition to having different zombies classes with different starting skills, also allow them to be Scientist, Military or Civilian. (For example, Zombie Healers start with Bodybuilding and when revived are Scientist class.) The only affect on gameplay as it stands is that Lab Techs with DNA Extractors can't immediately see a non-Civilian zombie and know that he didn't start off playing zombie. However, I think by giving new zombies access to different-cost skill trees when they revive will add interest and encourage more people to play zombie. Plus, some doctors and former military must have been infected in the inital phases, right?

(EDIT: This would be implemented with the Zombie Classes suggestion noted elsewhere, so particular groupings of starting skills are not relevant to this particular suggestion. Also, the rationale as to why this would improve zombie numbers is that new players now can see more options when starting zombie with the option of more varied gameplay. The primary downside to playing zombie as far as I can see is that you're pretty much going to be exactly the same as every other zombie with no special advancement trees or innate bonuses that differentiate you from other zombies (i.e. you don't feel special). This allows for that added interest while fitting neatly into the game system as is.)

Votes

  • Keep - Shameless self-vote. C tiger 02:39, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Sorry, but no. Zombies need unique classes, not those that transfer easily to human classes. You might as well start off as one of those classes and if you really want a taste of the zombie side, its as easy as jumping off a 6 story building. AllStarZ 02:41, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Aren't they usually two stories? --ALIENwolve 02:48, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - If it's only one skill (ie, bodybuilding and no other skills) this puts the starter zombie at the same disadvantage as a starter-killed human. If it's multiple, then it's unfair. So... Kill. --Shadowstar 03:18, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - I was basing the suggestion off of suggestions for new Zombie Classes (see the section on peer-approved suggestions.)
  • Kill - I think they vary from three stories up. I know it is not particularly hard to fall safely from a 2 story building if you know how. Rhialto 03:27, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Zombies need more for zombies, not more for if they decide to play Survivors. That doesn't help the falling zombie numbers, and doesn't really help much for anything else either. --Drakkenmaw 03:51, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - I clarified my reasoning above.
      • Re: - In that case, I'd like to point out that Zombie Classes haven't gone into the game yet. I reiterate my vote, but this time because it violates the concept of Don't Connect Suggestions.
        • Re: - Yeah, I just didn't know how to add this suggestion onto the previous one without writing a new suggestion, there's no provision for that. --C tiger 14:36, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - There are several better "zombie classes" suggestions out there. Yes, I'm too lazy to go look them up. Deal with it. Bentley Foss 04:32, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Sloth is one of the deadly sins, Bentley *burp*--Spellbinder 22:59, 17 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Event or XP increase

Timestamp: 03:04, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: event
Scope: Survivors(particularly military personnel
Description: In the main page of urbandead.com it states that the military has closed off borders and are moving to eliminate looters. I see 2 options to bring this to light.

1: Military personell get an xp increase for killing survivors, which makes it the same xp for killing zeds. This of course will be shot down.

2: I believe this will fare better. a citywide event coded to military personell will, once a month, be set to killing civilian looters in exchange for one free item or an xp increase. To do this, it would also be fair to make Scientists once a month to fill a certain quota of dna extractions to obtain one free item or an xp increase. In turn, Civilians with headshot(aka zombie hunters) will be set on a certain quota of zombies to kill for one free item or an xp increase. This just makes the game more interesting is all... maybe the prize would be a pair of revivification syringes? and the quotas should be set really high, like 10 zombies in 5 days, 10 people in 5 days, and 20 extractions in 2 days. Yea, go ahead and kill it if you want, i have no idea how much code this would cost but its probably alot... sigh, there go my fantasies...

Votes

  • Kill - Why do you want to unleash people with shotguns that can walk through barricades and free run from other buildings on each other? --Jon Pyre 03:11, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - It will incress Pkign anmd decress the load on zombies. --Fullemtaled 03:13, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - So what you are saying is that there should be more PKing. If you had the military killing a set amount of zombies, and Civilans sending a certain amount of texts then mabey. But you also should have something for the Zombies. Like they get a flak jacket for killing 5 people in 5 days or something like that. Then mabey, just mabey you might get my vote. - Jedaz 03:14, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Okay, this kind of thing has come up several times, so I feel the need to say something. In a civilized society, we don't send our military in to kill our own citizens on purpose. Sometimes it happens, but in general we aren't thinking, "Hey! New Orleans is in trouble, there are looters, let's send in the army and kill them all!" or, "Hey, rioters in France/Australia, I feel like the military should kill them all." The military can come in to subdue them, but not kill them, and especially not in a zombie scenario, where they'd be increasing the ranks of the (known) enemy. There is no RP or realistic sense to having the military get a PK bonus. --Shadowstar 03:25, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Why should the military be encouraged to PK? Mikm 03:36, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Were you the same one who suggested that military be seperate from survivors and zombies? If you are, for the last time, make a GROUP based on this idea! I'm sorry, but if the last few times haven't told you, this idea simply isn't going to pass! In fact, nothing that encourages PKing or ZKing will pass! --Volke 03:38, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - I have no idea what your talking about. Military separating from survivors? what the hell! --Trayton 04:21, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - The military does not murder the citizens of its own country with axes, revolvers, and hunting shotguns. They are there to reestablish order, not kill everything in existence. --Drakkenmaw 03:49, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - You sir are a bit too optimistic. To protect the greater good, the military will take any and every precaution to ensure the safety of the nation, including nuking Malton. --Trayton 04:21, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
      • And you sir, are being an idiot, because you assume that other citizens won't care about their relatives perishing in an atomic blast. Anyways, they assume that they will die out on their own anyways, so they just lock them inside a town and wait. AllStarZ 04:50, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Stop with the "military vs. everybody!!" suggestions already. And you know, what have we said about "Well I think my suggestion will never pass, but I'm going to post it anyway?" Go find out. Suggestions_Dos_and_Do_Nots Bentley Foss 04:36, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - In response to the first Re, someone suggested a week or two ago that military and civilians should be considered separate factions the same way survivors and zombies are now, probably based on the same flavor text as this suggestion. Frankly, both suggestions make no sense, since the military personnel in the city are cut off from resupply and therefore forced to scavenge for supplies, too. Does that mean they have to kill themselves to control looting? --Everyl 06:27, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - This is more of a half life idea than an urban dead idea. I don't hate it but it would mean that pretty much 90% of the current survivors would wake up dead the day after this happened. Maybe there ought to be a new 'black ops' class for PKers to get behind? --Vair 12:56, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - i don't hate you for having fantasies. but no. maybe the 'black ops' thing that Vair said could be expanded apon, but certainly no on free items. --Firemanstan 17:32, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill There's no need to be mean to the author. The core concept is interesting, a monthly event that goes over a day or two, but the rewards and concepts have problems. As for the flavor part of the suggestion I can totally see the government saying to kill everyone in the city as it is less obviouse then a nuke/bomb and can be covered up. The order would be made to prevent the risk of the entire country from being overrun. Yes, I want to hear more about a 'black-ops' class for the same reason I like the flavor idea!--Zombie1313
  • Kill - Game events are a great idea, but these ones seem poorly thought out. --Navigator 04:20, 17 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill PKers are not to be back with RP reasons--Spellbinder 23:00, 17 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -Tereseth (takes a hit) 4:20, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Feast

