Suggestions/21st-Feb-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

Barricade Status

Close enough to peer reviewed Barricade Watch --Brizth W! 21:00, 21 February 2006 (GMT)

Nanobot Syringe and Nanorobotics

This usggestion has been spaminated. 8 spams, 3 kills and 1 dupe. --Grim s 08:43, 22 February 2006 (GMT)

Memory of Words

Withdrawn by author.

Unloading shotguns & shell boxes

Author kill. --The Fifth Horseman 15:47, 22 February 2006 (GMT)

Profile Change: Survivor Group/Zombie Group

Timestamp: 17:45, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
Type: Improvement
Scope: Everyone
Description: The same way you can set a different appearance for when you're a survivor and when you're a zombie you should be able to set different groups. I think it's perfectly reasonable that in life I could be a member of the Caiger Mall Survivors and in death march with the Ridleybank Resistance Front, after all we do want to encourage people to play both sides. If you check the profile of a survivor it'd only display their living group, if you check a profile of a zombie it'd only display their zombie group. If someone holds allegiance to one side whether living or dead they could enter the same group in both fields.
  • Note: Under group stats known members it'd give both the total number of players in the group as well as how many are currently playing that side. So if the group "Malton Axewielders" has 100 members total, 50 of those are dead but half of the dead list Malton Axewielders for their zombie group too the number of known members would be displayed as: 75/100.
  • Note: Of course you could just switch your group each time you're revived or killed but it doesn't accurately portray group stats that way because of the unlisted potential members that are on the opposite side and cannot show they are affiliated with different organizations depending what they are.

Votes

  1. Keep Author vote. Because the whole point of the game is PVP combat where people can switch sides. This just makes sense. --Jon Pyre 17:50, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
  2. Keep Keep keep keep keep keep keep keep keep... Might encourage people to play both sides. There is however a concern for spying...--McArrowni W! 18:20, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
    • Re If someone really wanted to spy they could already change their group or not list a group in order to fool others. This is more to accurately reflect group membership and to encourage people to play both sides. --Jon Pyre 18:52, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
  3. Keep I like this alot, but McArrownis concerns are not unfounded... --Agent 24601 18:29, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
  4. Keep - Nice. It's just so obvious now...--Arathen 18:51, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
  5. Keep - Good one. Would be nice if the other side's skills were hidden as well. --John Ember 19:09, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
  6. Keep - Woot! --Jak Rhee 22:51, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
  7. Keep -John Ember a suggestions that hides the skills of the otherside is in peer reviewed for months now. so it could be nicely combined. but the time that it is in now it doesn't seem likely Kevan will put it in. (or it is just low on his prioraty list-that is my hope)--Vista 23:47, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
    • Re - Thanks, Vista. I agree that both together would make a lot of sense. --John Ember 01:28, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  8. Keep - Wouldn't hurt anybody --Lord Evans W! 23:58, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
  9. Keep - Encourages people to play both sides without any of the OMG ZOMBIE SPY crap.--Mookiemookie 01:06, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  10. Keep - Good idea. -- Andrew McM W! 10:50, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  11. Keep - Fun idea, id never use it... unless... --Kirk Howell 14:53, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  12. Keep - I always thought it should work like that. -Kraxxis 17:12, 22 Feb 2006 (GMT)
  13. Keep - The only thing missing is .... nothing Timid Dan 17:19, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  14. Keep - Really neat. A good, simple to implement, suggestion. --Cannibalcomfort 19:30, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  15. Keep - I'm another of those people who would like to see the other skill set hidden on profiles when a character is currently on one side or the other. I'm also one of those people who think this is a pretty nifty idea too. --Blahblahblah 20:29, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  16. Keep - I was originally surprised not to find this option. Great Suggestion! --Maggot Therapy 09:42, 24 February 2006 (GMT)
    • Tally - 15 Keep, 0 Kill, 15 Total. --Cannibalcomfort 22:19, 23 February 2006 (GMT)
  17. Keep - Makes good sense Gibmeister 16:32, 24 February 2006 (GMT)
  18. Keep - Good idea.--HVLD 00:07, 25 February 2006 (GMT)
  19. Keep - I mean if you can change your apperance why can't you change you alliance?--DicktheTech 16:53, 6 March 2006 (GMT)
  20. keep - I can really see an even larger use of this then you think. groups that have smaller groups or are nothing but smaller groups such as CMS or the DEM could place the main Group in the Zombie group to help reflect the true numbers of the main group. Also I moved the two votes above mine over the "VOTE **ABOVE** THIS LINE" line --Teksura 22:49, 2 May 2006 (BST)
    • Note: Has been implemented- 20:25, 26 May 2006 (BST)

Head Shot Revision

Timestamp: 22:44, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
Type: improvement
Scope: Zeds and Humans
Description: I beilieve the current headshot system is little more than a way to greif zombie players. Lets have it so that having the headshot skill means that all bullet shots with any gun ignores flak jacket saves due to the fact that you're aiming for the zombies head and not it's body.

