Suggestions/22nd-Mar-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

Virulent Infection

Timestamp: 02:25, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
Type: New Zombie Skill, balance change
Scope: All Players
Description: (realise this was a team work, I did not come up with this all by myself in one night, it had been reworked and nurfed for weeks)

Virulent Infection (Skill description:)Passes a hyper-active version of the zombie virus to a victim hit by any physical attack (claws or bite) that transmits itself to all people the carrier has physical contact with. This virus can only be cured by a survivor with Lab Experience using a NecroTech Syringe. Victims of this strain of the virus keep it when they die, and all revification attempts on them has 50% chance to fail. Infected zombies with brain rot now take 5 APs to revive, and the 50% miss chance remains. Stacks with Infectuous Bite.

Okay, so brain rot might be one of the least-used skills there are... So that made me ask myself: what could one do with brain rot. So i came to two conclusions: either the brain is literally rotten, decaying, damaged, or it is simply deformed, by the very virus that turned people into zombies, or a similar strain. The first being dull and bringing no inspiration I used the latter.

So this is supposed to be a zombie outbreak. And zombies are supposed to be, in a way, mutated humans (it's a desease after all). However, no one feels the effect of that desease, and the effects of it's familiar strain (infectuous bite) is so well known that it has become easy to cure and anyone can use a first aid kit to treat someone. What if another strain of the original virus apeared? Mutated? A virus that, while passive on active survivors, turns them into the living dead when their organs fail working? That's how i came with Virulent Infection, a skill to bring the real sense of epedimic to Malton, and bring a sense of paranoya to survivors, even though it is mostle a passive agressive skill.

Contagious. Yes, i know: multiply it by a billion. However, i still think it is acceptable, and I'll tell you why. First of all: It isn't air-born. In other words, it requires physical contact. Though that ranges from healing someone with a first aid kit to attacking with a fireaxe (though physical contact could be reduced to what you really use your hands for), it must be done. I don't you think you shake hands with everybody in the building you are in with. Also, if you did decide to, they need to do the same and jump to lots of other buildings for the desease to get really everywhere. Though this will not stop it from going everywhere, and I realise this, the places with the smallest population (of both zombies and humans) will be practicly free of this. Also, considering it has no direct effect on survivors, it should be acceptable. I've also been told, since this skill was drafted, that maybe it would be better accepted by the community if it only spread with the bite attack. However, I see no sense in this. As zombies attack barricades and get shot and all, they get damaged. Because of this, this infected blood is all over them, including their hands, which is partly why it is not restricted to the bite attack. Also, it would make no sense if if was contagious by any physical contact with survivors but only a zombies bite could initiate it, and i was looking for a Brain Rot subskill.

Effect... Incase it isn't clear enough, this skill makes it harder to revive infected zombies. Think of it as a semi-brain rot, if you will, since this strain mutated from the same virus. It makes 50% of all revification attempts on infected zombies fail. This would be explained as the virus, which is a hyper-active version of the zombie virus, will actively fights the NecroTech 'antidote' that is injected by the syringes. There is no added effect to this, exept perhaps show up on the DNA extractor (This specimen is infected with the (X) strain), and maybe even add a fonction to the extractor to scan survivors to know if they are infected, and if yes, it 'sends info by necronet on the virus' and gives you 5 xp (this is but an option, not to be voted on), and it's effect on brain rotted zombies who either have this skill or are infected. A zombie with brain rot and this infection in a necrotech building attemping to be revivified still have the 50% miss chance, and now takes 5 APs to revive, as the complications of this extra burden require extra precautions and attention (though the extra APs could be dropped if people express concerns on this, since people who revive in NT buildings may not know they are reviving a rotter). A zombie with this skill is automaticly 'infected', and cannot be cured unless revivified.

Curing this. Well, this would be a new, unstable virus that mutates after each host, so a mere civilian could not cure it... he couldn't even know it exists for it as no direct effect on survivors. This would be why people needs Lab Experience to cure this desease, for they have seen many deseases in their careers, including the zombie desease, and they have the ressources to counter it. While they have yet to find a perfect antidote for this strain, it is similar enough to the zombie virus so that the current necrotech syringes have some effect to counter it, however, while not 'immune' as the brain rot desease, it has a certain resistance like it (hence the 50% miss chance). Therefore, that is why it takes Lab Experience and a NecroTech Syringe to cure this infection. Sucessfully reviving a zombie cures it at the same time, and vice versa, but only gives the xp for reviving.

Immunization. Because it would be rediculous te be reinfected one second after being cured, you may be 'immunized' against the virus temporarely. Being injected by a syringe, wether infected or not, immunizes you for a 24 hour period, as the antibodies remain in your blood stream. This does not give any experiance, unless you cured the person. The only exeption to this rule is with zombies, as they must be revivified to be cured, and only gain this immunity if revivified (and possibly cured at the same time)

Now, and finally, detecting it. While these are more suggestions on how it should be done if the skill is included, one of them should go with it.

1) As the current infection... No one knows. (I don't recomend this one) 2) DNA tagging: The DNA extractor may now be used on survivors to detect if they are healthy. If infected, it sends the data back to NT for research and gives out 5xp or less (my favorite, most logical one too... and it gives low-level Scientists a boost since reviving is harder). 3) 'Turns 'em blue or something'. Simply tags the player with some kind of marker (I don't like this one, doesn't make much sense unless it triggers a physical change among survivors...)

Please, read all explenations before doing a spam vote, well, any vote really Note: Sorry for this. The only exeption to the physical contact tranmission rule is syringe usage, since they are easely made, kept clean, and disposable.