Timestamp: 03:21, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombies
Description: When a zombie with feast kills a suvivor they are healed 25hp. This is so that after a victorious fight with a suvivor the zombie isn't at 5hp and easily dispatched with one hit by the next suvivor to log in. Please don't use the kill argument "death doesn't matter to a zombie so they don't need ways to get health." If that was true we wouldn't have weapons or the ability to attack them.

Flavor wise: Makes sense. Zombies don't just bite to kill and then walk away. And they aren't eating the whole suvivor so don't use that annoying argument: "But this would mean that half-eaten zombies are walking around everywhere!" It's a zombie movie. Zombies eat what they catch. They aren't devouring the whole body so no there won't be "suvivors without a head!!!!".

Votes

  • Keep - Author vote. I'm sorry but those arguments are even more annoying than "Oh no! The server! The computer game would have to compute things!" --Jon Pyre 03:23, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Death really doesn't matter to a zombie. And we use weapons on them to keep them away. If you hurt a wolf enough, it will run away. AllStarZ 03:26, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)

RE Man, you say some incredibly retarded things. Of course death matters to a zombie, it costs the zombie ap and used to cost xp. Wolves aren't undead. And if death meant nothing to something, it wouldn't run away when hurt. Zombies definitely wouldn't. That analogy was so off, it was mind boggling. From the comments I've read, most of the stupid stuff I've read has been said by you. FLAME FLAME FLAME!!!! IF I EVER FIND YOU IN URBANDEAD, I'LL KILL YOUR ASS WITH TOP PRIORITY!!!! *RAGE!* -Tereseth 10:28, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)

  • Keep --Fullemtaled 03:27, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Disembowel is the better idea in my opinion. And half eaten corpses are a major part of the zombie armies. --ALIENwolve 03:28, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - 25 is too high. Double digestion would be enough. --Shadowstar 03:29, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Half your HP? Seems a bit high. Mikm 03:33, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - What's next: defeat a human and regain all HP plus increase your maximum HP? No. Zombies do not need the healing. Zombies can stand up with more HP, anyway. Ankle Grab, anyone?--Zacharias Cross 03:36, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Half your HP? Honestly, I play a zombie - I recognize that the population is low and they're having combat issues. But this is way too much. --Drakkenmaw 03:47, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - I will probably resuggest this later with a lower hp restoration. But zombies like health. Health is useful. Health lets them stay inside buildings longer. --Jon Pyre 03:53, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - That's way too much HP in return. Bentley Foss 04:38, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Make it ten, or even five, and I'll vote keep. X1M43 07:37, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I'm voting keep even though I think that 25hp is too high. Why? The daily routine of your average zombie is like this: Wander about, find a lone human or a horde smashing at a barricade. Waste a few AP, sleep, get killed and probably headshot, wake up waste 10AP standing up (if you don't have ankle grab) and repeat. It's dull. Low level zombies aren't going to have ankle grab or digestion and it's just not fun to keep getting killed and have your XP taken away. This is a reasonable suggestion that could make playing a zombie more fun and help to keep the zombie population at a reasonable level. --Vair 10:16, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Too high. +5 tops or double digestion maybe. --Thelabrat 13:31, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - zombies have ankle grab, they don't need an instant absurd heal. A small HP bonus for a kill seems reasonable for flavor and gameplay, but this is far too much. Also, I couldn't stand your grammar in the second paragraph, so I fixed it. You originally had "They're aren't". >< --PatrickDark 16:07, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - HP restore is way too high, it should only work with bite, and the benefit is insane when combined with ankle grab. The Entrails sugggestion posted a few days ago is much better. --VoidDragon 16:25, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - HP restore too high. and i agree with ALIENwolve, id rather see disembowel implemented. --Firemanstan 17:38, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- HP isn't that big a deal for a zombie, mainly because 99% of the time you're not online when you get killed and humans nearly always pack enough ammo to finish you off in one go. Also, even as far as HP buffs go, this one is still bad for the same reasons others have already mentioned. (Plus Disembowel is better.) furtim 17:53, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - 25 hp seems like too much, and it should be a voluntary action executable on any corpse, with a skill under Digestion. "There are some bodies here." *eat* "You regain 10 hp." Of course, this could only be done once per zombie per body or somesuch.--Arathen 23:23, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill On the very last hit, a bonus HP boost just like the bonus XP boost might be nice. and zombies do NOT eat day old bodys--Spellbinder 23:02, 17 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Hp boost is too high though, so I should probably vote kill. -Tereseth 10:28, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -realistic, and totaly useless in a zombie mob so, survivor, you dont have to worry. --spetznaz21 20:31, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Computer engineering and the engineer

Timestamp: 03:21, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skills and new scientist class
Scope: Survivors
Description: Scientists are currently the only type of survivors that only have two class-types, so I created a third one. The "computer engineer" will start with a Laptop (a new item that can be used only in powered buildings, and is found in NT labs, museums, hospitals and the tech store in malls) and a book. "Computer Knowledge," which the engineer has, is a new skill requiring a laptop to be used which lets people earn 3XP for researching in a similar manner to reading books. It would both cost 2 or 3 AP and have a chance of failing (with perhaps a 20% chance of success). Another use of this skill could be to link to the security system of a building, which would allow you to see what is ouside (basically giving you both views, as if you were both inside and outside). The major balance of this set of concepts is that, once an engineer finds a place with electricity, he can pump out experience without risking the outside. However, there are no "easy" alternate ways for him to get XP, and the Military skills would still cost 150 XP to obtain.

