Suggestions/16th-Jan-2007

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.

Suicide using guns

Timestamp:	Protomorph 00:00, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Type:	Game and item improvement
Scope:	Survivors who wish to be zombies.
Description:	I was wondering, if I want to die, why can't I simply shoot myself with a pistol or a shotgun? It seems as a much easier way than going up a building. Also, it can possibly lessen the effects of an unwanted combat revive, since a revived zombie will be able to immediately kill himself again. This option should provide a prompt window, so some people won't accidentally shoot themselves. Once you did it, you will get the message "You put your pistol's/shotgun's barrel next to your head and pull the trigger. You are dead." You might think that zeds are going to abuse this tactic to get into the buildings, but you're wrong. :) If you will try to kill yourself in a building with more than 10 survivors, you will get a message, "You are trying to force yourself to commit suicide, but it is too crowded and lively in here." If there are less than 10 people and the attempt is successful, then people in the room will see a message, "You see Someguy commiting suicide, blowing their brains out with a pistol/shotgun." I know, this might sound as humorous suggestion, but I am being serious. Now, this next part is not necesserely has to be implented, so don't vote for it. During Christmas, each set of christmas lights lowers the limit by 2 survivors and a Christmas tree lowers it by 4. So, even if you are alone, in a fully decorated room, you'll get a message after an attempt, "You are trying to force yourself to commit suicide, but the spirit of Christmas overwhelms you.".

Keep Votes

1. Keep That actually sounds really good. But add a headshot effect. -Mark 00:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC) By the way, great timestamp. -Mark 00:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
   • Re: Sorry, no headshots, since currently they work only on zombies, and also wouldn't make sense in this case anyway. "You shoot yourself with a precision..." Huh? :) Protomorph 00:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

   Re:- You're shooting yourself in the head! Head = headshot. -Mark 16:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

2. Change - needs a headshot affect. It usually takes around 5 AP to commit suicide anyway, so this would balance it out. Who commits suicide by shooting themselves in the arm? In addition, this should only be possible outside to stop Trojan Horses --Bloodrip 18:34, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
3. Keep New and fun ways for suicide. --Cap'n Silly 00:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
4. Keep - Damn straight! Its a free society, I can kill myself wherever I want!! --_Ducis ^Dux_Sloth^Talk 02:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
5. Keep A reason for a zombie to carry a pistol... and hey, if they dump you outside, you just gave them 1 XP! You also get to say something before you off yourself. "I'm still infected, screw you guys!" (BANG) Survivors get to observe it, so they're ready, so it's fair. You can RP and use all your liqour up, and then do it... If it gets abused, they can up it to 3 AP or something. MrAushvitz 05:24, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
6. Keep - Adds a lot of flavor, lessens impact of combat revives, and lets people commit suicide without having to find a building to jump out of. --Reaper with no name ^TJ! 17:52, 16 January 2007 (UTC) And am I the only one who realizes that Trojan zombies wouldn't be as effective as PKers? --Reaper with no name ^TJ! 19:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
7. Keep I like the idea! It makes sense and can add a new way for zombies to get inside and keep people on their feet. Besides, only zombies without brainrot could get in with ease.--Mayor Fitting 02:08, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
   