Note: This suggestion was made before the 10 AP per syringe rules, the author does not endorse this skill anymore as it is completely and utterly broken. The suggestion and votes will, however, remain for future references. --Certified=Insane 22:42, 1 April 2006 (BST)

Votes

  1. Keep - Author vote. This is to adress the game unbalance and spread out survivor populations. It is also to discourage unsensible agglomerations such those seen at malls (espeically caiger mall). May be nurfed in a later version if deemed too powerful... --Certified=Insane 02:25, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  2. Keep/Change - I like it except i don't think that you should get infected by healing someone who has it (you're probably using some sort of gloves), and that it is open to abuse by people deliberatley hurting people while infected --Mpaturet 02:40, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re - Indeed. However, there are no visible signs that a person is infected with this desease, so you couldn't know you should wear gloves. Also, in this post-apocaliptic setting, i doubt hygienic instruments are abundant. Good point though, I'll not it incase i have to rework the skill --Certified=Insane 02:46, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  3. Keep - This is good, I like it should help the zombie/human balanc even if the human players refuse to play as zombies it will be a good thing. --Weaner 02.53, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  4. Keep-I think it will make the game more interesting i guess and i dont see why not it shouldnt be accepted because it will give the game the real environement it should have--Josh Night 03:12, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  5. Kill it seems like it would punish people for healing each other, and I don't like this being claw as well as bite, even though its a new infection, and not just an add on of infectious bite. -Banana Bear4 03:17, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  6. Kill I can't quite put my finger on it, but something about this seems off. --Cerebrus13 03:22, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  7. Kill - No. You nerfed powered revives -- 5 AP with a 50% chance. As zombies are always taking little potshots at each other, the rotters are all going to end up with this and find it even harder to get a revive when they want one. Powered revives are complicated to get, and that's okay; but let's not make it worse. --John Ember 03:26, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re - Yeah, i know. The 5 AP thing was stupid, i meant to take it off but i had already posted it and didn't want to break the rules. --Certified=Insane 17:03, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  8. Keep - As of now death means nothing to surivors. Lets make it mean something again! - --ramby T--W! - SGP 03:34, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  9. Kill One dumb new player that doesn't realize they're infected could continually infect everyone around them. And it requires a syringe and skill. And all the zombie has to do is land a single attack. Way way way way way way way way way way way way way overpowered. Also you have temporary status effects with immunity and as Cerebrus said...in addition to all that something feels off. It may be that it's a bit hard to follow all the details of your suggestion, it's a bit overlong and you could probably condense it. --Jon Pyre 03:43, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  10. Kill - Ok, I'm guessing that you're suggesting a skill, which provides an infection, which spreads from zombie to zombie (via bite), which drops the chance of being revived to 50% and requires 5 AP to try along with the syringe. I'm sure I missed something there. Please remember brevity if you revise it. This isn't going to balance things so much as tick off the the zombies who actually want to get revived...I think. Velkrin 03:51, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re - For brevity, the first part was to quikcly explain it, the rest wat to clarify everything. The 5 AP was for rotters, but i do now realise it is stupid, though it is too late now to change that in this 'sugestion'. --Certified=Insane 17:08, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  11. Kill - Overpowered, even for a balance change. Nerfs newbie scientists/consumers (one of the best way for low-lvl scientists/consumers to get xp, is to heal people (possibly with diagnosis). This effectively makes them very likely to be infected by just doing their job, and since not everyone uses the malton map, they are likely to die before they can get help at a NecroTech building. I think this is a huge griefing potential). Additionnaly, if this spreads, having it as a skill is almost pointless: Every infectee gains it as much as the fellow who has the skill. Pkers and zombies spies such as the DotA will get infected and spread it as humans, throught the barricades, using the wonderful 100% to hit first-aid kits (which you said was sufficient contact). I could add that zombies with this skill will bite other zombies on purpose in attempts to block revification, especially on revive points. Changing the laws of physics (if there were any) would almost have fewer implications than this--
    • Re - Yeah, I thought that too for a while after you said it, but now that i think of it, curing humans has no miss chance and gives XP, and the DNA extractor variant for detecting infected hosts would give some xp (though i wouldn't give much for it) --Certified=Insane 00:16, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
      • Revised my vote because it has some merit, even though a lot of bad stuff clutters it up and I doubt you'll ever get this working -McArrowni 14:50, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  12. Kill - This would be abused too much in its current form, but there's a lot of good ideas in there. -LtMile 04:42, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  13. Kill - I really like the idea, but i hate the person to person transmission. --Grim s 08:05, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  14. keep _ i like the idea of an invection that needs scientist to revive, even if the idea is well written--xbehave 13:42, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  15. Kill - So in a powered NecroTech building it would be easier to revive someone with brain rot than someone with this virus? Riiiiight. --Brett Day 14:16, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re - Good point. I'll take note of this... --Certified=Insane 17:03, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  16. keep - I like it--Elhan 14:58, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  17. Keep- I like it too, it adds more depth to the game. In "28 days later" (yes, i know they were not zombies)a character was infected by a drop of blood, which was cool. I mean the only way in malton for people to become zombies is to be beaten to death, whereas any fan of the genre knows that it only takes a bite or scratch to start the zombification process, this more virulent strain represents the possibility of people turning through contact with the virus other than being bit and when you consider the amount of blood and gore thats flying around in malton, thats kind of likely.Orangutang 16:09, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  18. Kill - Did some of you killers not read this, or are you just confused. I'm pretty this doesn't actually hurt whoever's infected with it, like normal infection. All it does is make it harder to be revived when you're dead. That said, I still don't like the 5 AP thing (yes, I know it'll be taken out in the next version). The 50% is a little high, I think, high enough to be exploitable. I like that this virus is spreadable through both claw and bite, but I think that 100% spread through "physical contact" is too much, lower the percentage. --Pinpoint 20:34, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  19. Kill - Try adding some of this as seperate suggestions. Bits and pieces of each need refining, either way, but as this mass, it's got way too much for me to say "just needs a tweak". --Dr. Fletch 21:15, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re - Such as what? Some aspects weren't treated clearly but suggestions were added to fill the voids, as you cannot make a suggestion that needs another suggestion (Wiki guildelines for suggestions). An example of this is detecting the virus... I didn't have my mind on anything in particular, and didn't feel like having the suggestion shot down because of this, so offered variant ideas to gap the void. --Certified=Insane 00:16, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
      • Re: I mean bits and pieces. You've got a lot of ideas there: the virus affecting/transmitted by survivors, then we have a new contagion system, as well as the pseudo-Rot idea, and so on. Try thinking of which of these could work NOW, and suggest bit by bit, seeing how it gets taken. Maybe a new skill under Infectious Bite that requires Rot, so the "new strain" gets in... and if that works, maybe down the line try something along the lines of the pseudo-Rot coming with infection... etc. --Dr. Fletch 02:43, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
        • Re - Yeah, or perhaps turning this into two skills... the first not being contagious and the second making it so. While i was tempted to make this require two totally diffrerent skills, no current skills work like that. They all follow an easy and simple skill tree, where all skills require but one skill (and perhaps it's requirement). --Certified=Insane 18:35, 25 March 2006 (GMT)
  20. Keep - Needs work, and implementing it will be tricky I'm sure, but I'm not going to see all this careful effort wasted. It's a different form of the virus, doesn't cause damage and make you into a zombie, screws your ability to be revived (while you're a zombie, cuz it's in you and you don't know it, zombie AIDS!!) (Ahhh.. that's what he was saying), the virus is fighting back. Very, very cool. 2nd Strain. --MrAushvitz 14:15, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  21. Kill - Pretty much guarantees that no-one will even try and revive a Rotter. -Nubis 21:33, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  22. Kill -- A less curable form of infection might be ok, but pushes things a little. Costing essentially two syringes to revive someone who wants to play human pushes things a little too far. Passing infection through claw attacks is just ridiculous and violates the essential game premise that bites are a less powerful attack which make up for their lower hit rate by giving continual damage through infection. If I can infect a human and make him harder to revive with claws, why bite ever? And preventing people who want to be human from getting revived is just mean. The syringe glut IS a problem and revives ARE too easy and convenient right now, but this isn't the solution. furtim 23:27, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  23. Kill - Broken, and badly. --Snikers 00:29, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  24. Keep -- I think if implemented correctly this will really help out the slightly one sidedness of the game and it will be fun and thrilling for non dead people to not know if it was a high level zombie with a really deadly infection... I think its a good idea.--Surfincow 03:12, 24 March 2006 (GMT)
  25. Kill - With prejudice. --Gene W! - Talk 11:43, 26 March 2006 (BST)
  26. Kill -Though I like the idea of an evolving virus, this seems too broad a stroke. Also, very recent implements (ones made after this suggestion was posted, to your credit) address both the idea of a more stubborn, mutating virus and the ease of revives to acquire. Also, work on your spelling/formatting...--Xavier06 22:06, 4 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 10 Keep, 15 Kill, 25 Total. --Certified=Insane 22:22, 28 March 2006 (BST)