A subskill could be "Computer Engineering," which would allow people to have easier access to the interior layouts of certain building types and, thus, have a greater chance of success when searching there (hospitals, auto repair center, maybe NT lab but increasing syringes finding chances of success is quite unbalancing to me).

Votes

  • Keep - Author vote. maybe the idea need some tweaks, but i find that another use of electricity and a third scientist class worth the price.--LAnkou 15 dec 05 04:32 GMT
  • Kill - Humans have plenty of ways to gain XP as it is. No one in this game should be able to go hide out and safely and steadily earn free XP. Bentley Foss 04:39, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Riskless XP gain? Boosting of search percentages? X-Ray vision? I don't really like any of the central concepts you've included. No offense, but these are unbalancing beyond all reason. --Drakkenmaw 04:47, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Computer engineering deals with how computers function, and has nothing to do with finding a map of a building. You are thinking of hacking in that respect. Everyone above me said all I need to say. AllStarZ 04:48, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Maybe it's just my college major talking, but I like the idea of computer-related skills. I'm not sure it's worth creating another class for, though, and I don't really like the skill implementation ideas presented here. --Everyl 06:43, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I like science, I think it should be more developed in this game, but I don't think this is the way to do it. X1M43 07:33, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Also worth noting that ALL the science skills so far deal with life sciences in one way or another. This class doesn't fit in with the pattern. Rhialto 08:24, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Computers would be nifty to include in some fashion. The specifics to this idea aren't my cup of tea, however. --Thelabrat 13:34, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - i don't like the idea of free xp, and this is a game about killing zombies, if we want to sit on our computers and never leave a building, that's what the 23 hours and 30 minuets we don't spend playing Urban Dead are for. --Bermudez 21:58, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - It's definately a start - I would have started as this if it was available - but the skills need work. I would like to see more than just Doctors, Biologists, and Biochemists running around though - someone has to maintain the database that DNA extractions are uploaded to, after all.--Arathen 23:29, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - This would destroy the whole RP basis of the game. Your character gets experience by doing things (trying to shoot guns, wildly swinging fire axes, badly patching up wounded survivors) and interacting with characters to get better. Thats the whole point of xp you get experience from failing and you get better. Besides there is better way to get a lot of xp without going outside, get a bunch of FAKs go into a crowded building, punch a few survivors, and then heal them, you may want to apologize after this.--CPQD 07:42, 17 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill a new item that can be used only in powered buildings, and is found in NT labs, museums, hospitals and the tech store in malls--Spellbinder 23:04, 17 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - If we are not supposed to sit inside buildings getting free XP then why can scientists read books? This suggestion costs more AP for a slightly higher XP reward.--The General 19:36, 19 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Zombie Hording

Timestamp: 06:27, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Innate Skill & balance change
Scope: Zombies & Survivors
Description: From reading the previous suggestions it's painfully apparent that the zombies need some more help; however, help that isn’t just a stopgap measure and help that actually does something. I was thinking along the lines of "Death Grip", "Lone Predator", and "surround prey". This is a simple zombie horde attribute that will hopefully cause many smaller hordes to form rather then a few insanely huge ones.

I suggest that if the number of zombies in an area (inside a building, on the same block but outside the building, etc) outnumber the number of survivors (in the same area) by (5), then the zombies would get a (5)% attack bonus on all attacks.

5% is not completely overbearing, but it is a reasonable amount to make this useful. This idea stems from survivors situational awareness, if you are being attacked by more zombies then you can count on one hand you will leave yourself vulnerable when you attack, as you cant possibly attack and defend with the same result all the time, especially if outnumbered. This will help out low-level zombies, as they will form smaller groups, 10-20, to take out building easier and to avoid being headshot as often. Larger hordes would also benefit because they can now splinter off into 2 sub-hordes to move throughout the city faster, giving people in "quiet" suburbs something to beatdown.

However, Survivors would NOT get this bonus because the whole premise is that they are too busy kicking brain-munching ass/extracting DNA/reviving/etc to notice everything going around them, therefore leaving them vulnerable. Zombies on the other hand, already don't know WTF is going on around them and as such are simple to dispatch when outnumbered. Also the server wont have to do anything extra, it already keeps track of the number of live zombies in an area and I’m guessing it has some sort of counter for the survivors, therefore very little code would be needed since from my understanding by previous posts it reloads all the dropdown info every time the page refreshes.

This is not a skill, but an innate ability that zombies have. It would make them more powerful but more importantly it encourages them to work together as a group with a direct bonus. Zombies by themselves are stupid, slow, and easily dispatched by even an inbred survivor, but "in-groups" is where they flourish/decay and this suggestion reflects that.

Note - numbers in parenthesis are approximations only and can be tweaked, but I think that they are a good benchmark.