Kill Votes

1. Kill - I dunno... what's next? Suicide by knife? Why not by first aid kit? (Overdose on pain pills...) Not something I'd particularly care to see. (On a side note, there are more suicides around Christmas, not less.) --Uncle Bill 02:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
2. Kill- Make it a double headshot to solve trojan horse problems.--Grigori 03:29, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
3. Kill It's a way for people to turn themselves into zombies behind barricades. Even worse it singles out weaker safehouses to suffer for it. --Jon Pyre 06:35, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
4. Kill - Nice idea, but beware of zombies bearing gifts. --Wikidead 07:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
5. Kill - Make it so you can only shoot yourself outside, otherwise it's just an easy way past the barricades for combat revivees. And if you think there arn't many resource buildings with fewer than 10 people in them, then you need to get out into the outer suburbs a bit, instead of staying in the safe zones -- boxy ^{T L ZS PA DA} 08:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
6. Kill - because of Trojan zombies. Perhaps add "You shoot yourself! A nearby survivor dumps your body outside." if the building is occupied --Gene Splicer 15:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
7. Kill - It is just as easy to jump off a tall building and there is a possibility of Trojan Horse zombies as many others have indicated. -- 16:52, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
8. Kill - If you want to commit suicide, you have to work for it. Also, when you commit suicide in a building, you're supposed to be taken out of the building. That's what jumping out the window does. This makes it way too easy for zombies to intrude buildings. The 10 survivor cap doesn't cut it.Waluigi Freak 99 21:28, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
9. Change - I'll vote keep if you automatically get dumped outside when you commit suicide, or if you can only shoot out your bra!nz outdoors. --c138 ^{RR - PKer} 21:48, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
10. Keep - Good idea, but make it so no suvivors are affected. --Rocker820 22:02, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
11. Kill hmm... change it with gene splicers idea, or something like that. even double headshot woulden't work. (stay inside the building alive till you have 50 ap, then shoot yourself for 1 ap and stand up for 11 ap if you have ankile grab: inside safehouse with 38 ap. acctually, I think this would still be less effective than PKing, and on top of that you're obviously an enemy. and people flocked to vote kill/spam. --AlexanderRM 5:41 PM, 19 January 2007 (EST)
    

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Then buildings with 9 Suriviors get shocked with a Death Cultist murders himself and turns into a zed. I don't like that suriviors limitation, rare does not equal balanced, and it makes no sense. Want to kill yourself, why not do it in front of a group of people? You're sucidical, you don't say, "Oooh, have to contorl urge to murder myself." But if you take out the surivior limitation, then Death Cultists will use it as a Trogian Horse to take over buildings, bypassing barricades...altough that may cut down on PKing. Hence it is overpowered and unfixable. I like the idea, but since it is unfixable, it must die.--ShadowScope 02:31, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
   • Re: Do you think death cultists will be interested in the buildings with 9 survivors? It would be as easy to break it from the outside. And any building that's worth protecting has always much more people. Oh, and you don't kill yourself in front of the people because it is "too lively", so you want to live. :) Protomorph 04:45, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
2. This is a way of bypassing barricades.--Gage 02:34, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
   • Re: But you can do that the same by freerunning in the building and making your friend kill you to turn you into a zombie. Protomorph 04:45, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
3. Spam - Because zed spies could freerun into a building, shoot themselves for 1 AP, stand up for 1 AP, and then go nuts inside the building. Uh... no. Not a good idea.--J Muller 04:57, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
   • Re: - I'm gonna work on my idea and I think more people will like it if the suicide kill will make you spend 10AP to get up and 20AP IF you have a "Headshot" skill.
4. Yes, Death Cultists WOULD care about places with 9 survivors less because this lets them become zombies INSIDE. And, yes Headshot WOULD apply since most people who shot themselves on purposes shoot themselves in the head ("eating a bullet"). Wanna die? jump out a building, feed yourself to your zombie brothers, PK someone and don't leave or hell, ASK someone to do it! This isn't necessary.--Pesatyel 05:07, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
5. Trojan Horse - You wanna die - jump out of the window like everyone else! --Funt Solo 09:17, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
6. Zombie ambush squads!!! - Axe Hack sees all the Keep voters shoot themselves in the head and stand up as zombies so they can ambush the Kill and Spam voters. --Slice 'N' Dicin' Axe Hack 13:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

   Remove the strike when you have signed your vote. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 06:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

7. As others have pointed out, this aids death cultists a little too much. --ExplodingFerret 04:59, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
8. Spam - This has been suggested a number of times in the past and was shot down by the same reasons. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 06:40, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Small Prisons Using Fort Mechanics

