Suggestions/20th-May-2006

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

Attack a Random Zombie, version 2

{{suggestion|

suggest_time=01:51, 20 May 2006 (BST)| suggest_type=Minor combat change| suggest_scope=Survivors attacking zombies| suggest_description=The target selection list on the attack button would now include "a random zombie". To fully respect zombie anonymity, and to allow the active aspect of stack defense, you would not be randomly choosing a specific zombie to attack. Instead, you would be choosing a random spot in the stack, and attacking whatever zombie in that slot. As long as you keep attacking without touching the target selection (including attacking with a different weapon), you keep attacking the same slot (taking any action other than attacking will reset your target slot). But if one or more zombies changed the stack order by taking an action, you wouldn't be attacking the same zombie.

There would normally be no advantage to attacking a random zombie, so people would normally accept the default. Thus for those who want to try to get the kill bonus another attacker had done most of the work for, you still could. But those of us who find it courteous to avoid killstealing, we could do that too.| suggest_votes=

  1. Author keep Thanks to McArrowni for the improvement. It's fair that zombie anonymity should mean that if the zombies mill around, you'll attack a different one on your next turn. --Dan 01:51, 20 May 2006 (BST)
    Wow, such solid support for passive defense. Impressive. --Dan 15:35, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  2. Kill - Seems kind of pointless to me. --Cinnibar 02:48, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  3. Kill - What's the point? --Cyberbob240CDF - U! 02:48, 20 May 2006 (BST)
    • Re - The point, as it has been all along ever since I first posted this on the talk page, is no passive defense for zombies. This would provide a use for trenchcoats in seige defense: you go outside and shoot a random zombie down to 40HP, then shoot another random zombie down to 40HP. Then the zombies have the option of healing by digesting each other and standing up (at the cost of some AP), or being somewhat easier to kill when they break in. --Dan 17:27, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  4. Kill - A hint: If you have to put 'Version #' after the title, you probably shouldn't be putting it up here. -Wyn (talk!) 02:53, 20 May 2006 (BST)
    • Re - A couple of my better suggestions had to get to version 2 before they got peer-reviewed. It's part of the refining process that voters provide. --John Ember 15:57, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  5. Spam - The last one wasn't killed because it had small problems. It was because the whole thing was a problem. Sonny Corleone WTF 02:59, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  6. Kill - I told you what I thought last time and didn't added it, thus I still see a problem. And Cyberbob240 I think you missed something. When you attack a zombie, you attack the TOP zombie in the stack which is NOT the most active zombie. I don't see a problem with the suggestion (except what I mentioned in the previous version). It doesn't damage zombie anonymity. The only hinderance would be making it a little harder to get the kill bonus, but you have the option of hitting the SAME zombie (top of stack, standard attack) or a random one (other option).--Pesatyel 03:25, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  7. Kill - This is pointless. Nobody would use this 99.999% of the time. Do you often find yourself attacking the same zombie as another person and they steal your kill? Ask the person to wait untill you are done or add every zombie you can to your contacts --Teksura 03:30, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  8. Kill - Pointless--`mudez U! LCD 03:56, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  9. Kill - i find this suggestion completely pointless and is just going to be an aggravation to people --Nkoi 21:19, 19 May 2006 (PST)
  10. Keep -I like this. It's a pitty this is looking pretty doomed. Nazreg 10:10, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  11. Kill - I just don't like this. --HerrStefantheGreat 12:28, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  12. Keep - Put version 3 on the talk page to drum up more support next time. David Malfisto 13:12, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  13. Kill - Completely useless and infuriating for most people. -- Krazy Monkey 13:41, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  14. Kill - I can't see a way to make this clear in the UI. What's the difference to the user between attacking "a zombie" and "a random zombie"? Even if there is a code difference, in English those seem to mean the same thing. --John Ember 15:59, 20 May 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Good point, and good answer by Wifey. Thanks to both of you. --Dan 17:42, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  15. Kill - Make it "another zombie," and have it cycle down to the next zombie in the list. I have found times when it would have been useful, and it certainly isn't unrealistic.--Wifey 16:37, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  16. keep - its a small improvement but its still an improvment! o and Pesatyel the most active zombie goes to the top of the stack. its quite simple [[User:Wifey|Wifey] one is the top option in the box and the other is the 2nd one down!--xbehave 16:55, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  17. Kill - Urban Dead is elegant because of its simplicity. This would take a big steaming crap all over that elegance. It's complex and not needed.--Mookiemookie 17:01, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  18. Kill - this seems unnecessary.--Bulgakov 17:45, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  19. kill it like a zombie in Caiger Mall. No. Mattiator 20:04, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  20. Kill - Oh no, I want to vote "Keep", but I can't! When so many other people are voting kill, my own opinions cease to matter... DAMN YOU MORAL MAJORITY!!! --Rozozag 21:16, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  21. Keep -I kinda actually liked the previous version better, but this works too. Why is this unnecessary? Or all that complicated? Its just another freakin' option in the drop-down box (I already have to skip over "Self" every time I DNA-scan/revive). Its always kinda annoyed me that zombie-stacks operate as a queue. The anonymity is well in tone with the game and I support it, but I don't like the idea of zombies waiting in a line to be killed/revived. Its a broken mechanic, so why not fix it?--Xavier06 18:12, 22 May 2006 (BST)