Votes

  • Keep - Make sense for zombies, will help make them more playable, and is not an overwhelming change.--Catwhowalksbyhimself 15 dec 05 04:32 GMT
  • Keep Looks good to me. Rhialto 08:22, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I'm a bit wary about giving things away for free like this, but it's not a large bonus and the zombies need something to get more of them back in the game. --Drakkenmaw 08:38, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - We need a few more little bonuses like this. Nothing about 5% though, or give human attempting to flee a block with a horde in a 5% chance (or more) to not be able to escape the block that turn. --Chalor Sutton 09:48. 16 Dec 2005
  • Keep - I like it, and it makes sense flavor wise. Plus 5% isn't too much, but enough to make a difference. Just a quick question, will this increase the attack percentages on the barricades, just something to think about... - Jedaz 10:15, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Another way to work this would be that for every 5 zombies above a minimum of 25, every zombie in that group gets an extra +5% to hit up to a maximum of 75% to hit (for claw) and 55% to hit (for bite). This keeps it fairly balanced, but also gives a much-needed bonus for zombie hordes. --Katthew 10:37, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - A tentative keep though. I think it should have to do more with the ratio of zombies:humans in any square, rather than just a straight 5 zombies fewer. Reasoning being: 300 zombies and 305 humans, no one needs a bonus, as opposed to 6 humans and 1 zombie where a bonus would be useful and make sense. --Shadowstar 12:30, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Sort of like the Horde Bonus from C&C Generals for Chinese units. AllStarZ 12:57, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - With reservations regarding barricades and Shadowstar's ration comment. --Thelabrat 13:37, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep as with what thelabrat said--Ringseed2 15:00, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Ditto. --Basher 16:09, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Nope. Firstly, humans can group together and strategize, while zombies just shamble en mass, so with equal numbers, they'd cancel themselves out. Secondly, this bonus is already inherent in the game but doesn't require a horde. A zombie's melee to-hit is 50%, while a survivor with a fire-axe only has a 40% to-hit. I'd still like to point out that the problem with zombies is the lack of gameplay variation, not that they can't kill anything. You can see this for yourself by leaving a survivor outside for one day, even in quiet suburbs. --PatrickDark 16:22, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Maxed-out Zombie melee: 50%, 4 damage. Maxed out Survivor melee: 40%, 3 damage. --VoidDragon 16:27, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT) edit: Survivor firearm attacks with increased damage and accuracy are balanced by the need to spend AP gathering ammo and reloading before combat. --VoidDragon 20:48, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - That's why barricades were brought in you stupid tard PatrickDark. Noone is forcing survivors to use melee, the game forces zombies to. It's the humans choice if they want to do 3 damage at 40% or 10 damage at 65% --Qwako 16:41, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - VoidDragon, you do know that there are other human weapons than melee? Take for example a shotgun at 10 damage and 65%? --Lucero Capell 17:32, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep --Lord Evans 17:55, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - im ok with that. --Firemanstan 19:19, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - --Cah51o 19:37, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - And if this gives a similar bonus to de-barricading efforts, it's even better. --Centerfire 20:57, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep --Tenebrous 23:57, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - my biggest problem with the game to date has been the lack of The Horde advantage. In most zombie movies, humans get blown away by large groups, but can handle one or two at a time. And i don't think the AP required to search for ammo outweighs the enormous benefits guns give humans. --Bermudez 22:08, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Though I'd prefer it that the zombies need a percentage more. Not necciarly a large percentage, but a percentage.--Arathen 23:39, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Sounds fair enough, but I think using ratios instead of a fixed number seems more logical. Mikm 00:13, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Jirtan 05:01, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I like this, gives players a smaller reason to play as zombies. Dickus Maximus 05:07, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Ooh, I really like this herd mentality thing. =D paincake
    • Re - Well, I don't -- Andrew McM 11:24, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT) Shhhh! Everyone 11:26, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Dito most of the above comments. --RedKnight 07:52, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - This is like a reverse of Reduce Chances for Escape, so I like it. --Squashua 15:27, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Very in-genre. And it helps the zeds, who are kind of hurting right now. X1M43 18:18, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Good.--WibbleBRAINS 18:29, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - What is with voters on this page? how many nearly-identical (notice "nearly-") suggestions on this page have I seen shotdown for reasons like "Bad." and the like. Wasn't it already a preconception that suggestions should not be based on number of players on the square, or at least if they were not to give something as insubstantial as an accuracy boon. Well, regardless of how similar suggestions have been voted down in the past, I vote kill. This doesn't substantially advantage zombies, nor does it make them particularly interesting to play. This will just waste valuable space on the Peer Review page. Riktar 06:00, 17 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill I agree with Riktar. are you all SO lazy that you just look at the trend of the votes and not even BOTHER to read the suggestion. this suggestion has been shot down a bunch of times before in other forms, and violates one of the core no-no's,don't combo stack. Jeeze--Spellbinder 23:08, 17 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • RE I appologize if this idea seems similar to other ideas which have been shot down. I tried to look through all the other suggestions, but apperently I missed the several examples you comment on. I actually did read the posting dos and don'ts, I didn't find your combo stacking then and I didn't when I looked at your link, maybe I'm just blind. Also Riktar I appreciate your critism but please refrain from looking like a douche, if you dont like a suggestion please simply say so and don't claim it as a waste of space. --Frostey 19:27, 20 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Correct me if i'm wrong but the effect doesn't appear to stack.--The General 20:04, 19 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Nice. -Tereseth 10:34, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Decomposition

Timestamp: 07:42, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombies
Description: Your flesh is hideously rotted and you could not possibly be confused for a living creature. Zombies have no desire to eat your flesh. Zombie players with this skill could not be attacked by other zombies. It makes sense zombies would have a skill like this and not humans one against other humans since zombies operate on instinct while humans could still go mad, be evil, have infighting etc. Would obviously hurt zombies that rely on ZKing either to avoid being headshot or to get xp, but it'd be the zombie player's choice whether to take this. Essentially an opt-out from both the pros and cons of being ZK'd.

Votes

  • Kill - It stops you from being attacked by zombies. Under present rules, it is almost beneficial to be attacked and killed by a zombie, as that will not be a headshot kill. And I don't get how this would stop the zombie taking it from doing Z-Z attacks. This appears to be a skill that has only disadvantages for the zombies. Rhialto 08:30, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - You can't unbuy skills, and I fear for the young zombies who think this is a good thing. --Drakkenmaw 08:39, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Not to also mention that this would have to be under brain rot (because no survivor would be able to come back with decomposed fleash) - Jedaz 10:18, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep/change - I like it, but I'd make Brainrot a prerequisite. After all, if you're that skanky as to not look human, how could you be revived as one?Marianne Wells 10:27, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Let the young zombies have their meals. ZKing and PKing are a part of the game, not a desirable part perhaps (though most zombies would rather be ZKed than Headshotted, I'm sure), but not one you can get a skill to remove either. --Shadowstar 12:32, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - Jedaz, the thing you're forgetting is that revivification syringes are MAGIC. Oh, it can bring the walking corpse that has been shot dozens of times back to life but nope, can't cure them if they have rotting flesh. --Jon Pyre 12:57, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Next product in the line of Jon's suggestions: Anti-PK spray. Basically, you spray at PKers, and they disappear, or you can spray an entire area with it to prevent PKers from entering. AllStarZ 12:59, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Re - I already use an Anti-PK spray. It's called a shotgun. --Jon Pyre 15:11, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - murder is a sad fact of life. even to the game. no skills that make you impervious to it. --Firemanstan 17:43, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - So, if I take this, my zombie can attack other zombies and not worry about retaliation? Score! — g026r 17:59, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Please learn how to spell decomposition --SpicyDragonZ 16:01, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Anti-PK/ZKer skills almost never work--Spellbinder 23:09, 17 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Bullet Box

Timestamp: 08:04, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Item
Scope: Humans
Description: Box of 20 bullets that can be loaded individually into pistol clips, at the cost of 1 AP per bullet. Decent probability of finding these, to compensate lower propability of finding pistols and clips.