Timestamp:	Jon Pyre 07:40, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Type:	Improvement
Scope:	A couple of police stations
Description:	Forts have a very interesting and unique mechanic, preventing people from walking into a square unless they're coming from the right square. It seems a shame to limit Kevan's invention to just two locations. I suggest modifying a couple police stations to take advantage of it. Many police stations also have a prison complex attached. I suggest making a few police stations two square large buildings. One square is the Police Station, and is more or less normal. The other square is the prison and effectively does not have an outside. When outdoors players would not be able to walk to the outside of the prison square, the prison square could not be free run into, and players in the prison square would not be able to move to any other square except back into the police station. The only way in and out of the prison would be through the interior of the police station, or to be killed and dumped as a body. Dumped bodies would land in front of the police station half. This wouldn't make the police station/prison complex any harder to break into than a police station. To make the prison square advantageous I suggest allowing surgery inside of it (yay prison infirmary) when powered and having the following items at the following percentages: Knives (4%), FAKs (10%, it's less than a hospital but still significant), binoculars (2%). It would also allow binocular use and suicides thanks to the watchtower. Suicides would land in front of the police station half. Now this would clearly makes those PDs more powerful thanks to the surgery and nearby items so I suggest leaving these prisons relatively rare, adding only 10-20 to Malton as a whole. They'd be boons to the few areas that receive them but unique enough that they add to the flavor and richness of Malton without unbalancing PDs. To make the change with as little upheaval as possible I suggest only altering police stations with an empty square next to them. That way there's no need to replace any buildings. Any zombies standing in the empty square can be moved over 1 space to in front of the police station. This should add an interesting kind of minifort to the game without making them so common as to significantly overpower police stations. And of course even this small bonus to survivors should be balanced by implementing something nice for zombies along with it.

Keep Votes

1. Keep These prisons would lend themselves towards some interesting battles. --Jon Pyre 07:44, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
2. Keep YAY MORE FORT MECHANICS AND STUFF! --Cap'n Silly 09:08, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
3. Keep Bitch slaps for anyone who doesn't think knives can be found in a prison. MrAushvitz 13:24, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
4. Yeah... - Only if we get one in Judgewood :) --Marie^{The Grove on Tour} 16:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
5. Keep - I think maybe you've designated too many of them throughout Malton, but it's an interesting tactical anomaly, having to go through one building to get to the other. I like it. I feel that it would have to be balanced out by replacing one of the suburbs hospitals though. Maybe you redo the suggestion, and have the prison block replace any hospital that is in an adjacent block to a PD (I dunno if I was clear enough there, contact me on my talk page if not, I like the potential of this one) -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 11:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
   • Re Interesting way of balancing it out...--Jon Pyre 17:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
     

Kill Votes

1. Kill - 20 prisons in a single city? Are you kidding? Also kill because I don't fully understand the mechanics - which is one of the downsides of prisons - they're so damned complicated in terms of the movement rules. Plus, what - 1 AP to dump a body into the NEXT square? Bit overpowered, no? It should be 2AP at the least to do that trick. This needs strong revision. Also, there is already a perfectly good prison suggestion in Peer Reviewed. Why not think of something new? --Funt Solo 09:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
   • Re This wouldn't be a full prison, ala Alcatraz but more like a prison section of a federal building. Many police stations/courthouses have something along these lines. And the reason a dead body is dumped in the next square is because there would be no exterior of the prison section to be dumped into. Neither survivors nor zombies can be outside in front of the prison. It's an inaccesible square. It doesn't put the zombie out of its way either since if they want to break back in they'd have to be in front of the police station section anyway. --Jon Pyre 09:48, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

   • Well, it seems like an awful lot of trouble to go to, and will create 10-20 uber PDs with attached hospitals, with cheap dumping rules - it'll create havoc with free running routes and outdoor movement routes - there's no real reason why it should be a separate square (you could assume that such facilities are part of the main PD square, in the same way that most hospitals are actually several separate buildings). Nah - I just don't like this one. Over-complicated. Overpowered. --Funt Solo 10:48, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

2. As Funt. Up to 20 prisons in Malton will be nearly 50% of the total suburbs with prisons. --Slice 'N' Dicin' Axe Hack 14:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
   • Re Remember, 20 is just the theoretical maximum. I expect something more like 12 or 15 would actually be put in. Which would only relate to around 12% of suburbs having one or these. --Jon Pyre 18:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
3. Kill - Not as Funt. I like the idea, but 20 is a little high. I'd go with just 2 or 3. And Axe Hack? 20 buildings. 100 suburbs. 20%. Not 50%. --Gene Splicer 15:51, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
4. Kill - As Gene Splicer above, except I would say 4-5 placed in some of the outer suburbs, and no surgeries. These are jail cells, according to your description, not actually prisons and would not have surgeries but would have a chance of finding FAKs slightly less than that of hospitals, otherwise they are overpowered.--SporeSore 16:53, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
5. kill make it so the cells are unfreerunnable (is that a word?) when the jail entrance is barricaded. I know people don't like internal cades but if there are only about a dozen of these in the game it would be a great haven from zeds and pkers while you go away for the weekend. remember you would have to break the cades yourself to get out!--Honestmistake 17:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
   • Re That could trap players. I doubt people would go for that because it could mean being stuck inside indefinitely. Good realism for a prison but I don't think it'd work. --Jon Pyre 18:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
6. Kill- I really do like the idea, but it needs a few changes. For one, make all dumped bodies go into the PD, so it effectively takes 2 ap to dump it outside. Also, I like the idea of internal prisons barricades. It seems just like a zombie movie for people to be banging at the fellow survivor's barricades as the zombies enter their half of the safehouse.--Grigori 21:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

