Suggestions/24rd-Dec-2005
Closed Suggestions
- These suggestions are now closed. No more voting or editing is to be done to them.
- 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.
- Suggestions under the 2/3 proportion but with more or equal Keeps to Kills ration will be moved to the Undecided Suggestions page.
- All other Suggestions will be moved to either the Peer Rejected Suggestions page or the Humorous Suggestions page.
- Some suggestions may not be moved in a timely manner; moving Suggestions to Peer Reviewed Suggestions page will take higest priority.
- 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.
24th December, 2005
VOTING ENDS: 7th-Jan-2006
Door Alarms
| Timestamp: | 02:00, 23 Dec 2005 |
| Type: | improvement. |
| Scope: | Buildings |
| Description: | When a Zombie opens the doors to an armory,PD,etc it alerts the human players in the building that a zombie is in the building. |
Votes
- Kill - Because it's been suggested a dozen times before, and because it was very, very poorly formatted and broke the page. I just fixed it (see timestamp) and I think we might as well leave it up here and pretend it was posted on the 24th, as it was only lurking behind the broken code all day long and didn't get to be properly voted upon.... Bentley Foss 05:18, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill A: if it creates text everytime zombie entered the building then it is open to uber-spam.
B: if it only means the latest one, why does it matter? C: Why does this matter at all, if there is a zombie then it says. "There is a ___ X zombie/s here."-X = number of zombies.? - --Fullemtaled 07:30, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill it been suggested before, and better.--Vista 13:34, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - Hay guys let's add useless crap that does little to nothing. --Katthew 13:39, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - You've already got this:There are two zombies here etc.--WibbleBRAINS 14:25, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill It is USELESS--revoso 16:48, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - What WibbleBRAINS said. --Whitehouse 18:17, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - Entirely pointless. --Robin Goodfellow 23:30, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - This is better. We apologize for the inconvenience. Wait - no we don't. --Signal9 03:28, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
On a different foot
| Timestamp: | 04:05, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT) |
| Type: | Starting Improvement |
| Scope: | New players |
| Description: | Right now, the cut and dry "everyone starts with this and this alone" thing is effective, but not really interesting.: What I propose is that a random function be added to starting a new character: instead of one result (the standard), there should be three (one good, one standard, one bad). Humans and zombies could pick up an extra item or XP; or they could lose either AP or HP, though usually only in small amounts, X (to be determined by Kevan).
Human: You stumble out of your hiding place, for lack of food. As you dart through the streets. You see a pack of zombies killing a young man, survival instincts surge through you as you climb into a nearby dumpster. Inside of it, you get cut on a piece of glass. You climb out once all of the sounds have stopped, the man is gone, but he dropped his pistol. You grab it and prepare yourself for events ahead. (This user would start with -X HP and a pistol, in addition to his regular starting gear) Zombie: You stand up with a groan as adrenaline forces it's way through your body. Your mind is foggy and you are having a hard time moving. As you stumble through the streets, a small child tugs on your clothing and asks if you are okay. For reasons beyond your comprehension, you bite into the child. As the blood dribbles down your chin and the child's innards slide down your throat, you understand that it is the hunger that drives you. You finish your meal and begin to walk away, but your leg is stuck in a drain, after a few tries, it comes free and you are on your way to find your next meal. (This user would start with +X XP and -X AP) Note that one could have only the good, only the bad, both, or neither. It's all a roll of the... err, whatever computers do to grab their random numbers.