Votes

  • Keep --Jpv 08:04, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Why? Pistol clips are fairly easy to find and load 6 bullets for you at 1 AP a load. This makes pistols into really, really bad shotguns if only bullet boxes could be used, and would be worthless if you had a choice. FireballX301 08:17, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Something about not making new ways to do the same thing, especially if they are notably inferior to the existing method. Rhialto 08:20, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Finding New Ways To Do Old Things IS BAD --Drakkenmaw 08:40, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Just a bad idea in my veiw for reasons state above. - Jedaz 10:19, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I don't hate it. I just don't see the need. Tell me how it will make my game more fun and maybe I'll change my mind. --Vair 11:08, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Pointless. Clips aren't that hard to find. My zombie side went searching for a flak jacket and loaded up with 5 pistol clips I didn't need. --Shadowstar 12:34, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill One of the reasons why some people carry more pistols instead of shotguns is because they reload faster and use less AP to reload in any case. AllStarZ 12:54, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Pistol clips only come fully loaded with 6 bullets. --VoidDragon 16:29, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - dont see a need. --Firemanstan 17:46, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Not necessary. --Dickie Fux 22:38, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • KIll Drakkenmaw has it--Spellbinder 23:10, 17 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I appreciate what you are getting at but Finding New Ways To Do Old Things Is Bad.--The General 20:09, 19 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Scent Life

Timestamp: 08:19, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Zombie Skill
Scope: Zombies
Description: The idea behind this skill for zombies is that it allows the zombies to detect survivors inside a building. The problems with previous similar suggestions are:
  • If there were N survivors inside, success was automatic, and impossible below that threshold, which would encourage PKing if a new person inside went over the limit.
  • Versions based on a random chance of success rapidly become near-certain chances if a group of zombies are present. 50% success for one check would become over 90% if 4 checks are made (1 zombie making 4 checks, or 4 zombies sweeping as a team).
  • Flavour levels of success ignore the point that the practical difference between no survivors detected and one is far greater than the difference between 1 detected and 100 detected. This system's random component also ensures that beyond 'none' and 'one or more', the zombies don't have any certain idea of how many survivors are inside.

This proposed system is a passive skill for zombies, under the scenting skill tree. It can only be used once per half-hour in any given block. This time limit is based on the block, not the zombie. To facilitate this, each block will have a two new, hidden, attributes. The first is a timestamp to indicate when the scent life skill was last used. The second is a record of what the last result returned for a sniff action was, a value from 0 (fail) to 6. The pseudo-code is as follows:

When a zombie with this skill performs any action:

  • if zombie is inside building (end) Zombie can see them, so no need to use scent.
  • if survivors are outdoors with zombie (end) The scent of the closer survivors overpowers any possible scent of anyone indoors.
  • if (block's scented timestamp) is < 30 minutes ago (return last sniff result) This prevents a single zombie doing repeated searches on one block by refreshing, and prevents near-auto succcess for groups. By returning the last result if a recent sniff was made, it prevents false negatives from being reported.
  • set (block's scented timestamp) to (now)
  • check for level 1 success (3 x survivors) % present
  • if level 1 passed, check for level 2 success (3 x survivors) - 15 %
  • if level 2 passed, check for level 3 success (3 x survivors) - 30 %
  • if level 3 passed, check for level 4 success (3 x survivors) - 45 %
  • if level 4 passed, check for level 5 success (3 x survivors) - 60 %
  • Set (last sniff result) data field to the success level returned.

Exact numbers can be manipulated for balance. The important point is that even a decent sized group of humans should be able to hide. Note that although these numbers may seem high, the 30 minute cooldown between repeated searches on the same block ensures that this does not become an X-ray vision skill for hordes - this skill is just as effective whether the zombie is a feral or in a group.

Note that the above calculations are invisible to the player. Depending on the level of success achieved, various bits of flavour text will be seen: 

 No success: No special text.
 Level 1: You detect a faint smell of life inside.
 Level 2: You detect the smell of life inside.
 Level 3: You detect a strong smell of life inside.
 Level 4: You detect a very strong smell of life inside.
 Level 5: You detect an overpowering stench of life inside.

Counterpoint to dummy barricading counter: Using the numbers above (which can be changed for balance) it would take 17 survivors inside a building to allow the zombies a 50% chance to detect survivors inside, and that check could only be made once per half hour, no matter how many zombies pass by. Since survivors generally don't hide in such large numbers in building types that would be dummy barricaded, the odds of detection are even lower. Although it is no longer a sure way to hide, dummy barricading is not nerfed by this skill.

Nb: Both the exact % chances of success and the time delay between repeat checks on a block could be changed for balance.