Rotter

Timestamp: 04:15, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
Type: New Zombie Class
Scope: New players
Description: For too long, there has been only one type of starting class for zombies, while there are three main types and eight sub-types of survivor. While this will not rectify that situation, it goes as far towards providing some diversity among the ranks of the horde as a single suggestion should.

I propose a new class of starting zombie called Rotter. This class, only for the hard-core zombie player, is made up of corpses who have been dead quite some time and have rotted beyond repair. The Rotter starts off with the Brain Rot skill, so that it can only get a flak jacket or survivor crossover skills with great difficulty. In return for this sacrifice and the lack of a useful starting combat skill, the Rotter will be able to level in the zombie skills faster than its fellows, at the rate of 85 XP per skill. If revived in a powered NecroTec Building, it will have to spend 150 XP for its survivor skills. Although survivors get a better deal in skills of their own class, there is less need for a zombie to get out-of-class skills, hence the cost of 85 XP and not 75 for each zombie skill.

Although this starting class is not for everybody, and should be labeled as such, I believe that many would appreciate having the option of this starting class.

Votes

  1. Keep You know, I'd really prefer other benefits for brain rot. However, I don't think that cheap zombie skills are a balance problem, because my maxed out zed was still as crappy/awesome as my not maxed out zombie. It still won't make them able to do more things though, which is sad.-Banana Bear4 04:22, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  2. Keep- Author vote. It's my suggestion. Of course I like it.--Guardian of Nekops 04:29, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  3. Keep - That'd be a nice setup. --Dr. Fletch 04:40, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  4. Keep It needs a large warning saying that it is a "Career" selection.--Deathnut RAF 04:42, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  5. Keep -LtMile 04:44, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  6. Keep - It's decent. The 85xp cost is compensated by the lack of harman skills, and the lack of Vigor Mortis at low levels. There's something I dislike about it, but not enough to change this vote--McArrowni 04:45, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  7. Dupe - Zombie Classes. The only real difference is the lowered skill cost. --mikm W! 04:52, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re - ...which is the basis of this suggestion, and the only reason I can think of that a player would want Brain Rot as their starting skill rather than Vigor Mortis. I think it is a viable difference.--Guardian of Nekops 05:00, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
      • Re - How is your suggestion different than making zed skills cost less (which should be done anyways for all players starting as zombies) --mikm W! 13:27, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
        • Re - It would be different from that suggestion (which, by the way, I have not been shown yet) in that it requires a cost for the lowered XP requirements; Brain Rot and an extra cost for survivor skills. That means basically no NecroTec Employment, no Body Building, no Diagnosis, and no flak jacket without a lot of effort. --Guardian of Nekops 15:06, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  8. Keep - A pretty-much-dedicated zom. Now that's an interesting tweak! --Gene 05:21, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  9. Kill - Was done better here and here. Velkrin 06:15, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  10. Keep - I like it. *shrug*--Wifey 13:50, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  11. Keep - I check the three items linked above as possible dupes, none of them mention giving a break on XP costs for zombie skills. Good idea, I wouldn't object to it being the full 25 XP discount instead of just 15. --Brett Day 14:22, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  12. Keep I don't see a problem with some people choosing to tough it out and get a small reward for it. Make it very clear to these players what they're getting into though: Needs less xp to level zombie skills but starts with very low attack abilities. Almost impossible to ever play as a human. --Jon Pyre 15:06, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  13. Kill - It is okay. But as pointed out above. It has been done better. - --ramby T--W! - SGP 15:09, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  14. Keep - There are better implementations, but this doesn't take away from the fact that this is a slightly different suggestion with it's own merits. Timid Dan 20:33, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  15. Keep - Had I had the option of this when I made my zombies, I would have taken it. -Nubis 21:18, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  16. Keep - Flip side, baby, flip side. I like it because "rotters" makes sense in Malton, zombies have been dead some time now, and many of them must be REAL rotten by now! It can waste a lot of NT syringes ("Dammit, another rotter, son of a...") And starting a zombie off this way getting inside a necrotech building will be hard period (luck more than anything "hey! I'm revived, ooops, guess this was a NT building.. oops..") And that skills cost for human skills, man that's gonna be harsh, but max out yer zombie faster per se... a lot of players will make rotters just to have fun again! (More zombies!) -MrAushvitz 14:18, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  17. Keep -- Interesting approach. I think I like it. Zombies do need some kind of alternate class in place. I mean, the character creation screen looks rather dismal with that lone "Corpse" class for zombies and all those nice things over on the survivor side. A faster-levelling zombie with no chance for getting Bodybuilding/Flak or any potential future crossovers skills is an interesting idea. My only concern is that it's not really all that balanced, but I'll support it anyway because people need incentives to play zombies, or at least to create zombie alts. furtim 23:32, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  18. Keep - Doesn't disturb the balance, and adds variety. --Gene W! - Talk 12:14, 26 March 2006 (BST)
  19. Keep -Not too disruptive. Similiar suggestions have been made, but the skill-cost tweak puts this over the top. It takes the tedium of starting out as a zombie, at the cost of an endgame slog for survivor skills. The transition to survivor is not nearly bad enough if you know what you're doing, though (Proscribed routine: Just save up XP while a zombie, get some sap to do a rotter-revive, and BAM! Insta-Survivor). My biggest reservation is that this could become the predominant class choice, flooding the streets with quick-leveling badass Zombies, but its not enough to sway me to a "Kill" vote. If the Rotters become too populous/powerful, I would suggest the next iteration go all the way and make it strictly zombie-exclusive by shutting it out of all things human.--Xavier06 00:56, 5 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 16 Keep, 2 Kill, 1 Dupe 18:35, 7 April 2006 (BST)