I feel that changes this small would be remedied in next to no time, having very little real effect on the game. While it borders on NPC usage, seeing as how they only have an effect when a user makes a new character and they can't be interacted with (or even exist after that message), I don't think that would make for a valid kill vote. |
Votes
- Kill - Slightly confusing - --Fullemtaled 01:21, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - What's the point? --Jon Pyre 01:46, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- RE: In a nutshell, flavor. And some bonuses for new people. --Arcos 02:04, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - Let's re-rolling new characters until we get one we like. Rhialto 02:17, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - Kill because this is something that happens once and only once per character lifetime. Any effects it has (wow, an extra 5 XP? You got a crowbar in your inventory? etc. etc.) are so incredibly minor that it's not worth the trouble. It's not that I hate the idea, it's just that I hate the idea in terms of effort required vs. reward. Bentley Foss 05:32, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill Negligable, people would just restart until they got something they liked, wasting a huge spectrum of useful names. --Zaruthustra 06:58, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill -Negligable, It doesn't add anything substancial, and screws up starting balance.--Vista 13:32, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- keep Great idea--revoso 16:54, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - Sorry but the possibility of starting with less AP or HP just makes it harder to play the game at beginners level, even if it is compensated for by an increase in something else. --Whitehouse 17:58, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep Its flavorfull, its interesting, im sure it wouldnt be hard nto do, and so its a great idea.--grassman 19:14, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - (see Zaruthustra's & similar comments). --Firemanstan 20:13, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill with a capital K - Hey, theres not enough pressure on the server, lets make a hundred people who don't do anything. That'll fix everything!!! --APOCzombie 21:10, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Re: You mean like the hundreds of characters that are made because of a bad starting point, or because they were killed/revived and too lazy to fix it? If anyone's going to start a new character because they want a free dna exatractor or what have you, it's them. And they would do it with or without this being implemented. --Arcos 23:58, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Emergency Broadcast System
| Timestamp: | 04:10, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT) |
| Type: | Improvement/Various |
| Scope: | Suvivors mostly |
| Description: | This is an improvement of my earlier Radio suggestion which I think would add fun and flavour. I propose that four nondescript buildings on the map become television stations, equipped with a transmitter on the roof and a description of studio equipment in the building. These buildings would allow players there to transmit television signals that could be received by people with televisions.
To broadcast a television signal you would need to be in a television station that is powered by a generator. When powered you would have an additional dialogue box identical to talk except messages typed there would be broadcast over the airwaves and could be received by all people with a televisions (I'll explain how those would work in a bit). To prevent spam each message broadcast would require you to expend a tape. Tapes would be one use items you could search for inside the television station and would have a low enough % of being found that one person could not overly spam.
To pick up a television signal you would need a television, found only in mall tech stores. Televisions could be put in rooms the way generators can, and could be attacked and destroyed similarly. Under a room description you will see "A television is set up here (X)" with X being the channel number the television is set to. There would be a drop down menu to change the channel "Change Channel To [ ]", and it would cost 1AP to switch channels. When the television is hooked up in a room with a powered generator and the station the television is set to also has power the word "television" in "A television is set up here" would become a clickable link. That link would lead you to a page showing every message broadcast from that channel's station in the past 24 hours. It would not cost AP to view this page. The page would have a small two line description of a television studio at the top and then all the messages would be listed in the order broadcast. You would be able to both hear the message and see the person speaking it (it would look just like a long list of people talking). This page would of course have a link to get back to the city, same as you exit your profile. Having to actively click to see these messages would prevent spamming people who aren't interested.
It would allow players that feel they have something very urgent to say a way of spreading it to the masses, for instance one could announce battle strategies "Attention, the Malton Teal Militia are engaged in a desperate battle for Fort Creedy. All who can assist are urged to take up arms!" It would also remain in flavour and I expect many suvivors roleplaying scientists and philosophers debating on air to the origin of the plague and its implications. There are useful applications for this and a lot of flavor, and combined I believe it is worthwhile. Plus it'd give zombies and suvivors another thing to fight over.
A: Mobile phones are person to person, allowing privacy and reliability. These would be a mass media and allow more than just individual conversation.
A: This is more fun. Plus I can check in game without having to search through another website.
A: I don't think this provides an undue advantage to suvivors. I'd rather have this than forum metagaming.
A: It has the word meta in it. Seriously. If you're going to follow that tact why having Feeding Groan? Zombies can just metagame and post suvivor locations on a forum page.
A: I don't think so. Go to station, power station, find tape, send message. Find tv, power tv, set channel, watch tv.
A: Because you're putting your tape in a machine and queuing it up behind the other ones. It gets played in an endless loop until the next day. You can watch all the messages really quickly because it only takes about a minute to watch the loop of brief messages. It doesn't cost AP because it's playing in the room you're in, it doesn't take any activity to watch it.
A: The same way some buildings grew mobile phone masts. This wouldn't be contradicting a current description but adding to them. There are plenty of buildings that could have a description of a studio added in without compromising continuity.