Votes

  • Keep - Author vote Rhialto 08:19, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - As much as I appreciate the well-thought, well-planned, and well-written nature of this suggestion (seriously, I applaud you on this)... I cannot see how it makes sense as far as ease of play to limit the ability to use the sense in the block to once in 30 minutes. I know it fits the balance aspect of the skill, but to me it just seems highly-arbitrary. It would almost make more sense to limit the skill as far as accuracy of the result goes, instead of limiting the ability to obtain that result. Perhaps only update the "return" on the scent every 24 hours or so, to explain it as lingering in the air from the recent human presence? This is just a thought, mind you. Nevertheless, I ask that you please justify the 30 minutes in some way outside pure mechanics so that I can change this vote to a keep. Well-conceived suggestions such as this are few and far between, and I truly do want to give this the Keep you've earned simply by presenting this so well. --Drakkenmaw 08:52, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Thanks for a constructive reply. I originally chose 30 minutes as I felt that was the shortest time interval which would guarantee that it isn't the same zombie rehashing the area, and to prevent coordinating groups to do repeated scans in a short period of time. I'm not married to that time period though. I didn't want to have one check to remain the same answer for 24 hours, as that would generate false positives and false negatives as people enter and leave. The ideal solution would be to take some average value of the number of survivors over the past 24 hours, but that would require a much larger amount of data to be stored, and that kind of data would have to be updated on a timer instead of in response to player actions. I also didn't want any possibility of false positives, as otherwise, a zombie might buy this, get a positive, smash a barricade, find no one, and conclude that the skill is a waste of XP. In response to your comments, I have made one change, which I highlighted in green. The change is to prevent false negatives in case another zombie has been sniffing the area already. This change it also helps ferals more by reducing the need for meta-gaming to communicate the results. Rhialto 09:17, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Okay, I can definitely change this to a Keep now. Congratulations on breaking into "X-Ray Vision" in a way that is neither ludicrous nor overpowered, by the way - I figured the Shadows suggestion from earlier was going to be the only possible good concept covering the idea. --Drakkenmaw 09:27, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - for the principle and the fact that you've thought it through well. If I have one criticism it is that it seems a little complex. Some additional thought might produce something that is a little more elegant. --Vair 10:28, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Yes, the maths and pseudo-code is a little complex, but bear in mind that a) The pseudo-code for just about every in-game action is almost as complicated (the check for 5 tiers of suceess is the only bit that makes this notably different in complexity), and more importantly b) all the code is entirely hidden from the player. From the players point of view, there are no additional interface buttons, simply a random chance to see an extra bit of text from a successful sniffing check. Rhialto 11:10, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I'ld have to agree with Vair with that criticism, I have to admit that I was a little lost to start out wiht. So any way I did the math just to check how this would work out. It appears that for a zombie to get a level 5 reading the first time there would have to be more then 53 survivors in the safe house. However there has to be more than 33 survivors in a safe house to get a definit level 1 reading. So I don't think this is too over powered. - Jedaz 10:33, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - This skill is utterly essential and should have been implemented weeks, if not months, ago. --Katthew 10:38, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Useless. use spies, they are much more effective at finding out what is going on. Edit: To make clear why i killed. A: You nerfed any reason to barriacade in a sepperate spot. And B: You nerfed the only thing that would make this worth while. Why sniff if you can only sniff once every 30 minutes and that applyed to all zombies? No thank you, I will stick to spying, it is more accurat and actualy worth while, as has been proven in most cases. - --Fullemtaled 13:33, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Many of us don't use spies. We shouldn't have to. If 33 bleeding, wounded people are rumaging around inside a house, even a zombie should be able to smell them out. Would make the game much more interesting playing a zombie. --Clickytickytai 11:46, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - You know what? I like it. :) --Seagull Flock 12:03, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Me likey. - KingRaptor 12:37, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Completely and utterly nerfs the dummy barricade strategy, which would be most valuable in the unlikely event that zombies ever get a boost. --Grim s 13:01, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Re - Did you look at my counter-argument to this point? It would take quite a large group of survivors to make detection probable, and the formulae have been rigged to prevent hordes from multiplying the odds of success into a certain thing. Rhialto 13:30, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Tasty treat you thought up there. --Thelabrat 13:59, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Although I would argue it's not compatible with any zombie tagging ideas that have been suggested. --C tiger 14:33, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep --Dickie Fux 14:50, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - --Ringseed2 14:55, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Bravo for well-written suggestion, though I would limit the checks to movement into a location to reduce db hits a tad (# of walking actions < # of all actions). Also, I'd be tempted to increase the % for each wounded (HP<25?) harman in the building. After all, if getting at a couple tasty treats is good, getting at juicy ones is even better. --RSquared 15:12, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • There's a reason it runs through the check for every action. Imagine, your zombie enters a block, and gets a positive result for the sniff check. So he attacks the barricades, and the result no longer appears. he might be tempted to think that no one is there anymore. It's worth noting here that the second and subsequent checks would stop at the point where the system recognises that another check has been recently made. Rhialto 22:54, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill NO X-RAY VISION. I don't care how it's implemented, it's still a horribly unbalancing idea for zombies to be able to detect survivors inside buildings. You already have scent trail, and this will only work where it's known that people congregate anyway. There's no use for this skill. Just tear down the barricades of any hospital, police department, or NectoTech building. There are people in there; you don't need the game to tell you that too. --PatrickDark 16:37, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I like it --Basher 16:12, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Oh shut up Patrick, this a good suggestion which is very well thought out. --Qwako 16:47, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - An interesting, well thought out idea that is not overwhelmingly powerful, in fact it would take a large group to trigger it, but would still be useful. --catwhowalksbyhimself 17:48, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Very well thought out --Lord Evans 18:04, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - impressive. very impressive. my compliments to your brain. --Firemanstan 19:02, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Yes.... your brain meats must be especially tender... and delicious... --Zaruthustra 19:51, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I'd modify the percentages somewhat, to allow a better probability of detection, but that's a quibble over implementation details rather than a ding on the idea. Congratulations, Rhialto, on managing to shut up most of the "ZOMG NO X-RAY VISION!" crowd. Well done. --Centerfire 20:44, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keepvery nicely done .--Mr. Mcdoogles 20:57, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Bravo, well thought out and balanced. --Antrobus178 22:14, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Zombie spies are lame from a metagaming view and illogical from a genre view. That is NOT a reason why zombies should not be able to smell people inside safehouses. They can already track and sense wounds, this is a logical step.--Arathen 00:02, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - You shouldn't vote kill if you use spies. Just don't buy this skill. But for those who like playing the game the way it was intended, it's of good use. --TheTeeHeeMonster 01:27, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill Dummy barricades are VSB or EHB buildings that have no people in them and serve as decoys, so why you say why it doesn't bother a building with a low amount of survivors in it as a counter is beyond me. It's already obvious that PDs, FDs, hospitals, Necrotech buildings, and anywhere with a generator always have survivors in them, so I don't see a real use to this other than to have a horde sniff out a suburb to get a general idea of where survivors like to hide. Maybe I'm just not understanding this suggestion, but if I don't and until I do, I'm voting kill for similar reasons to Grim S. --Volke 02:23, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Re While it can in theory detect even one survivor, the numbers were chosen to make small groups very hard to detect; the group size that would make detection probable is similar to the group sizes found in the obvious targets. Dummy barricading still remains a viable strategy. If there is only one barricaded building in the area, that is the obvious target. If there are ten, the zombies culd either try to sniff them out or systematically break them down and hope they get lucky first time. Rhialto 22:41, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Wow. Um.. what? No, no, I kid. I don't care how it works, but if it finds us harmans, it's good with me. --paincake
  • Keep What paincake said. :) --Zombie1313
  • Keep I was originally going to vote against it, but since it only detects very large groups of survivors, it seems to make alot of sense. -phungus420 1941, 16DEC05 (GMT)
  • Keep -Technically this suggestion's type would be Location Alteration AND Skill Addition: Zombie, but I like how well thought out it is. --Matthew-Stewart 06:46, 17 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - From what I gather, no text is displayed at all if survivors aren't present, which is the same result that is given if there are survivors present, but it failed the first level check. In other words, if no special text is shown, you can't be completely sure that the building is empty or if the check just failed. So, dummy barricades will still be pretty effective even with this skill around. --Zarquon 06:50, 17 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill -- I REALLY like the idea. I'm just not clear on HOW they are doing the detecting. Smell (the blood of the injured)? What about a lower chance if all the survivors are fully healed? Hearing (a lot of people in a building is bound to make noise)? And I can't see zombies working as a team to up the odds since only one would make a successful check and, I'd think, have to communicate this info to the others.--Pesatyel 03:49, 19 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • As written, this is a passive skill that costs no AP to use. And there is no need to communicate the results to other zombies, as any zombie who passes through within 30 minutes automatically gets the same result as the earlier zombie. I'd like to see further in-game communication options for zombies, but that is grounds for another suggestion. I agree that it should logically be easier to detect wounded survivors, but I wanted to keep the formulae clean. It may well be simple to create formulae that increase the detection odds for wounded survivors. In retrospect, I think I7d want to call this "Sense Life", and leave teh exact sense used vague. Rhialto 11:51, 21 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - You've put in the effort to make it work, you deserve a keep vote.--The General 11:21, 21 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I like it. --Comrade Morgan 20:17, 21 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Currently at 31 keep and 5 kill for those keeping track.