}}

GPS Improvement

Timestamp: 11:31, 20 May 2006 (BST)
Type: improvement
Scope: Humans
Description: The GPS is only good for e-mailing or texting your comrades details of your present location. How about changing the contacts list to show your buddies current GPS location? Obviously they too would have to possess a GPS unit themselves.

PK'ers would lose the feature of being able to carry one constantly in fear of their location being currently on display, so would have to constantly drop/find one to remain anonymous. A small price to pay for a murderer!

Votes

  1. Kill - You forget the fact that PKers could use alts with GPS Units to track their targets without being detected. --Cyberbob240CDF - U! 12:03, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  2. Kill - Cyberbob said it. Good intention, bad idea. --HerrStefantheGreat 12:28, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  3. Kill - But that would take away all fun of looking for them. (Yes, Airk Fraker. We are just behind you.) --Niilomaan 12:37, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  4. Kill - Cyberbob hits the nail on the head. David Malfisto 13:13, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  5. Dupe - Of this -- Krazy Monkey 13:39, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  6. Dupe - KrazyMonkey said it. It's a dupe folks. –Xoid Talk U! 14:28, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  7. Dupe - It's a bad version of the suggestion in the link --McArrowni 14:37, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  8. Dupe - Did you really think that people weren't going to notice a dupe of a suggestion made only two days ago? --Lord of the Pies 14:52, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  9. Kill - Cyberbob got it right. No question that this version is different from the previous one, but worse rather than better. --Dan 15:44, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  10. dupe - its the same, but worse. I want to say WTFCENTAURS But I can't. Mattiator 16:40, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  11. DUPE - But you still did it anyways, and got the link wrong as well. I somehow don't think that is a good thing to do for the sake of your public image. :/...--Changchad 17:52, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  12. Kill - Definitely not a dupe, but it would turn out bad like Cyberbob said. --Pinpoint 20:58, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  13. Kill Not a dupe due to the terrible "If you have a GPS unit ANYONE can see where you are" idea. Being able to see where your allies are is a great idea, but only after contact flagging is implemented. --Jon Pyre 21:08, 20 May 2006 (BST)

Victim Reflex

This suggestion was Spaminated with 7 Spam's and 1 kill. Auto defense suggestions are almost universally bad. This, obviously, was no exception.--Mookiemookie 17:16, 20 May 2006 (BST)

Rotting Touch

Timestamp: 19:58, 20 May 2006 (BST)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombies
Description: Prerequisite Skills: Vigour Mortis & Rend Flesh

Skill cost: 100 XP

The same force that causes the undead nature of the zombie can now be transferred through its rotted hands to a living victim, to a limited extent. On a successful hand attack against a survivor, a zombie with this skill has a 25% chance to cause a minor paralyzing effect as the muscles begin to rapidly deteriorate.