A: I don't think this would tax it too much. As I've always said, I'm not a techie so I can't speak with authority on this, but all it would have to do is post sentences on a seperate webpage, update it, and provide a link to that page.
A: Seemed like a good number. One in each quarter of the city. But that number could go up or down depending how many television channels are decided to be appropriate. In the real world the number of VHF television stations are determined by city size. New York and L.A., America's biggest cities have 7. Malton seems like a smaller city though so four would be a likely number. |
Votes
- Keep - Author vote. Because zombie movies always have the news broadcasters struggling to stay on the air. --Jon Pyre 04:41, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - I was with you until you said the TV can give you everything that was broadcast in the last 24 hours. Most video recorders don't even have that much capacity. And yes, I know about some of the mosre advanced stuff that you can get, but ultra-modern hi-tech electronic consumer goods aren't really in-genre. Rhialto 05:15, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Re - Remember that this is a television station, not a radio shack. They can switch between tapes and with a degree of automation. True in real life you wouldn't have quite this many tapes queued but it's part of the fudge factor necessary in games, the same way that buildings never run out of items and first-aid kits can heal anything. --Jon Pyre 05:39, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - Because this pretty much just dumps all those cross-referenced server-killing text messages to everybody that were just fixed a few days ago. See the news page (http://www.urbandead.com/news.html) for some description of the problem. Bentley Foss 05:40, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Re - I'd like someone with a programming degree to back me up on this but it doesn't seem like it would cause the same problems. The reason the strike slowed the server was because the game had to check the names of everyone present. This would be just posting messages on seperate webpage. It'd be on par in complexity as this wiki page, except you could only add messages and not delete or edit them and at the end of the day the page would refresh. Checking power conditions seems pretty simple too. It would only need to keep track of the power condition of the four television stations and then check if power was on in your building. --Jon Pyre 05:46, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - I kinda like this. I believe meta is a dirty word, and the thought of some public access channel running in the background with all sorts of assorted messages sounds at very least entertaining. As to the server: if something like this were cached, and only updated every so often, it would add little stress. (a static page people can visit, no proximity checks, or long lists of people for the server to look at every time, etc.) --Tyroney 05:48, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep I like this alot as I really hate meta gaming. The "tape" anti-spam you have worked into the idea is also great! One questionable thing is the link and how that would work without letting those who don't have a TV from seeing it via the internet. Still I'll leave that question to the programers. --Zombie1313
- Keep It sounds like a great idead. and i like how you decided to cut donw on spam the tapes are a great idea. I dont know if you typed it.. I should read more .. But i assume the tvs only work in powered buildings?. --User:ericblinsley
- Re - Yes, the building with the tv needs power. And not only that the station of the channel you're on must have power too. --Jon Pyre 06:48, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - It gives me a way to spread the word of SZJ to a whole bunch of people when I get revivecd. - --Fullemtaled 07:24, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - Fluff is good. --User:Tereseth 7:57 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - Although fluff is good, it rather diminishes the apocalyptic feel for me. You'd think the TV would be down, even for emergency broadcasts. Besides which, who would be watching the TV after all this time? Mobile phones were far enough IMO. --Daxx 11:35, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill -I like the fact that humans are only left with only the scraps of civilization. thrown back into the stone age. I already have some slight problems with mobilephone co�rdination.--Vista 13:30, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - You say "It would allow players that feel they have something very urgent to say a way of spreading it to the masses", I say it would just be full of people who are self-important. A bit like real TV, really.--WibbleBRAINS 14:33, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - I can tell you put a lot of thought into this. I like the idea of a broadcast system, but not one users have control over. Think of real-life EBSs that scroll text about approaching tornadoes. I opened this topic at Talk:Suggestions, let's discuss it there. --Carnival H 14:45, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - Those television crew guys from Caiger Mall would be pretty amused with this idea, I guess. --Omega2 14:55, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - I love the idea --revoso 16:58, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - This is the apocalypse you know, mobile's are ok because you can carry them about and the contact level is limited. --Whitehouse 18:04, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - Give survivors something more to do with generators, both for the tv station and the tv. Maybe all buildings would have a tv already? And instead of a tape...maybe just make it 5 ap to broadcast? --DarthMortis 1:00 pm EST