Cell Phone

Timestamp: 8:41 AM
Type: Change
Scope: Cell Phone Users
Description: Ok, this was deleted yesterday because i didnt (know how to) use the template, I hope this time it is better.

the mundane task of contacts has been obsolete for far too long, many people find it tedious and time-consuming to get contacts with people, get cell phones, and make sure they have your contact. My suggestion is to basically "trick out" the cell phone, it would invlolve a slightly different coding, but become very popular (usage wise).


A: several added buttons (just like shopping buttons in the mall) and the cell phone communication section would be treated like a "speak" box. this would also be a "dial" phone, where there would be a second "speak" box, for users to input the "number" now, "numbers" would be issued to all players (visible on their profile) and given to all newbie players; people could also show or hide it, incase they were getting spammed. the final part of this idea, woulc be the save number button, this would let users save friend's numbers insteead of adding them to contacts.

B: (my favorite idea so far) treat the cell phone as a room, requiring 1 AP to enter, and 1 AP to leave, anything, done in the room doesnt require AP (aside from calling) users in the "cell phone room" would still be visible, but the users can not see out of the room. the button layout would be something like this

(A) (B) (C)

(a) (b) (c)

(1) (2) (3)

this looks like a block in the city, and the "buildings" are the cell phone buttons. A: is play games (small chance of exp gain, up for voting, my idea was 10%) B: input number (for saving) C: view saved numbers a: send information 

     send information could be a skill or an item that could be merged
with the cell phone in  order to use this button when information is sent.
it can be classified to a players desired information, or simply send it all.
information would be current HP, Exp, AP, and skills, up for discussion though.

a second item could be implemented which would be a "cell phone charger" after ten uses, (gaming needs 30 to deplete the battery) of the cell phone) it runs out of battery and needs ato be recharged at a generator (giving another use for it)

1: where battery charges left is shown, or battery life "your cell phone is at 30%" 2: check past messages "oh pooh! i forgot where i was going, where did george want me to go?... oh, thanks cell phone! im off to caiger mall!" 3: several phones could be "GPS phones" and would display location here.

this suggestion is up for change, so kill it if you feel it needs editing, i also realize there may be some kinks, and those will be worked out if you tell me about them... thanks how do i stop breaking the page? if someone could explain it, or do it for me i would be appreciative

Votes

  1. Kill And stop breaking the page. --Cerebrus13 17:14, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  2. Comment: To avoid breaking the suggestions page, place a | at the end of your description of the skill (like I just did for you). Now, to read the suggestion... — g026r 17:38, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  3. Kill - Suggestions_Dos_and_Do_Nots#Don.27t_Give_It_Away Don't give free actions.--Bermudez 18:21, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  4. Kill - Suggestion incomplete, appears to be a work in progress that belongs on the discussion page first. Timid Dan 20:29, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  5. Kill- definitely not solid enough to pass, also seems like its not really neccessary, if you want to talk to someone you already know, you don't have to click their profile link to go to their profile and add them to your list, just coppy and paste the address when your logged in. -Banana Bear4 21:04, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  6. Kill - I just can't see WHY this would be of use. Would cause more server load, has a chance of giving free XP, and is too damn complicated for its own good. --Dr. Fletch 21:10, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  7. Kill - A whole lot of things that no-one would use. -Nubis 21:15, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  8. Kill - Is this trip really necessary? 1) The side-trip to the "cell-phone" room breaks up the feel and flow of gameplay, which should feel desperate and hurried, not frivolous and bored. 2) What happens when you get attacked in this special room? You clearly state that the cell-phone user is still visible, but apparently not interacting in a normal way. This bothers me much more than the free AP. 3)The free AP, though subject to certain restrictions and of dubious value, is still too easy to use and exploit. 4)Numbers?!? Numbers! All in all, there are probably a few ideas here to salvage, but in this draft, I'll have to vote it down.--Xavier06 01:08, 5 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 0 Keep, 7 Kill, 0 Spam 18:34, 7 April 2006 (BST)

Knife & Axe Skills

Timestamp: 20:13, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
Type: Skills
Scope: Knives and Axes
Description: *Hand to Hand Combat
    • Knife Combat
      • Knife Mastery - Additional +5% to hit on knives.
        • Knife Throw - Players now have option to throw knives. This deals 4 damage at a 30% chance to hit. If hits successfully, knife sticks into opponent, doing the same thing as Infection. The knife must be pulled out(new button, one AP) and a FAK used to get rid of the HP loss. For zombies, removing the knife is good enough. Hit or not, a knife thrown is a knife lost. Someone can only have one knife stuck in them at a time.
        • Keen Edge 50% chance to hit for 3 damage instead of 2.
    • Axe Proficiency
      • Axe Mastery Additional +5% to hit on axes.
      • Crushing Blow 2% chance to deal 8 damage on a successful attack.
        • Precise Blow 5% chance to deal 8 damage.
        • Mighty Blow 2% chance to deal 10 damage.

You must choose between Precise or Mighty Blow.

Possible pros: More often used knives/axes.