   #Kill - Interesting, but 12 or 15 prisons? Wow, Malton must have the highest pre-apocalypse crime rate of any city in the world. --Wikidead 00:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

   • Re Well, consider the number of police stations! --Jon Pyre 03:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
     • Re: The number of police stations in Malton is high because police stations are buildings vital to the game, but still... Good point. --Wikidead 06:46, 17 January 2007 (UTC) (illegal reply - BzAli 22:13, 17 January 2007 (UTC))
7. Kill Although I like the idea, why make things harder for the mere 37% of zombies in the game?--Mayor Fitting 02:03, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
8. Kill - Too many, I say. Maybe 5-8 of these, seeing as they're smaller urban holding areas more than anything else. Also, you don't really see many full-size prisons in the middle of a modern, developed city.--J Muller 02:49, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
9. Kill - Sorry Jon, but I'm leaning 51% toward kill on this one, simply because your suggestion still needs a work over and a few tweaks. --_Ducis ^Dux_Sloth^Talk 12:06, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
   

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Am I missing something, or are you suggesting a bunch of squares that are impossible for zombies to get into or even attack the barricades thereof (if they have barricades, you don't really mention)? --ExplodingFerret 05:10, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
   • Re They are possible for zombies to get into. They just have to attack the police station and enter through that way. This is balanced because survivors can only get in there through the police station as well. --Jon Pyre 05:54, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
     • So the prison can't be barricaded? It seems kinda pointless in that case. --ExplodingFerret 21:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

---

No more shooting blindly

Timestamp:	Reaper with no name TJ! 19:00, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Type:	game mechanic
Scope:	Survivors, buildings with generators.
Description:	Have you ever tried shooting a target in a dark room? Not so easy, is it? You're probably a much better shot with the lights on. Now, we all know that generators increase search rates in buildings. But not by much. Certainly not enough to justify making yourself and everyone else in the building a target unless you happen to be in a TRP (and even then it is debatable, considering the high AP cost to maintain a generator and the presence of griefers). Therefore, I propose that firearm accuracy is increased by 5% when inside a powered building. Melee attacks aren't affected because it's easier to see your opponent when they are close to you (which you need to be in order to swing an axe at them). If you run the numbers using the Firearms Vs Melee Weapon Efficiency page, you'll see that the increase in attack efficiency would only be about 0.1 Dmg/AP against a flak jacket in a mall (1.47, versus the normal 1.37), so it's not overpowered. However, it will be one more reason for having a genny around.

Keep Votes
For Votes here

1. Author Keep - I already gave my reasons above. --Reaper with no name ^TJ! 19:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
2. Keep - I would vote against but since now powered buildings are lit up on the map and easier to see from a distance (by zombies.) It's actually a decent idea. Besides, generators run out and/or get broken (often by humans). However by firearms I hope you're including the flare gun with the indoors action.. hee hee. MrAushvitz 19:39, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
3. Well Done! Ev933n / Talk 20:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
   