- Re - Actually, television signals still being broadcast during a zombpocalypse has precedence. In "Dawn of the Dead" (original) the four suvivors holed up in their mall's only contact with other humans is a television that they're watching. The only program on is a scientist in an eyepatch arguing about the nature of zombies with other people. As the months drag on the set becomes more and more disheveled and the camera work becomes less and less professional, as civilization breaks down. There's little doubt that the television station itself is surrounded with zombies and they're just trying to keep the signal going as long as possible, hoping someone is out there. And Darth Mortis, I don't want to make it AP based because someone could still spam off 10 messages with a day's AP that way. Having to search for a tape could be used to limit how much one person could say while still allowing someone to hold onto a tape so they are guaranteed they can broadcast in an emergency.--Jon Pyre 18:38, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Re Another note about broadcasting. Mobile phones require far greater infrastructure than a television signal. The phone and the phone mast are constantly pinging each other and keeping track of the cell user's position. The signal has to travel through a complex relay point, which needs to coordinate that signal along with all the other cell phones being used. Ever make a call and get a message that "All Circuits Are Full?" because the phone mast was overwhelmed with callers? It's a very complex system. Television broadcasting is amazingly simple by comparison. The technology was invented in the 20s. All you need to do is broadcast the signal from a single source and everyone with a receiver for 100 miles can pick it up. If you could get enough power in a television station you could use that alone with no outside infrastructure to broadcast. --Jon Pyre 18:57, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT) -
- Keep - I like the idea --Lord Evans 22:05, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep -Low priority, implemented after zombies get several more things. It's a nice idea. I note the three Stadiums would be a pretty good locations to have as the broad cast centers...--Contaminated 22:08, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep--Kcold 22:49, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - I like this idea, adds some fluff, and might be fun for the RFM guys to play with. As to the comments that civilization is in ruins, when did this happen? I was under the understanding that Malton was quarantined which suggests that there is something left outside. If mobile phones work, then it makes sense some place still has television, heh. We know that the looters would have made off with all the good TVs, so you wouldn't search the mall, you'd have to search houses in the ghetto to find TVs. ;) Like it was said, a cell phone network is a billion times more complex than a television transmitter. Storing all of the messages in a single location and making the "television screen" apart from the main character screen would cut down on server load. -- S Kruger
- Keep - This is a great idea. Perhaps we should start with radio broadcasting though (one-way, not two-way). --Blobmorf 18:37, 26 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - We have narrowcasts (cell phones), I'd love to see broadcasts! --John Taggart 00:50, 27 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - Still,it would be funny to see a tv studio pop out of nowhere. --Penance 16:20, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - I like this idea, it doesn't seem that unrealistic to me. --Bort the Almighty 01:57, 7 Jan 2006 (GMT)
A "Kevan's Ideas" Wiki
| Timestamp: | 09:47, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT) |
| Type: | Time-Saver, Sense of Usefulness |
| Scope: | Kevan, You |
| Description: | With the recent implementation of the "Feeding Groan" skill, Kevan said, "Had been toying with a zombie flare-a-like for a long time, but couldn't settle on a satisfactory mechanism to prevent abuse and spam." (You can read that at the bottom of the "Peer Reviewed Suggestions" page.) At the top of the main Suggestion page Kevan says he's not short on ideas but on time. I'm sure one obvious difficulty is finding the perfect way to implement ideas in a game where every little shift can throw the game wildly off-balance.
(1) We could put our collective intellect into solving an actual problem rather than throwing out random ideas hoping one will stick, thereby cutting down on the total number of random useless suggestions posted here each day. (I've noticed many complaints about that.) (2) Any ideas troubling Kevan may be "solved" quicker, meaning faster implementation in the game. Anybody with me on this? A KEEP vote essentially means, "Hey Kevan, we want to help, just point the way." I think it's safe to assume that a Kill vote by Kevan himself bypasses the two week voting period on this one. ;)
No doubt a few people will whine and complain about upcoming features once they get a peek. Their numbers are diminished in two ways: Kevan could be selective about which ideas he chooses to share, keeping the more controversial ones to himself for the time being; and I think people will only complain if the idea imbalances the game, but the point of this new page is to prevent that from happening. If Kevan hasn't had a nervous breakdown yet from the massive amounts of criticism over features already implemented, I doubt such a Wiki would faze him much. In the end he'll know what's best and I wouldn't deign to presume he can't handle it.