A survivor afflicted with Rotting Touch must spend 2AP on move actions only. This effect lasts until the survivor either dies or is treated with a First Aid Kit.

Votes

  1. Author keep Ok, I'm back with another shot at a zombie skill. In essence, this makes a survivor move like a zombie without Lurching Gait until treated. If this is a dup of another suggestion (didn't see any like it on a quick search), please let me know. Thanks, suggestions for improvement are appreciated! --DirskoSM 19:59, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  2. Kill- this skill is really going to imbalance the game. althought its a good idea i dont like it. --Nkoi 12:38, 20 May 2006 (PST)
  3. Keep - Not overpowered at all. It doesn't hurt the person. It just makes the need to keep FAKs even more. Sonny Corleone WTF 20:40, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  4. Keep - Would have voted kill until I found re-read it and found that it only slowed movement. I would rather it be tied to bites though. Final note: I do believe I have voted on something quite similar before, but until then I vote keep. --McArrowni 20:51, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  5. Keep - I doubt it'll really do all that much, but it could be useful from time to time. I think it's good on hands, though. Otherwise, bites would be a little too useful. --Pinpoint 21:01, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  6. Kill Don't mess with AP. Not that you should never mess with AP but AP attacking suggestions usually are incredibly unbalancing, like this one. --Jon Pyre 21:11, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  7. Kill Mess with AP but make it vite attacks, hands are supposed to do damage with bits doing the other stuff--xbehave 21:14, 20 May 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Made it a hand attack so a zombie will have to alternate between bites and hand attacks rather than inflict multiple afflictions all in one attack. It also only has a 25% chance of taking effect on a succesful hit anyway, unlike Infection which takes effect 100% of the time with a successful hit. .--DirskoSM 21:58, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  8. Keep - I'd say make it a subskill under infectious bite though. Works either way.--Mookiemookie 21:17, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  9. Keep - I'll give it the benefit of the doubt. --Rozozag 21:19, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  10. Keep - Bite already does enough. It's not a Swiss Army Knife. --TheTeeHeeMonster 21:32, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  11. Keep - I don't see this as overpowering. It DOES say move only.--Pesatyel 21:53, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  12. Kill - If you did a graduated to hit percentage up to 25% kind of like pistols I would vote yes. --Steel Hammer 21:56, 20 May 2006 (BST)
    • Re - To clarify, the 25% is based only on a successful attack. So just because you hit your target is not a guarantee you will cause Rotting Touch to take effect. So if a zombie successfully hit 12 times, you could expect the effect to activate on 3 of those hits. Obviously, a string of bad luck and you might never see it happen at all. Could easily reduce the percentage if it seems too high, but compare that to Infection which activates on ANY successful hit and can kill its victim. --DirskoSM 04:11, 21 May 2006 (BST)
  13. Keep - I like this. Lots. -- John the baker 22:31, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  14. Kill - Hand attacks are swords. Bite attacks are Swiss Army Knives. - David Malfisto 22:44, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  15. Keep - Ooooh. Devious! --John Ember 22:50, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  16. Keep - The flavor text might need to be played with abit (perhaps "Your system is in shock due to the chilling touch of the zombie"?), but the idea is definitly interesting. Plus, this could make XP farming risky --Darkstar949 23:06, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  17. Keep - I'm biased in favor of suggestions that would tip the balance. I think we should have some heavy-duty changes on tap in each direction. --Dan 23:21, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  18. Keep - Spending 2AP just to move? That's not a very good prize! --Legom7 23:50, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  19. Keep - I like the idea. It'll really make surviveing a zombie attack a painfull situation that can be fixed with a single FAK so its not over-powered. --Teksura 23:51, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  20. WTFZOMBIES/Keep I like it, as a "hand infection." Mattiator 23:55, 20 May 2006 (BST)