Wiki-Based Newspapers

Timestamp: 16:30, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Alteration:Item
Scope: Newspapers and the Wiki
Description: Since this is the "Official" Urban Dead wiki, there should be some connection between the wiki and the game. I propose a new page Newspaper Headlines that the game pulls from, at random, to choose newspaper headlines. Contributions will be voluntary and anonymous, and the game already has a profanity filter that can be used to avoid offending the youngin's. If the pull from the list fails for any reason (profanity, bad formatting, etc), the game reverts to the old subroutine for boring newspaper headlines. In this way, Kevan gets a source for more variety, Player and Zombie groups can add advertisements / tips / warnings / threats, and wikigoers get an entertaining way to contribute to the game. This idea has been idly mentioned previously, but I don't believe it has come up as a formal suggestion.

Votes

  • Keep - All hail propganda --Fullemtaled 17:33, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Yeah, bring on the two-minutes hate. -- Know only that I am watching you 17:53, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Great idea!!! --Lord Evans 18:07, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I can't see anything good coming from this. Sorry. — g026r 18:08, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I think it would be interesting to read, but as a Zombie-player, I'd be cut off from this source of entertainment. - KenzieZombie 1:13, 15 Dec 2005
  • Keep - I'd prefer if it was one wiki page on which people could add and remove headlines (let people have easy access to deleting an offensive or idiotic headline) but I like it enough to vote keep anyway. "The headline reads: "Church of the Resurrection starts worshipping random fire hydrant" you skim the article and throw it away." Zombies could check the Wiki. lol ;) -- Amazing 18:17, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Re - I did in fact use the wrong word. Changed all instances of 'article' to 'headline', which was the intent. I didn't mean to say that someone can write a 12-page manifesto in a newspaper, but, say, 255 characters or less. --RSquared 18:33, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Author vote, I don't see any good coming from this either - that's why it'll be great. Obviously, since it is a wiki, deletion or edit of an offensive headline is perfectly acceptable...the above becomes "Crackpot harman claims Church of the Ressurrection worships random fire hydrants - retaliatory jihad expected." --RSquared 18:31, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Re You my friend, have just made me laugh hysterically, thank you very much (honestly, this aint a joke, taht was funny!)--grassman 01:11, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - The only thing I can say is that the rules for headline submissions should be strict and tightly patrolled. The newspapers are supposed to be from before the zombie arrival, right? I'd have no problem, however, with one that read "The headline reads: "Experts Issue Dire Warning: Death Cults on Rise in Malton." You skim the article and throw it away." And as I always vote Keep for flavour, I'm not breaking that here. --Drakkenmaw 18:39, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Could be useful for groups to announce recruiting drives/attacks/etc. --John Taggart 19:31, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill A great idea in theory, but it would be hard to implement and it would end up like the stupid wall tags times a million. --Zaruthustra 19:46, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Nobody has to read the papers. No one has to believe what they read in the papers. And hopefully, a few dedicated wiki-ers can try to keep the page relatively berift of stupidity. X1M43 20:05, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep finally something worth reading the paper for. --Mr. Mcdoogles 21:01, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Why didnt anyone think of this sooner, there will be some really funny stuff outa this.--grassman 01:11, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I was tempted to argue realism, but this is such a good idea that I'm going to vote keep. - Jedaz 04:12, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Jirtan 05:03, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - Unless someone has been printing newspapers since the zombie outbreak, all the newspapers should be old. --RedKnight 07:52, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Since some groups have been out there making newsletters in the metagaming community, I can totally fankwank this one into making sense in game. --Thelabrat 10:53, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Kill - I don't think we need any "Jill Sandwich" newspapers; the grafitti is obnoxious enough. --Dickie Fux 17:01, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - RSquared wins all. --MaulMachine 17:05, 16 Dec 2005 (EST)
  • Keep - i don't think i will read the papers even with this, but ill vote for flavor. i can see the underground press at work - or perhaps big brother... hmmm. --Firemanstan 23:25, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Nice flavour, but I can't help feeling I'd read the wiki page before I read the papers in-game and spent an AP. Rhialto 22:42, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • keep - ANGRY ZOMBIES GO ON STRIKE!!! -Tereseth 10:39, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Billboards, Redux