Votes

  1. Kill This is so bad it might be a practical joke. If there was no headshot, zombies would be unstoppable... so what if you die, get up for 1 AP... this is in here somewhere, NEVER TOUCH HEADSHOT. --Agent 24601 22:48, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
    • ReWhat we're not getting rid of headshot we're making it so that instead of costing a zed ap it makes a protection item useless
    • Re no comment --Agent 24601 22:54, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
  2. Kill A zombie's HP is boundless, increasing the damage done to them nerfs the flack jacket and makes zombies over-powered. If it costs a zombie five additional AP to stand, that's five less times they can take 50 or 60 more damage. --Arcos 23:04, 21 February 2006 (GMT) EDIT: I fixed the votes where these two yahoos above me mucked it up. --Arcos 23:19, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
  3. Kill See what Arcos said. --mikm W! 23:13, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
  4. Spam - There is no reason whatsoever to change headshot. --TheTeeHeeMonster 23:28, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
  5. Kill - health is useless to a zombie. if you remove the AP penalty they can buy 300 HP for that AP. what kind of influence does the paltry increase of damage mean to them? It is also the only thing that gives a practical limitation to the ?rise trick, also you remove the only use of a flackjacket. you don't compansate for the loss of headshot for people who use an axe, etc. Don't you think that if finding a better headshot would be that easy people thought of it by now? After the months of trouble old XP stealing headshot gave, we finally have a reasonbly excepted version that works. please don't try to stir up that old shitstorm again. I think nobody here or in the game would want that.--Vista 23:33, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
  6. Kill - I've always thought the headshot killing blow should ignore flax jackets, as a matter of realism/consistancy. But every shot?? - Why even have the item, if everyone can get a skill to get around it? Headshot is fine, leave it be. --Blahblahblah 00:39, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  7. Keep - This actually makes a lot of sense to me, but I'm sure it has no chance. --John Ember 01:20, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  8. Kill - I won't bet anything on it, but I have a feeling even Grim won't vote keep on this. (no offence to Grim of course). The AP penalty from headshot is the only thing keeping ankle grab under control. --McArrowni W! 01:22, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  9. Spam - You know what? Let's get rid of headshot all together so zombies don't have to do anything but beat the shit out of mall barricades to get experience points. --ALIENwolve 02:09, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  10. Kill ^ --Jon Pyre 03:05, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  11. Kill - Ignore flak jacket? Are you serious? It would increase the damage of weapons by 1-2 points, and get rid of the current deal. The current deal I think is fair. You're definetly a new player, if you want to see greifing, go read up on what the old headshot did. It was killer. I do disagree with everyone who says "Don't touch headshots." because if a better suggestion does arise, it should be given an honest shot. as for this one. Its terrible.--Uncle Willy 16:10, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  12. Re Do You're research before you going aroung callling people newbies. I so happen to have a level 22 survivor and thought headshot was kinda pointless
  13. Kill - Headshot is fine the way it is. Without it, zombies can spend 1 AP to completely undo the effects of 30-40 AP spent by a survivor. An extra 5 AP zombie AP is very, VERY reasonable. Bentley Foss 18:09, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  14. Kill - There are so many ways of saying no to this, but one sticks out: no more wasting a day of AP searching for a flax jack! -Kraxxis 18:41, 22 Feb 2006 (GMT)
  15. Spam Oh yes, lets turn two things at the same time to useless crap. Now excuse me, I have babies to kill (loads and cocks MAC-10). AllStarZ 22:52, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  16. Spam - No more Headshot suggestions, for the love of whatever deity you follow!--Arathen 02:50, 23 February 2006 (GMT)
  17. Kill - I Don't see this sugestion as good for zombies. Sorry. --Jim Stevens 21:06, 24 February 2006 (GMT)
  18. Kill - It makes sense , but it just not rational to add, to much hassle, also it should just be the headshot hit, not all the hits!--DicktheTech 16:56, 6 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Final Tally - 0 Keep, 13 Kill, 4 Spam - 20:23, 26 May 2006 (BST)

We learn from our mistakes.