Thanks for the input everybody. Kevan had the final word and decided it wouldn't be a good idea. I'd like to take this time to suggest, for those who liked the idea of helping out, that there's always donations and ad-clicking available. Hope to see you all in the city. --Carnival H 07:41, 27 Dec 2005 (GMT) |
Votes
- Keep - I like this idea. - --Fullemtaled 09:56, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - As he said, much more useful than throwing out random ideas. barbariandude 11:22, 24 dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - If Kevan doesn't mind that we get to look at what he's planning. --Daxx 11:31, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT) Also, APOCzombie, you forgot Dupe. :P
- Keep -bloody briljant, what Daxx said. and still moderated. Kevin shouldn't have to sift through countless versions all having the same effects on that page.--Vista 13:23, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - Awesome! I fear some people would start arguing about Kevan's ideas even before they're implemented, though. Anyway, count me in. --Omega2 14:51, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - Good idea, lets see what he thinks. --Kryten 15:02, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - what daxx said--revoso 17:02, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - Excellence. --Arcos 17:30, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - what revoso said. --Firemanstan 17:34, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - Good idea, I hope Kevan thinks so too. --Whitehouse 17:47, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - What everyone else has said. --Matson Jade 19:20, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep- while essentially its up ti kevan, this would give us a chance to really help the game out--grassman 19:22, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - Changed my vote to keep after some thought. This would certainly make our efforts here more useful. But I'm still concerned that this would cause a lot of problems for Kevan. Imagine zombies striking to prevent a revealed suvivor skill from being implemented. Maybe it would work for some of his ideas better than others and he could be selective about which to talk about. --Jon Pyre 20:32, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - Jon Pyre, your choices are keep, kill, or spam. Pick one. Oh yeah, and this is a great idea. two thumbs up. --APOCzombie 21:13, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - However, we must remember that it's not because we give input, that Kevan would have to do as we suggest, even when he's vetoing an otherwise unanimous vote. I think this is a good idea, but it puts us mighty close to the point where we might get so close to the game development, that we get emotionally attached to our ideas on what would be on that page. --McArrowni 21:34, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - But isn't what he suggested that we should help Kevan work on the in progress ideas themselves? We stay here to get emotionally attached to suggestions that we create. --ALIENwolve 21:47, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill I don't like the down side of Kevan having to put up his ideas where the least diplomatic of our community could react ungraciously to them. I would point out there are some extremely vocal, self-important, melodrama-seeking people who are members of this Wiki. This idea invites trouble in my opinion. --Contaminated 21:57, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep --Lord Evans 22:07, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill i think like contaminated--Kcold 22:58, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - If Kevan doesn't want to do this, then he's not going to. So I think the idea he's some delicate wilting flower who needs protecting is rather silly. --Robin Goodfellow 23:36, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep Why not? Mikm 00:35, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - Same reason as Contaminated. And I'm sure that if he wants to know what we think he just looks through the the stuff that's already online - he does more programming than chatting with us - that's a good thing. --Signal9 03:39, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - Okay, first, I can't believe we're not spamming this on principle, as it's clearly not a suggestion for the actual game. Second... I agree with Contaminated and Signal9. While I'd love for it to happen... I think it wouldn't be a great idea in the sense of politics and talking and crazy people stalking him on the wiki (and even if no one on the wiki is a crazy stalker now, we'd get some fast if this idea were implemented)... --Shadowstar 05:52, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep -good idea, beccause this forum is always the same, someone put an idea, if its good for zombie survivor vote kill and if its good for human zobie vote against. discussing peacefuly with the dude who know approximatly what possible or not wil be more constructive. idea will be applied more faster and the little war zed vs survivor will maybe end on this forum, making the real thing ^progress instead of shouting evrytime. --spetznaz21 20:31, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - Logn required to view would be good. But it is true that idiots like AllStarZ roam these boards, and try to shoot down