Kill Votes

1. Kill-We don't need survivors buffs. How about survivors get a -5% to hit when in unpowered buildings and it goes back to normal when powered? Being on the street doesn't affect your accuracy.--Grigori 21:25, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
   • Re- You know, that's what this suggestion was originally going to be like, but I decided to change it because I figured it would get spammed. Guess I had it backwards. I'll have to stick with my gut instinct next time. --Reaper with no name ^TJ! 21:12, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
2. Kill - As much as I'd like to improve my accuracy, I actually agree with Grigori. I like your idea, but you need to change it so that being in a powered building makes your accuracy normal and being in a dark building makes it lower. --Horje 00:29, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
3. Kill - Realistically speaking, all attacks would be easier in a lighted room. (And I would still vote kill if it did buff all attacks) --Wikidead 01:04, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
4. Kill Meh.--Mayor Fitting 02:01, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
5. Kill - Survivors don't need a buff. --The Surgeon General 02:09, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
6. I actually think a BETTER idea would be a -5% PENALTY without light! Guns don't need a buff.--Pesatyel 02:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
7. Revise - Somebody who knows the right end of a gun might not have much trouble firing in the dark, maybe make it only work for being without Basic Firearms. (Think of the impact on zombies attacking malls with active generators.)--Labine50 ^MH|^ME|^P 02:46, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
8. Kill I don't think the buff is needed. --Jon Pyre 03:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
9. I might consider a -5% to hit in dark buildings. --ExplodingFerret 05:14, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
10. Kill - Unneeded buffs for survivors harm zombies. Yes they do. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 06:32, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
11. Kill - Almost a spam. As Grigori said. Loosing accuracy in unpowered buildings may make the trenchies care a little about maintenance issues -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 11:37, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
12. Revise Kill - A simple suggestion with too many consequences to game play. Such a bonus would encourage survivors to stay indoors even more than they do now. This idea can not see the light of day until 48H day/night cycles are implemented. If survivors have a to hit bonus in the light, shouldn't zombies have a to hit bonus in the dark?--SporeSore 13:46, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
13. Kill This would give pkers more of a buff than survivors. think how many pks you've ever seen, then think how many times you've seen a zombie killed. then, think about the actuall effects of the deaths. survivors do need a buff- think a seige 3 zombies vs 100 survivors (a tie) and a siege 100 zombies vs 99 survivors (zombies win) but this isn't it. --AlexanderRM 5:59 PM, 19 January 2007 (EST) Edit: Also a -5% penalty would mean 0% to hit with unskilled pistols/shotguns and -2.5% with unskilled flare guns. wonder what would happen 2.5% of the time... --User:AlexanderRM
    

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam - survivors don't need a buff vs. zombies, and PKers don't need a buff against their victims. --Funt Solo 22:11, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
2. Spam - Um, what about OUTSIDE, in the SUNLIGHT? Should shooting be even better there, say +10%? No, because that is likely the DEFAULT SETTING for shooting skills. Should they be worse in dark places? Maybe, but who's gonna vote for that? --Swiers 02:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
   • Re - Malton's buildings are extremely close together. Most people believe free-running works by either jumping roof-to-roof (which would require the gaps between buildings to be incredibly small) or by some sort of rope network. Either way, it only makes sense if the buildings are close enough together that the gaps don't get much sunlight. So we might as well say that survivors are always shooting in the dark. --Reaper with no name ^TJ! 21:12, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
3. Spam - As Funt.--J Muller 02:46, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
4. Swiers, apperatnly, a ton of people would vote for a -5% peantly for shooting in dark places. I might even vote for that. I also wonder of having some Malton time...in the daytime, everything is normal, but in the nightime, you receive a -5% peantly, both inside and outside, unless you have that genny...Prehaps the daytime and nighttimes cycle would occur every 30 mintues (daytime and nighttime both 15 mintues), so that players do not have to worry about logging in on the same time every day and still being stuck in nighttime.--ShadowScope 04:27, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
5. Spamtastic - erm, I don't think any tweaking of the hit percentages in this way are needed. Not at all. --_Ducis ^Dux_Sloth^Talk 05:04, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
6. As Swiers. Where's the good ol' sun? --Slice 'N' Dicin' Axe Hack 13:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
7. Spam - Honestly I would vote Keep - if it was only survivor vs. zombie it worked on as that would give the invading zombie a motive to destroy the generator but PKers don't need the boost so I'd remove the PKer bit if I were you. --Marie^{The Grove on Tour} 15:59, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