Timestamp: 16:55, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Type: Tagging Addition
Scope: Survivors
Description: Currently tagging has a problem with providing a clear message. Anybody who has tried knows that the life span of your tag is probably about twenty hour hours at best before it gets covered up by some semi-literate survivor with references to your mother. If you're in Caiger Mall its closer to 24 seconds. To aid groups in marking their territory I have unceremoniously lifted and repurposed the billboards suggestion which is currently dying. The difference here is that spraying billboards would be hard. Billboards will only appear on street areas. To spray them you must have the tagging skill and expend 10(5?) AP (see optional section for a revised system). For this you will be able to climb up and spray your tag on the board for all the see. It would look something like this.

Before There is a billboard here depicting a (thing, be it dancing robots, dogs, whatever).

After There is a billboard here depicting a beach scene. Somebody has spraypainted "This area is controlled by the fancy lads, anybody found in the area without a monocle and top hat will be shot on sight."

With this groups will be able to mark clear territory bounds that won't get sprayed over every ten seconds. People will not want to sacrifice such a large chunk of AP unless they have a vested interest in the area.

Optional Ideas

  • Being able to suicide off them.
  • Being able to climb on them or use them as cover. I don't know how this could be balanced to work. What would be interesting is letting people hide on them, but zombies could try to knock them down. But how would they come back up? Mysteries like this course through the universe in magic rivers.
  • Longer messages?
  • As an alternative to spending AP it could be balanced by taking multiple cans of paint. This would cost more AP as well, except you could budget it and it isn't as heavy handedly arbitrary.

Votes

  • Keep - Me likey. *spraypaints U.N.I.T. logo and the words The United Nations Intelligence Taskforce Wants YOU! * on a billboard depicting a trio of soldiers* --John Taggart 18:04, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Thief! Thief!! Someone chase after him, he has my idea! Heh. -- Amazing 18:08, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)

RE Quiet you's! Sit down like a good little wiki communist! --Zaruthustra 19:54, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)

  • Keep - I like this suggestion. So much that I'm eventually going to suggest something that's exactly this but with a few ideas of my own added in (especially about the optional ideas). i hope you don't mind. --Jon Pyre 18:12, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - hey, i voted keep on it the first time. --Firemanstan 18:16, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Nice. Though I would suggest that for the extra ap you spend doing this, you get to post a longer message than the standard tag (you do have more space, after all). Also; if used for cover, maby limit to one person at a time, and perhaps make it so that they can be attacked with ranged weapons (but not melee). --Zeek 18:23, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Well, with all the things I like about this attached as options... might as well, really. I personally am not a fan of making things "tougher" simply by raising the AP cost to the sky for it. Also, I think a lot more could be done with adding the equivalent of another "building" to Malton (though I do think this is a great way to add one). Until this becomes more than just another place to put spraypaint, I'm going to have to say it needs more thought. --Drakkenmaw 18:45, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
RE I'm happy to hear any alternatives to this. I couldn't think of one. --Zaruthustra 19:36, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Re: I'd personally say make the people painting billboards pay the cost in items over AP just to climb it. If you're going to spraypaint a billboard, that is really a GIANT surface you'll be covering to try and get your message out. So maybe make it cost more in paint? Two or three cans would both pay the AP cost-balance in a different, less-arbitrary way and inherently prevent someone with one can from just hopping up the thing on a lark and painting over your message. --Drakkenmaw 19:54, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Thats such a well thought out response I think I'll just TAKE IT. *cackle* --Zaruthustra 19:56, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Genius! Daring! A paragon of creativity! So yea, keep. --Zaruthustra 19:45, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep Great idea, liked it in the first place. If the board were to be used as cover, maybe a zombie can shake you down from it, with a cerain sucess rate of you falling off for X damage (maybe even being unconsious for awhile, like spend 3 ap before you wake up, or a time penalty), then as for getting back up, theres no reason a zombie would stand next to a billboard without a person up top, so you can just walk right back up.--Mr. Mcdoogles 21:07, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep I wouldn't go for the optional ideas but your base suggestion is good stuff. --Antrobus178 22:17, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - But i don't like the idea of hiding on it because the blocks will already have a building on it. I like the multiple cans idea, maybe in combination of a 4 or 5 XP hit --Bermudez 22:52, 15 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Vandalizim + Zombies = Win--Arathen 00:08, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - So zombies can suicide. Bentley Foss 02:07, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - As long as it's too expensive (in either AP or items) for most people to bother with the "Jill Sandwich" garbage, this would be good. --Dickie Fux 17:06, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I like the extra cans of spray paint option, makes more sense. --Matthew-Stewart 20:34, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I love it! Turf wars anyone? --MaulMachine 17:00, 16 Dec 2005 (EST)
  • Keep - I'm in full support of any idea that encourages intelligent communication. As an aside though, the billboard should have a greater range of affect. Ergo, if you enter without... two blocks of the sign perhaps? You would see the message "In the distance, you can see a billboard display a puppy, and the message 'Survivors in St. Mark's." Just a thought.--Calon 23:41, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - I like this much better than the last billboards suggestion. I didn't vote on that one, was reserving my judgment. But definitely voting on this one. I like the atmosphere it brings, and much better than a potential hp loss. Riktar 06:11, 17 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep -Technically this suggestion's type would be Location Alteration, but I like it. --Matthew-Stewart 06:57, 17 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - This one would be hard to explain.How did everyone miss those billboards even when they are standing underneath one? --Penance 00:32, 18 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Again, tagging needs more use. -Tereseth 10:44, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
  • Keep - Very nice idea, I like this. 28th, december 2005 1:59 PM

Blance XP Loss

Duplicate of Mind Munch and many, many others. Please, have a look at Suggestions Do and Do Nots, and specially Frequently Suggested. --Brizth 00:10, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Just what the hell does "blance" mean anyway? - KingRaptor 12:47, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)
I think she's in a Streetcar Named Desire.
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Suggestions/15th-Dec-2005&oldid=139669"