any zombie- supporting ideas so they can be unstoppable farming machines. Maybe ban certain users from viewing the kevan's ideas Wiki. - Tereseth 9:26, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Spam - This page is for suggestions to add to the game, not meta-suggestions to add to the wiki. As such, this is off-topic. However, I do still think it is a great idea. Rhialto 00:03, 27 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - It's still a suggestion that's related to the game. The more help we can give Kevan, the better. --John Taggart 00:31, 27 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill Vote changed - Why would we ever suggest "Kevan, tell us your ideas"? Not a game change and generally a poor request. Also poorly explained. --LouisB3 14:56, 27 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Re: Your timestamp tells an interesting story. :) --Carnival H 17:54, 27 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - Hm, doesn't seem that useful from here; the existing suggestions already cover pretty much everything I've ever thought about implementing, and sending out an actual call for feedback would be read by a lot of people as "Kevan will definitely be implementing X soon", leading to impatience or disappointment - announcing the Large Building change and then not having time to implement it when it turned up code complexities was annoying, for me as much as anyone. I already discuss new game mechanisms with game-design friends who play UD, and it seems to be sufficient. (The "toying" with zombie flares was literally that; it was an idea I'd thought about a bit and drifted away from, rather than something I wanted to add but was completely stumped by.) Thanks for the thought, though. --Kevan 04:29, 27 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Re: And we thanka you, for the game as well as the explanation. :) --Carnival H 07:41, 27 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - *beats Kevan with his shoes* ;) --Monstah 20:04, 29 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Mo Money
Killed by author
Morbid Latch
| Timestamp: | 23:11, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT) |
| Type: | Skill |
| Scope: | Zombies |
| Description: | Ahem. As a survivor, I want to stab my own hands right now for this suggestion, but um. A skill under either Lurching Gait, Brain Rot, or (preferably) Vigour Mortis that allows the zombie to do a grapple attack on target with a low percentage chance of succeed (Perhaps initially hit chance of 5%, improved by Vigour Mortis and Death Grip up to 35%? Numbers are not set in stone.).
|
Votes
- Keep Author's unreasonable vote to further the balance of zombies and survivor despite the fact that he's mainly a survivor. But meh, I think zombies have reasons to fight while latch onto someone else to feast on their brains while the victim is still alive. Hunger can do strange things to the living, not to mention the dead...--Liadis 23:11, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - Overpowered, mainly because the survivor can't leave the square.Mikm 23:17, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT) Note: Changed my mind again. Mikm 03:42, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Re: Umm... Yeah, I see your point. The thing is, I don't want to mentally think about a survivor dragging a zombie throughout the town, into a police department, and let 50 other people shoot the zombie dead while he shakes the zombie off, it sounds more like a penalty rather than a boon, and this is a zombie skill that zombies spend 100 XP to buy, not survivor's. Point I want to make, though, is that survivors can leave the square after a minimal effort (5 AP, number not set in stone), should they find themselves still alive (And having a zombie chewing on their brain or arm) when they log in, and run after that happens. So it sounds a little bit like griefing the survivor, but, um, I think it's less powerful than other equvilent skills. If you find the bite hit% bonus too powerful, we can also tone it down. Or vice versa... --Liadis 23:34, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep Perfect - --Fullemtaled 23:21, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep I would suggest that the "Shake off" action cost 1 AP and have a 20% chance of succeeding. Also, claw attacks useless, or would break the 'grapple' attack? Can't use firearms...seems overpowered. Oh well, I still kinda like it. --RSquared 23:29, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Re Perfect! I like your idea more than mine. The fact that the victim can't use firearm would mean that they have to shake off the zombie first, THEN shoot the zombie. Although at that point, they usually have a good case of infection, and would face a zombie who had digested enough to be at full health... Although I can see where this would be a little bit overpowered in that sense, since it would temporarily deny the use of firearm until the victim throws the zombie off him...