Possible cons: Overpowered? Extends skill tree one tier deeper

Votes

  1. Keep Author vote. --Cerebrus13 20:15, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  2. Kill Axes don't need to be made better. They're meant to be crappier than ammunition. Knives could use a purpose but I'm not sure an infection-like condition is the answer. --Jon Pyre 20:22, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  3. Kill - I don't really think axes are broken such that they need a fix, they certainly don't need to be high-powered ammunition-free weapons. The thrown knife idea is slightly interesting, but there have been a number of very good knife-related suggestions already, and a 30% chance of 4 damage with a knife is far less than you'd get with a single pistol shot (and you wouldn't lose the whole pistol). It just seems you've got one suggestion trying to do a lot of different things all at once, as well. You'd be better served breaking this type of thing up into a series of sequential suggestions as to better analyze the response to each individual item for feedback/improvements. Timid Dan 20:28, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  4. Kill - Axes at either 1.71 damage per ap (For the damage increaser being part of the to-hit roll) and 1.5255 if its a seperate roll. NO FUCKING WAY. If you want to be that accurate and have damage per AP that good, use a gun. --Grim s 20:32, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  5. Kill john has a point, 45% is more than enough, i mean, you dont need a higher percentage with an axe more than you need a higher % with firearms.. --Richard Rose 20:30
  6. Kill Yeah, axes are already pretty decent, I don't think any power up the axe suggestions will fly... Knives could use some work, but I'm not sure about the infection idea.-Banana Bear4 21:01, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  7. Kill - Axes are fine as they are as an alternative to guns, and survivors don't need their own version of a zombie's bite. -Nubis 21:13, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  8. Keep - Damn, I was gonna post a "knife throw" skill, but I like the way yours is worded better! Basically i say your Knife throw and "Keen Edge" skills are perfect, knives can (but won't always do) better dmagae it depends how deep you get the sucka. And "Keen Edge" is an excellent skill name (see some nut in the corner sharpening his knife collection, yeah, that guy.) Think of how many knives you'd have to carry to hit, and finish off an enemy.. to be honest (with misses) and that is why the knife in chest makes sense. But as for axes, I'd say resubmit this, just do the knives in their entirety, but I have one suggestion to add: For balance purpouses, someone wearing a Flak Jacket (which is Kevlar after all, and a steel plate in the center) there is a 50% chance that "stuck in chest" doesn't occur with the hit (this isn't an auto defense skill or some crap like that, it is a limitation of this knife skill, knives kill people very well.. Flak Jackets stop knives, very well (bullets better, but you know). You still hit, just knife isn't stuck somewhere vital making the sucka bleed to death! (flak jackets protect those prescious organs, a good can your REAL prescious organs!)-MrAushvitz 21:18, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  9. Kill - I'd like to see knives given a purpose, I admit. And depending on how it worked, a "throwing" skill could be great. But axes are fine as is, and I'm firmly in the "no Infection for survivors" camp here. Sorry, but no keep from me. --Dr. Fletch 23:43, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  10. Kill - Axes are lower hit chance then guns because they don't use ammo. --Bermudez 23:47, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  11. Kill - Right, melee weapons are worse because you don't need to search. If you want a realism explanation, weapons dull faster with use, and you're trying to not get the weapon stuck in the opponent. Knife throw is more powerful then infectious bite, since it requires an AP and a FAK to heal. Dmg/AP has been delt with above. Velkrin 23:54, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  12. Kill - What everyone else said. No need to search for fireaxes. Why I still feel this leaves survivor melee combat a bit weak, I think this was intentional. Also, I dislike one side taking the mechanics of the other (infection-like abilities for survivors, etc.)--McArrowni 00:10, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  13. Kill - I think knives need to be given more purpose too, but this needs to be worked out better. However, the needing of a FAK for survivors if they get hit would make them a good pker tool. Also, axes are good where they are at. There is a balance between them and ammo weapons. They are not meant to give high damage because they don't need ammo.--StormLord 00:24, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  14. Kill - Under no circumstances should melee weapons deal more damage per AP than maxed out hands. - CthulhuFhtagn 00:52, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  15. Kill/Change -The Knife Throw idea is nice, but I see no need for the extra damage. If we do it for knives, why not for bullets, too, which also stay embedded (much deeper) in the body? Making it a one-use projectile has merit, though. Knife Mastery and Keen Edge seem of dubious value. The Axe skills are a no-go, however, unless you also tack on some AP-drain to it as well (like, say, to sharpen or hone it). If you raise the percent to hit or damage on the Axe, you upset the balance. Its supposed to be less effective than guns because, unlike guns, you can re-use it infinitely without pause.--Xavier06 02:16, 5 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 2 Keep, 13 Kill, 0 Spam 18:33, 7 April 2006 (BST)

Remove Ankle Grab as a Crossover Skill

Timestamp: 22:03, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
Type: Game mechanics change
Scope: Survivors
Description: As it stands now, survivors with the Ankle Grab skill who stand up after being revived spend only 1 AP to do so. This goes against the spirit of the skill, which, by my understanding, was implemented to help zombies counterbalance some of the survivor's AP advantage over them. It doesn't seem right that the skill exacerbates the very situation it was intended to help fix. Ankle Grab is a zombie skill, and that's why there's no reason it should work for survivors.

I propose that ankle grab NOT work for a survivor standing up after being revived, and survivors stand up for the full 10 APs instead of 1 AP. This suggestion would not change the mechanics of how the Ankle Grab skill currently works for zombies.

Given the current state of low zombie morale from seeing survivors who were just killed being revived within minutes, I believe this small change wouldn't be the cure-all, but it would be a step in the right direction.