    Note removed illegal part of vote.--Vista W! 00:36, 21 May 2006 (BST)
  21. Kill While this is a cool idea, zombies already have Infectious Bite to grief harman actions. This would just make ALL zombie attacks to have a side effect, which i think it wouldnt be nice for the harmanz. --hagnat mod 00:43, 21 May 2006 (BST)
  22. Kill -God it's already bad enough zombies have to pay 2 AP for walking at the start, we should remove that instead of adding to it. It's a crap idea that increases the use of a bad mechanic.--Vista W! 00:47, 21 May 2006 (BST)
    • Re How is this a valid vote? Voting Kill because you don't like a mechanic already in the game does not seem valid to me. Consider the suggestion for its own merit, not because you are biased against an existing game mechanic. --DirskoSM 02:46, 21 May 2006 (BST)
  23. Kill - I think the idea behind it is good, but it should be added to bite attacks, not claws.--Bulgakov 01:00, 21 May 2006 (BST)
  24. Kill - What hagnat said. --Cyberbob240CDF - U! 01:14, 21 May 2006 (BST)
  25. keep - i like this but given how easy it is to hit with hands it should only be 10% chance.--Honestmistake 01:32, 21 May 2006 (BST)
  26. Kill - Ugh, no. Having spent ages as a lurching gait zombie, I cannot condone griefing like this. - CthulhuFhtagn 15:53, 21 May 2006 (BST)
    • Re Huh? Lurching Gait zombies already move as fast as humans. It's hardly griefing when it can easily be removed by anyone with a FAK. --DirskoSM 17:41, 21 May 2006 (BST)
      • Re - Pre Lurching Gait. Sorry. - CthulhuFhtagn 01:20, 23 May 2006 (BST)
  27. Kill- The 50% accuracy of Claw Attacks is the trade off for not infecting the survivor. I don't think you should have accuracy and infection in the same attack. --WibbleBRAINS 19:52, 21 May 2006 (BST)
  28. KillKillKillKillKillKill -- This isn't what Claws are for. Claws are for murderations. Teeth are the specialty weapons that do special things specially. That's why they have a lower %hit. But I voted kill instead of spam because I would definitely reconsider this if it was reintroduced as an "Advanced Infection" rather than a claw skill. furtim 20:27, 21 May 2006 (BST)
  29. Kill Overpowers claws. And I'd prefer a balenced Advanced Infection than anything that strips a person of their AP. In zombies movies it keeps survivors from fleeing, but real-time battles tend to be rare, and if the zombies loses all of its AP before the kill, it'll only grief the survivor since we can all agree that moving for 2 AP is something that NOBODY wants to have to deal with. I might reconsider if it was added to bite, but adding it to claw makes it too powerful since they already have some of the best damage averages in the game due to their accuracy and lack of need for ammo. --Volke 20:36, 21 May 2006 (BST)
  30. Keep -I was going to kill this, but having it affect only movement was rather nice. if it was infections bite i think it would be shot down tho. there are better infectious bite suggestions. Nazreg 13:04, 22 May 2006 (BST)
  31. Keep - Nice idea for a zombie skill. I like the idea that zombie attacks do lasting damage. it makes sense...seing as they're kinda mouldy and infested with stuff. --Otware 15:04, 22 May 2006 (BST)
  32. Kill -Close to the fence on this one, but 25% is too high a chance since claws are the main attack for sensible zombies. I'm not sure if you should overload bite with this either. Perhaps if it was its own seperate attack with its own accuracy?--Xavier06 18:23, 22 May 2006 (BST)
  33. Keep - Hell, why not. ZOmbies need new skills, and this seems worthwhile.--William Raker 15:31, 24 May 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 19 Keep, 14 Kill, 33 Total. DirskoSM 19:19, 24 May 2006 (BST)