---

Bolt Rifle

Timestamp:	Horje 23:56, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Type:	Weapon
Scope:	Item Users
Description:	It seems kind of silly that the military would drop soldiers into a city infested with zombies with just a pistol when they have much more effective weapons at their disposal. Then again, adding a much more effective weapon would tip too much of the balance of the game towards survivors. So I propose a basic, bolt action rifle. The Bolt Rifle, or just "Rifle" could be used to fire at enemies, either in the same or adjacent square. Accuracy in the same square would begin with a base of 5% accuracy when firing into the same block and 2% accuracy when firing into an adjacent square, and, because of the large calliber of the bullet fired, would do 12 damage. The attack would also ignore flak jackets because the bullets issued by the millitary would probably be armor piercing. A player could get the Basic Firearms Training skill to increase the accuracy of both ranges by 25%. Another, possible, skill would be Rifle Training which would provide a 10% accuracy bonus to long range. Attacking with the weapon would be the difficult part, which is why the rifle would keep the game relatively balanced. To fire the weapon, one would have to click it's name on the inventory to "Raise and take aim". One would then need to use another AP to fire. Because it's a bolt action rifle, bullets would have to be loaded and then fired individually. Each bullet loaded would require one AP, though, unlike the shotgun, bullets would be found in cases of 5. Thus, the process of performing a ranged attack with the rifle would require a total of 3 AP, making it preferable for long range, but usable for close range. Another possibility is the "Rifle Butt Attack," which could be performed by attacking with either a loaded or empty rifle before raising it and taking aim. A rifle butt attack would have the same stats as a crowbar attack and would be subject to the same skill increases. Attacking with the rifle butt would only require 1 AP, making it more useful than firing in close quarters. The whole thing seems pretty complicated, but I'm hoping it will be implemented as a way to make the game, especially collaborative fighting, more interesting. Thus, my goal is not to use this to make the game much easier for survivors, but, instead, to make it more enjoyable.

Keep Votes
For Votes hereyou prevent this enabling you to
Kill Votes

1. Kill - Change it so that I can fire at someone inside an adjacent building (barricaded or not) and so that I can fire at someone two suburbs away, and I'll vote keep. --Wikidead 00:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
2. Incomplete Where would the ammo be found? Where would the gun be found? At what rates? Also this would be fairly useless, just come next to the Zeds and shoot, if they're offline they won't fight back, if they are, they'll come to you before you get to shoot. Oh, and 12 dmg is WAY too much. --Deras 00:59, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
3. Kill- No offense, but this sounds like every other rifle suggestion I've ever read. If someone can find a dupe I'll vote that.--Grigori 01:14, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
4. Kill - Incomplete and overcomplicated. Also, if it only holds one shot, it's a breech loader, not a bolt-action.--J Muller 02:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
5. Kill - Naw, I don't think this is a great implementation of an alright idea. I would certainly vote 'keep' for a breech-loading rifle suggestion, if a decent one ever came along. Sorry, but this one doesn't count... --_Ducis ^Dux_Sloth^Talk 04:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
6. Remote firing suggestions need more thought than this. How do you choose who to fire at? How would the drop-down box be modified to accomplish this? How would this work with the fact you can't see much into adjacent squares containing more than five survivors? I think in spite of the seeming 'power' of shooting from one square away, how many shots would you have to fire in order for it to be cheaper to move to the square, use conventional weapons, then move back (optionally)? If it turns out to be a useless weapon (which I heavily suspect), and you give it sensible search locations (e.g. mall gun store), you're going to annoy the crap out of people who will waste the search time (AP) and IP hits by finding and discarding it. --ExplodingFerret 05:21, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
7. Kill - Interesting, but no. Come back with an improved version, when survivors don't need another buff -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 11:44, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
8. Er... I don't quite think it's good right now. Note to everyone else, there are bolt-action rifles that do come with a capacity for only one round. They're mainly competition rifles, but they do exist. I've shot them. -Mark 17:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
9. Incomplete - As others have pointed out. Also, you should probably include dmg/ap and efficiency calculations (the latter once you figure out some search rates) so we can better judge whether or not it is too powerful. --Reaper with no name ^TJ! 21:20, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
10. Kill - Not needed. Walk over to the target, fire your shotgun, walk back: 3 AP right there, at a better hit chance. - BzAli 22:07, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
    

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam - overpowered. --Funt Solo 08:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
2. I would say a Dupe 'cause I think that ol' vandal Gold Blade has suggested something called Bolt Action Rifle or something....but I can't find the link...so Spam till someone does find the link. --Slice 'N' Dicin' Axe Hack 13:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

---