Votes

  1. Keep - Author vote--Mookiemookie 22:03, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  2. Keep - I was toying around with this idea. I like it. --TheTeeHeeMonster 22:06, 22 March 2006 (GMT) Edit: To all the people who say that buying this skill forces people to play as the other side for a while, consider this. Have you ever heard of banking XP? Store up 200, and when you die, buy Lurching Gait and Ankle Grab, and head on over to the nearest revive point. And to the "Reviving is hard enough" argument: it takes a zombie more AP to kill a human in optimal conditions than it takes to get revived. This would balance it out.
  3. Keep - Probably how the skill should have been in the first place. -Nubis 22:12, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  4. Kill - Sounds good, I admit, and I was about to vote keep, but then I realized that this change would make career zeds burn more AP when revived before they can reach their chosen side again. As such the change hurts everyone, helps no one in the end, and doesn't get my vote. Sorry. --Guardian of Nekops 22:18, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  5. Kill - This was how it worked in the first place. It got changed for a reason. First, the old way was confusing ("why isn't Ankle Grab working for me this time?") and second, what about revived zombies who throw themselves to the horde in order to go back to zombiehood? You'll be penalizing them 9AP when this happens, and combat revives are not exactly rare. I appreciate what you're trying to do, but there's a reason this approach was axed. --John Ember 22:51, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re - Thank you for the constructive criticism.--Mookiemookie 23:42, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  6. Kill Seems unfair that the one crossover skill survivors have should be taken away (especially considering how rarely it is used). It'd support a well-crafted suggestion to end crossover skills in general though but not selective picking and choosing. Also I'd like to point out There is no survivor/zombie AP imbalance. Survivors build barricades they can easily replace. Zombies have immortal bodies that can easily stand. Zombies are their own barricades in a way. The six AP it costs to stand up is comparable to the AP it takes to build up barricades a level or two. --Jon Pyre 23:05, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  7. Kill - I myself think if you've spent enough time as a zombie to get the skill and still want to play a survivor, then on the (probably rare, at least from my experience) occasions you get revived, one crossover bonus can't hurt. Besides, using the logic of "the spirit of the skill", that's just a slippery slope I don't think we need to go down, unless you'd like to see "Nerf Zombie Bodybuilding" down the line. --Dr. Fletch 23:40, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  8. Kill - Crossover skills are neat. They require playing as the other side for at least a little bit, and thats a good thing. -Banana Bear4 23:59, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  9. Keep - "Career zombies" should buy Brain Rot so this doesn't hurt them. --Sindai 00:08, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  10. Kill - There really is no reason to keep this from being a crossover skill. It takes about 20AP or more to make or get a revive scringe alone. This makes the revive process hard enough as it is on the entire survivor community without factoring in what it would be if survivors couldn't use ankle grab.--StormLord 00:41, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re - While many of the kill votes for this suggestion have brought up very valid points, I feel like I should respond to this one. The whole problem that prompted the suggestion was the very fact that revives are NOT hard on the survivors, at least through my anecdotal evidence. And why SHOULD survivors be able to use ankle grab? I doubt that the crossover factor of it was an intended consequence, like I'm sure the crossoverness of bodybuilding was. Besides, if you want to get into that argument, go ahead and tell me why zombies shouldn't get to use free running? Or why survivors don't get to use feeding groan?--Mookiemookie 01:37, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re Zombies can use diagnosis which doesn't make any sense. I don't think it's a matter of intent but a technical issue. It seems that skills that determine your health, AP cost of actions, and how the interface appears do cross over while those that involve actions do not. --Jon Pyre 03:34, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re I disagree. Diagnosis is a dupe of Scent Blood, so I can understand why that carries over. I do believe that some of these crossovers are by intent, but I could very well be wrong. As I said above, some of the kill votes have brought up very valid points (the fact that they did surprised the hell out of me, to be honest). However, no matter what other crossover skill someone brings up as an objection to this, I still feel the heart of the matter is that death really does not mean anything to a survivor. I'd love to see some skill or tweak implemented that would change that. Continue this on the discussion page? I feel like we're getting somewhere with this...--Mookiemookie 03:53, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  11. Keep - works for me --Catwhowaklsbyhimself 03:46, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  12. Keep - It just doesn't make sense for this skill to work for survivors. For that matter, I don't think Diagnosis whould be cross-class either. --Norcross 04:48, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  13. Kill - This would make combat revives better than headshot. If this was added to the game then people would complain even more about combat revives. --TheBigT 02:19, 24 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Tally - 6 Keep, 7 Kill, 0 Spam 18:33, 7 April 2006 (BST)

No Brain, No Pain

4 Dupe votes due to similarity to Preserved Ligaments. Velkrin 00:52, 23 March 2006 (GMT)

No Brain, No Pain (Version 2.0)

Timestamp: 19:13, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
Type: New Zombie Skill
Scope: "Zombies Only" skill, adds 15 to max. HP!
Description: No Brain, No Pain
New zombie skill, appears on zombie skill tree as a seperate tree "*".
It has no prerequisites other than being a zombie, so new zombie players can buy it sooner.
Note: Bodybuilding, the "survivor counterpart" also has no prerequisite, and can also be bought as soon as you have the XP if you're a living character. But you have to be a survivor at some point to purchase that skill. This skill is more for the "dedicated" zombie player. Both survivors and zombies benefit from "bodybuilding", but zombies again have to take the "longer route" to get access to it. This skill is "right here right now", "I am harder to kill".

Game Mechanics

  • Your zombie can withstand much more severe damage and keep on fighting! Adds 15 points to your maximum HP. (By itself you go from max. 50 HP to max. 65 HP)
  • This also stacks with bodybuilding when you are a zombie! (With both you go from max. 50 HP to max. 75 HP!)
  • When human: This skill provides NO bonus to HP whatsoever, but does not interfere with any other skills that boost your maximum HP.
  • This skill is a reflection of the sheer amount of "stopping power" required to put you down, well in excess of human tolerances (humans can be KO'd, you can't!). Your zombie is more defiant, mean spirited, and doesn't die until lying in pieces or several well placed hits (to the head preferably!)
  • Limitations:
This skill, as with "bodybuilding" increases your HP LIMIT, it does not also give you the bonus HP on top of that. You would have to get those HP somewhere else (by digestion, or getting yourself killed and standing up.)
You can still be revived, regardless of your HP (oh joy!), giving another reason to perhaps purchase "Brain Rot", to finally have some NecroTech free fun with your enhanced zombie!

Why would this skill be needed?

Actually this skill is NOT as good as bodybuilding per se (higher bonus, but "Dead Only". Bodybuilding makes you "tougher" on BOTH sides of the equation, this skill only matters when you are a zombie. It is useless to you as a survivor (take that zombie spies!)
The answer is this: You are always tougher as a zombie! You may not be as fast, or as smart, or as skilled, speak as well.. smell as well.. but you ARE much harder to kill, period. Zombies do not have the inherent weaknesses of all living things. They are something else.
Humans are faster, zombies are tougher. For a zombie to not have to spend so much AP for movement they have to buy a number of skills, but humans will always have their "Free Running." This cuts down on the "grief" of being a starting zombie (so what if 3 survivors stepped out and shot you point blank, get some XP before they drop ya! Reach out and infect someone!)