Walking Wounded

Withdrawn for re-thinking after problems were pointed out. In the immortal words of Arnie, "I'll be back" --HerrStefantheGreat 21:28, 20 May 2006 (BST)

Play Wounded

Timestamp: 15:52, 20 May 2006 (EST)
Type: Newb Balance Change and Skill
Scope: Zombies
Description: This 100 XP zombie skill will allow a player who is level (5) or under to look like a wounded human to other humans (when ever they hold still for 1 Hr. and when they stand up as a zombie after being killed.) Players who are level (6-15) can do it (after 5 Hrs. and when they stand up as a zombie.) And players who are over level (15) can (only do it when they stand up as a zombie.)

The player’s name will be the name of (the last human they came in contact with,) and for the other players who have Diagnosis, they will see the player as having under 25 HP. Attempting to heal the player will not change what is seen as the HP level. The only way to tell that they are not a wounded human is to (use a DNA Extractor on them, they use an AP, or they are attacked by either a human or another zombie.)

Everything that is in ( ) is just an example and can be changed to make the suggestion better. Please be sure to read the comments of either myself or other voters, as we may have already come up with a solution to problems with the suggestion.

Votes

  1. Keep - This is my Author vote and the only other kind of option possible to help Newbs.--Savat 15:55, 20 May 2006 (EST)
  2. Kill - How stupid do you have to be to not be able to tell a lump of (un)dead rotting flesh from a live human --HerrStefantheGreat 21:00, 20 May 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Wich is why it gets harder to do the higher your level is. A fresh zombie victim would look like nothing more than a wounded person, because their bodies haven't decomposed that much yet.--Savat 16:19, 20 May 2006 (EST)
  3. SpamKill - WTFCENTAURS?! Sonny Corleone WTF 21:00, 20 May 2006 (BST)Kill - It's dumb. And don't touch my vote again. Sonny Corleone WTF 21:34, 20 May 2006 (BST)
    • Re - First off, "WTFCENTAURS" makes no sense. Secondly, this is not a spam suggestion, since it violates no rules. Lastly, I recall you voting spam on another suggestion just because you wanted me to RE it. If I could, I would mark this as an invalid vote.--Savat 16:25, 20 May 2006 (EST)
    • Note - You must give a valid reason.--The General W! Mod 21:24, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  4. Spam - What Stefan said. --Pinpoint 21:08, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  5. Kill - Stefan scores again -- Krazy Monkey 21:09, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  6. Kill Graah, zombie take method acting classes. --Jon Pyre 21:16, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  7. Spam - what pinpoint said--xbehave 21:17, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  8. Kill - This is the first seuggestion that I have ever voted on without reading all the way through. The first two sentences were all it took to get a kill from me. This is not well thought out at all. --Rozozag 21:23, 20 May 2006 (BST)
    • Re - That is a very poor way to vote. What about the first 2 sentences did you not like? perhaps there is justification for them somewhere else in the text...--Savat 16:36, 20 May 2006 (EST)
  9. Spam - "Nah, gahz. Ahm a harman. Zar!ahzrah." Damn those ninja zombies.--Wifey 21:55, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  10. Spam' - I see absolutely no point to this suggestion. Why would a zombie want to appear to be wounded survivor?--Pesatyel 21:58, 20 May 2006 (BST)
    • Re - IC, because humans seem to want to get close to a wounded person in order to help them. OOC, this will decrease the number of times they log in to find that they have just been killed again. This isn't an auto hide, since the character is still visable for all to see. This is also not a simple matter of being able to tell a living, breathing person from a dead, rotting one. Any fresh zombie looks just like a person who has been attacked by a zombie. Currently, in this game, you can still heal and save people who have been attacked by zombies, even if they only have 1 HP left.--Savat 17:11, 20 May 2006 (EST)