Timestamp: 23:25 27 feburauy 2006
Type: Improvement
Scope: Newer survivors.
Description: New survivors have the hardest time gaining experience because they miss with their attacks most often, then I realised that people learn from their mistakes. Putting it in game terms, I think that people should gain 1 exp for missing an attack (This is the case in alot of other games aswell). This would realy help people get their first level. Suggested by --Razzlero

Votes

  1. Kill- No. If you want to help a survivor make those free deaths things don't reward them for doing nothing Drogmir 23:37, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
    • RE- Firstly they wouldn't be doing nothing, they have to attack in the first place to gain experience. Secondly it will still take a long time for those 1 experience points to add up. Third if you play other rpgs most of them give you a small amount of experience for missing.
  2. Kill - A garantied level every two days? to much, to fast. charish the fact that you level up so slowly in the start. you level out soon enough and then you have to waith months for something new to be introduced which you can buy without any trouble. a lot of the challenge of the game is lost when you can buy levels so quickly without any effort. I just started a new character and boy is it fun to just earn that last xp you need for shambling gait. seriously being a new starter is the best part of the game, enjoy it!--Vista 23:39, 21 February 2006 (GMT)
    • RE- Well.....it wouldn't be every 2 days, alot of time is spent walking around and searching for stuff. Stronger survivors level up fast anyways, with very high hit percentage with shotguns, so that's why it helps newer players.
  3. Spam - Nothing against you personally - but this suggestion is un-redeemable. What Vista said, and survivors have more than enough ways to get XP (even without attacking). --Blahblahblah 00:36, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  4. Spam - I believe this idea is unsalvageable, as the whole basic premise of rewarding failure is wrong.--Mookiemookie 01:04, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  5. Kill - Gotta agree with Vista. Don't sacrifice the journey for the destination. --John Ember 01:24, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  6. Kill - As Vista said. XP farming with punches and your best friend, anyone?--McArrowni W! 01:29, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  7. Kill Learning from your mistakes = buying a new skill and having a smaller chance of missing. --Jon Pyre 03:18, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  8. Kill Not a bad way to help noobs. Make it until they buy their first skill and/or only for "crossover" characters, whether zombie turned survivor or survivor turned zombie (THOSE guys need some kinda help...)--Pesatyel 07:06, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  9. Kill _ this is a kill for this particular suggestion. But the general idea is based off something the game needs ,and a flaw of the early game. Gaining XP in the begining is almost imposible, you can spend 3 weeks before leveling up, and thats NOT fun. On top of that until you max out your combat skills there is no fast way to gain XP. I think as a community we have to get to gether and adress the problem, a suggestion that halps players below level 5 to gain XP more rapidly that also teaches them the ways of the game. Some sort of training. I'll work on it if no one else does and let you vote send me 25 Kill votes, hopefuly inspiring someone to come up with something better. --Kirk Howell 14:49, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
    • RE- If any other version of this appears, or some method of balancing the experience with levels I'll definately vote "keep" for it. At the very least I'll be glad to see my idea inspire someone esle about fixing this problem.
  10. Spam - Free XP makes leveling meaningless. --Dickie Fux 15:43, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  11. Kill - I don't know how you learn, but I have to do something correctly in order to learn it. You don't get a question wrong on your history test and expect to get points do you?--Uncle Willy 16:13, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  12. Spam - No specification on how much experience or how many levels a newbie gets before the free experience stops. Heck, PK'ers would get experience for missing an attack on another survivor? -Kraxxis 17:14, 22 Feb 2006 (GMT)
  13. Kill - Because this violates the "No free lunch" bit that's mentioned directly in the Game assumptions. Newbies can deal with gaining XP just like every other UD player has had to deal with them. Bentley Foss 18:11, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  14. Kill No. (Guts baby with a kitchen knife). AllStarZ 22:49, 22 February 2006 (GMT)
  15. Spam - No free lunches. And "this is the case with many other games as well"? Name ONE. I can tell you for a fact that every other RPG I can think of dosn't even reward actually HITTING, it's only when you kill something that you get XP. IE: Shadowrun, City of Heroes/Villans, D&D/Star Wars D20, Knights of the Old Republic I/II...--Arathen 02:55, 23 February 2006 (GMT)
  16. Kill - Bullshit suggestion for many reasons, I'm really sorry.. I agree with most people here and have a few pointers of my own. What about the older players who earned their EXP the old fashioned hard way? This suggestion makes a MOCKERY of their hard earned EXP! What's wrong with earning your living? Paying your dues? Proving your worth? Survivors aren't meant to start out strong, that's why this is a survivor game. I like things the (die)hard way. Besides, this game is rather unique since you can play both sides and continuously switch between them. Comparing it to other MMRPG's is like 'Appels met peren vergelijken', which is a saying we use in the Netherlands, meaning: Don't compare two completely different things! --General Viper 10:52, 23 Feb 2006 (GMT)
  17. Kill - T.A.N.S.T.A.A.F.L. --Jim Stevens 21:09, 24 February 2006 (GMT)
  18. Kill Just kill!--DicktheTech 16:59, 6 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Final Tally - 0 Keep, 13 Kill, 5 Spam - 20:20, 26 May 2006 (BST)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Suggestions/21st-Feb-2006&oldid=263979"