Note: This is the other suggestion that was considered the "Dupe" of the last posting of this skill (this version corrects all of that):

Preserved Ligaments

Besides, preserved ligaments... kind of a mummy thing.. ain't no herbs and spices shoved in my zombie's belly!

Votes

  1. Keep Author vote. Now it's even more different. The other skill DID carry over but did NOT stack... this one does NOT carry over and DOES stack. +15 instead of +10, and can slow down the "survivor XP gains" for zombie kill XP (there will always be low level zombies out there.) Doesn't give zombies a bonus to attack (and enter) Caiger mall or other major seiges, just means you need more ammo for the tougher ones. --MrAushvitz 19:15, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  2. Kill Definitely not a good thing. I don't think zombies need to be overpowering powerful. New skills are needed, but I don't think this is what we need.--Catwhowalksbyhimself 19:15, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  3. Kill - Not completely bad. I think 75 might be a bit too much, though. 65 sounds more reasonable. I'd like it better if you made it so you had to use digestion to obtain the extra HP each time you died. --TheTeeHeeMonster 02:00, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  4. Kill - Here's an idea, come back when you think of something for zombies to do other than attack stuff, get shot, and stand up to attack more stuff. Thats the problem, not zombies being weekWeak. Actually a better idea for you would be to give up on suggestions and put all this energy into a vaudeville act. -Banana Bear4 02:10, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re Zombies will be zombies. No, that's not quite it, zombies SHOULD be zombies. What would you rather see zombies doing? Running the Necrotech labs? Cooking meals for the survivors in Malton? "Mealzz on whueulzzz Uhhhhh..." --MrAushvitz 20:24, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  5. Kill - I agree that a zombie bodybuiding-equivalent is good. I don't think it should stack with bodybuilding. --mikm W! 02:22, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re I'd agree, but then we'd be looking at several Dupe votes, kill at least tells me I'm getting closer. --MrAushvitz 20:24, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  6. Kill Would make it too hard for survivors to kill the zombie unless they were fortunate enough to be packing several shotguns. Imagine the poor newbie forced to face a 75hp zombie with an axe! --Jon Pyre 02:24, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re Excellent point, but same newbie is facing a zombie with 60 HP with bodybuilding today anyways. Keep in mind, that survivors have "AP to spare" when going after a zombie, and they even get to "pick and choose" which ones to go after, that newbie is free to go a block or 2 and pick an easier target if they wish. --MrAushvitz 20:24, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re Ah but you're forgetting that survivors often have to fight zombies that break in if they want to save their buddy's life. It doesn't really matter which zombie you fight outdoors just to gain xp. It doesn't even matter if the zombie is killed or not, who is it bothering just standing around? But that newbie doesn't have a chance to choose if the zombie is in their safehouse. --Jon Pyre 02:43, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  7. Kill - I do like this idea. I really do. My only criticisms are that I'd prefer something to REPLACE Body-Building, instead of adding to it (perhaps where you can only gain BB as a human if this is approved, NBNP allows you +15-25... but only as a zed), and perhaps we use the "if you take it, you must earn it" logic, ie, you'll only revive with 60 max, the other HP must be earned through Digestion. --Dr. Fletch 02:49, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re You guys may be on to something with that.. what if zombies had the highest HP limits in the game, but only if they can digest their way up there.. for example feasting on recently killed survivors (yeah I know, I've tried it so many times). Not a big deal per se, but when you end your session if you've eaten well it's like "oh, sweet merciful jesus why does this zombie have 100 HP, how many people did this son of a (censored) eat lately???" But yeah for this skill, can be tweaked in any number of directions, like any good set of nipples. --MrAushvitz 21:24, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  8. Kill - I really wanted to like this idea, I really did. It's well-worded, well-reasoned, but in the end, it just swings the pendulum too far to the zombies' side. As for the "zombies=tougher" part of the equation, I hate to break it to you, but we're already there. For a certain amount of AP, zombies get to dust themselves off and get right back in the game. 'Nuff Said.--Xavier06 02:33, 5 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 1 Keep, 7 Kill, 0 Spam 18:32, 7 April 2006 (BST)

"Vice" Bite

Timestamp: 19:55, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
Type: New Zombie Skill
Scope: "Zombies Only" skill
Description: "Vice" Bite
There is a chance each and every time you use a successful bite attack that you "Clamp Down" to your victim! The best comparasin to what it is like is this: Having a hyena clamp down on your skull, and squeeze, only to realize your skull is nothing compared to massive jaw muscles of this predator! Another comparasin, an aligator just bit onto a wildebeast, and takes them into the water, for a roll, and a roll, and a roll.. until the only thing still moving is the aligator.
Appears on zombie skill tree under a seperate tree named "Man-Hunter Skills", these skills are the zombie's "flip side" or opposite, to the "zombie hunter" skills. All skills under this tree require at least level 10 zombie as a pre-requisite.

Game Mechanics"

  • There is a 3% chance per successful bite attack that you make against a survivor that you "Clamp Down" to your victim. This means you have them fully in your jaws, and if they try to leave your location it will cause significant damage! Not just any bite, a nearly inescapable bite!
Survivor reads: "A zombie just clamped down on you with a bite like a VICE!"
Attacking zombie reads: "You succeeded in getting your victim in your merciless, vice-like jaws!"
  • Once you have "Clamped Down" onto a victim, all further bite attacks from you are +25% to hit! (A miss is just the survivor managing to "shake" enough to avoid some of the damage you could have done.) This also stacks with tangling grasp (you are holding on to them as well, are you not?) But all of the ways of breaking tangling grasp do NOT work on this attack nor any of it's bonuses. Your zombie has to be killed (by anyone), the survivor dead, or the survivor moves away, only then is it "broken".

Zombie died: "The survior only got free over your, dead, body..."

Survivor died: "You released your jaws from the victim."

Limitation: At this stage, your zombie is NOT allowed any "speaking" actions, to move away from this location, or to bite (or even claw) at another player (or barricade, or other object) other than this one. This is the "price" of this attack, you're stuck on this victim (for now!)
  • Survivor Moves Away: 90% chance that you do 15 Points of bite damage! (Your zombie DOES NOT get XP for this!) 10% Chance they get away unscathed!