    It IS an auto-hide. A survivor walks into an area and, normally, sees 3 zombies. Now, they see Tom, Dick and Harry. Not everyone gives a crap about helping others, so instead of being able to kill 3 zombies that may be wounded (you didn't cover THAT either), they see 3 survivors and ignore them. The trade off for zombies dying all the time is the fact they get to stand up at full health as well as Ankle Grab. What's to stop a horde of zombies from ambushing survivors by having 100 of them standing around "pretending to be survivors?" It may be a little weird to see a bunch of survivors standing around outside, but it has potential for abuse against newbies.--Pesatyel 01:41, 22 May 2006 (BST)
      • Re - I suggested that only zombies who are a low level be able to look like a wounded person while they really are. Higher level zombies have this restricted till they can only do it right when they stand up. The first AP they take and there cover is blown. Now that I think of it, I feel that a Zombie's HP should have more of a connection with if they can look human or not. Also, think of the long tem affect of this happening. You say that not many people care about helping others out and would just ignore a wounded person. Well this will make players try to interact a bit more because you don't know. In the end, I think this will increase the health of both zombies and humans.--Savat 11:21, 22 May 2006 (EST)
  11. Kill - Stefan said it. --Steel Hammer 21:59, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  12. Spam - Enough with the Ninja Zombies already. "Oh look it's a wounded human with numerous bullet holes and claw marks" - David Malfisto 22:47, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  13. Kill - This looks hopeless to me, but I won't give it a spam because I think it's a sincere effort to think outside the box. --Dan 23:37, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  14. kill - no. Mattiator 23:56, 20 May 2006 (BST)]
  15. Spam - Thinly disguised ninja zombies suggestion. Disguised mostly by it's paralyzingly confusing mechanics. --Cinnibar 23:57, 20 May 2006 (BST)
  16. Kill - +Dan.--Bulgakov 01:02, 21 May 2006 (BST)
  17. Spam - SSS. No more ninja suggestions! --Cyberbob240CDF - U! 02:09, 21 May 2006 (BST)
  18. Spam- ZOM(G)BEHHAX! Ninja Zombies gogogogo! Newbs do not need to be helped. So stop trying. Tokakeke 03:01, 21 May 2006 (BST)
  19. Spam - This gets implemented, and it'll be impossible to survive if you don't have full health. - CthulhuFhtagn 15:57, 21 May 2006 (BST)
    • Re - How do you figure? Are you even reading the suggestion? This has no direct conection with health, other than the fact that zombies can look like a wounded person when they arn't doing anything. You can still heal survivors. Also, to all the other spam votes who keep talking about ninja zombies, no one is dissapearing from sight. it is nothing more than a case of mistaken Idedntity.--Savat 15:00, 21 May 2006 (EST)
      • Re - Because paranoid asstards will PK anyone who doesn't have full health. - CthulhuFhtagn 01:21, 23 May 2006 (BST)
  20. Spam -- The Cyberman of Meat. furtim 20:28, 21 May 2006 (BST)
  21. Spam -Can't see where it might ever not be broken. Yeah, survivors can interact to expose the filthy zombie-in-hiding but since some building are packed with survivors, it seems unfair to make survivors make a sweep for zombies in every survivor crowd. If I walked into a Mall with 50+ survivors, am I to check all of them, just to be sure. Sure, they are exposed when they stand up, but this just allows the ninja-zombie to wait for the survivors to go offline and then come out of hiding. Zombies already get to be anonymous, but they shouldn't be (practically) invisible. Remember, when making suggestions, you should always think of how it will affect the other side.--Xavier06 18:47, 22 May 2006 (BST)

Walking Wounded: Resubmitted with Changes

Removed once more by Author for resubmit. I'll take your comments under advisement. --HerrStefantheGreat 10:19, 21 May 2006 (BST)

Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Suggestions/20th-May-2006&oldid=274490"