15 Points of bite, survivor reads: "You spew torrents of blood all around as you tear yourself free of that zombie, but it cost you a pound of flesh (at least!)" Zombie reads: "A satisfying gush of blood spews forth from your victim as they escape screaming.." Nearby witnesses (Surv.'s and Z's at this location) read: "There is a massive spout of blood, and screaming as _____ escapes from the jaws of a zombie!"

Unscathed, survivor reads "You're free! Minus some of your clothing.." Zombie reads "Your prey has freed itself!" Witnesses read nothing.

Why?

Oh, this little beauty adds to the 'gore' element of the game, causes pain and massive bleeding. Doesn't force a survivor to stay and fight, but might kill them if they leave (or aren't watching BEFORE they leave..) Mainly it gives the more experienced zombies a very pleasurable gaming experience, while adding to the "horror" of nearby survivors witnessing the pain and mutilation of one of their own nearby. Survivors being killed or nearly-killed by zombies in a horrifying manner, should be a bit more horrifying. Additionally it does give some satisfaction to survivors who "escape" or kill the zombie who just "got their teeth" on them! However, it does notify to the survivors watching that (Survivor) who just took off was in need of medical attention.. if you wish. there are many limitations to the zombie doing the biting, unlike tangling grasp it's much more dedicated and "vulnerable" in a way.. but if you want to get them GOOD it isn't free.

Votes

  1. Keep Author vote. Sounds painful, it should be. Movie Inspiration: "That torso-chick zombie" from "Night Of The Living Dead" the one who cracked his skull open with one GOOD bite and a lot of blood shot out very quickly, took a while for them to get her off him too! Picking on a woman, I tell ya. --MrAushvitz 19:55, 22 March 2006 (GMT)
  2. Keep, though 15 damage seems a bit high. --Cerebrus13 02:46, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  3. Kill 15 damage is way too high but this suggestion could be salvageable. Maybe something like 30% chance to clamp down, broken 100% of the time if you miss with a bite attack or when the survivor hits you, and if the survivor moves away without breaking it they take 4 damage could work. Just a tiny penalty for running away from combat without it being deadlier than a shotgun blast please! --Jon Pyre 02:53, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
    • RE Lol (mental image of zombie biting down hard on man's arm like a police dog while being beaten over the head with lead pipe "Bad zombie! Bad! Bad bad bad bad bad bad zombie!!!") I didn't want this skill to "kick in" too often with a bite (once per day, or every other day..) but if you get them good, their ass is yours.. okay I can retool it, for less than 15 HP.. but after escaping you'll still need surgery! --MrAushvitz 21:53, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  4. Kill No. To much of a percent to hit boost, to much of a dammage boost, and to much of you making horrendous sugestions on this page.--Bermudez 02:57, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  5. Kill - Pretty much what Jon Pyre said. --mikm W! 02:59, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  6. Kill Jon Pyre FTW! -Banana Bear4 03:33, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  7. Kill Very broken. Velkrin 03:40, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  8. Kill - Nerf it. 15 HP is too high, but I think that 6 or so damage would be a good deterrent for running like a girl without being ridiculously overpowered. I'd also recommend that you actually have it negate Tangling Grasp, as we not want to be this an automatic claw cannon, and a missed bite should indeed deactive the grip. I'd also like to put it out there that fellow zambahs/harmans should be alerted when somebody is grabbed. Would encourage teamwork for both sides, and it doesn't happen often enough to be a spam ticker. Should also compensate somewhat for the damage reduction and the Tangling Grasp negation. I'd also kick the chance of it successfully hitting to 20% AFTER a successful bite. I'll vote Keep when this is re-tooled a bit, or you change your name to "MonsieurDachau". --Undeadinator 03:55, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  9. Kill - Uhhh... would you mind making an attempt to stop trying to prevent survivors from running from zombies? [Edit: And while you're working on ceasing to do certain things... cut the propaganda. Yes, I see the little popularity games you're playing to try to appeal to the masses that you've insulted in various ways; those that hate you so much. You've tried to "be funny" in some way: nice try, but you're about as opaque as this bottle of nice... sweet... delicious Snapple... and the bottle isn't too opaque... a little cloudy, but I can see well through it! Man... Snapple... I wish your suggestions were as great as Snapple.... Back on topic, though, your little sexual joke a couple suggestions above... yeah... not cool. Way to try to appeal to the pathetic, lower-class, penis-thinking idiots. And what was going on with that comment on my vote yesterday? You insult my theory and understanding of the concept, and then on the end you slap, "But I respect you because your suggestion was intelligible." Nice try, Propaganda Machine 9000. I almost liked you better when you just had 100% bullshit suggestions and 0% comments, rather than what it is now with 100% bullshit suggestions and 80% bullshit comments. Definately not called for! I suppose my flaming wasn't quite called for either... something about boards with rules... whatever. I need some sleep anyway.] Destin Farloda 04:38, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Re - Ohhh.. a fellow "Perceptive-ist", but let's be honest cloudy as my intentions may be. Noone's suggestions will ever be as good as Snapple. Is it wrong for me to apologize and be nicer to those I've ticked off, did jesus himself not ask others to forgive, can Zombie_Jesus be any less wonderful? I'm just working the crowd, keep in mind, everyone does it.. in a different way, I'm just about as subtle as a brick upside the head. I am completely lacking in dimplomacy skills... here's some money, you do take bribes dontcha? And I do have no choice but to respect intelligent remarks, even if I disagree. If you play D&D I vary from Lawful good, to Lawful Evil depending on people's levels of ignornace, but I do live in an "honor system" of sorts. MrAushvitz 10:38, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  10. Spam Any suggestion so massively broken (+25% to bite attacks? stacks with tangling grasp?) cannot expect to be taken seriously. Don't think only in terms of realism, and all that--McArrowni 18:54, 23 March 2006 (GMT)
  11. Kill/Change -I suppose I should admire your sheer amount of chutzpah for making so many, many ill-considered suggestions, Mr. A. Of all the ideas of yours which I've killed today, this one seems the most salvagable. Change the percent/damage and you might just have a suggestion that could hold its head high before being voted down.--Xavier06 02:42, 5 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 2 Keep, 8 Kill, 1 Spam 18:32, 7 April 2006 (BST)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Suggestions/22nd-Mar-2006&oldid=190985"