--Liadis 23:40, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - I would like this, as kind of a zombie alternative to headshot. --Matson Jade 23:31, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep --Lord Evans 23:52, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - Presuming that the Zombie can't attack anyone else without breaking the grapple. - Jedaz 00:01, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Re - I, the arthor, presumed as much. Yes, I'll add in a notice, thank you. --Liadis 00:04, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill -Too complicated, Too overpowered. Too NOT NEEDED. combat works fine, it is balanced, heck zombies already have the best attacks. What you need to do, is balance the fun. Playing a survivor is more fun, therefore there are more survivors, Therefore they're winning, make zombies more fun and you'll see the opposite happening. if you want balance make zombies more fun not more powerful.--Vista 00:35, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Re: I see some of the points you are making. Zombies, however, probably would be more fun to play if they start to fight like... well, zombies, instead of "Ohh, lookie, me hit you for 2 damages 25 times or 4 damages for 13 times." Great variation, isn't it? An example of this would be playing Dungeons and Dragons. A Gamemaster can choose to say "The zombie cling onto you, and starting to chew on your left arm", or he can choose to say "Zombie, grapple hit, 4 damages"... Heh, as for complication, I have to admit this idea is somewhat complicated. As for overpowering, you might have to point out where it's overpowered, since I am rather stupid and cannot see people's viewpoints as good as others... --Liadis 00:45, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Yes variation is good, but this way you have 3 claws attacks and the rest bite al the time. Bite would become 1.6HP/AP infect you and, you nerf guns, the only effective weapon people have against zombies. It cost more to get rid of the zombie than it costy for the zombie to kling on. You let other people hit survivors unwillingly, don't acount for the fact that it isn't possible to target zombies specificly. people will be wrongfully labelled as PKers. I think that it is best if you tell me something about it that isn't overpowered at this point.--Vista 12:21, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Re: I see some of the points you are making. Zombies, however, probably would be more fun to play if they start to fight like... well, zombies, instead of "Ohh, lookie, me hit you for 2 damages 25 times or 4 damages for 13 times." Great variation, isn't it? An example of this would be playing Dungeons and Dragons. A Gamemaster can choose to say "The zombie cling onto you, and starting to chew on your left arm", or he can choose to say "Zombie, grapple hit, 4 damages"... Heh, as for complication, I have to admit this idea is somewhat complicated. As for overpowering, you might have to point out where it's overpowered, since I am rather stupid and cannot see people's viewpoints as good as others... --Liadis 00:45, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - I can make a list of things wrong with this. One, a skill that prevents suvivors from using their only effective attack that they've spent days finding ammunition to use. Two, a skill that requires people to spend large amounts of AP to escape (and even if they shake the zombie off the zombie can just latch on again, goodbye realtime combat!) Three, requiring the server to keep track of how much damage you've done to the zombie. Four, making zombie claw attacks worthless. Five, forcing you to target a specific zombie when that is currently not possible. Six, making it possible for other suvivors to accidentally shoot you with a shotgun. Need I go on? This is bad bad overpowered bad. --Jon Pyre 01:00, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - .38 caliber snubnosed revolver. Much smaller than a fireaxe, crowbar, or baseball bat. Also much easier to use in close-quarters than a fireaxe, crowbar, or baseball bat. Then there's also the bit about stacking combos. --VoidDragon 01:06, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill until changed - Great Idea but it needs a bit of fine tuning before getting my Yes vote. "Note, I play survivor all the time, but since I am running out of people to heal or zombies to kill we need an incentive for people to stay dead". 1st, Anything that prevents you from drawing a pistol and firing would probably stop you from swinging a axe or throwing a punch, so its not realistic to have melee attacks be immune. This skill should neutralized all actions (attacks, medkits, revive syringes,etc) until player successfully breaks free. 2nd, 20% chance to escape isnt realistic given that both players are in physical contact, how could an attack miss? better method is to add a "Break Free" button, where the chance of success is based on relative strength, ie: Escape%=[50%]*[survivor HP Base]/[zombie HP Base] giving a 10% advantage if one player has Body building and the other doesnt. This would force the player to deal with the grip immediately. 3rd Other survivors can't use med kit on player, they get message a message instead: "you can't cant get close enough to [player name] to give first aid, He is rolling around the floor westling with a zombie, fighting for his life. 4th Damage from Any attacks made against the zombie or Survivor get shared by both based on the same Escape% calculated earlier. "Last Each attempt to break free should cause 1 hp of damage to the zombie as the human stops a toe, throws an elbow, or bends a finger trying to escape. (of course the victim still takes damage from infection) Each escape attempt should return a message to both the zombie and the player like: "[you/your victim] Twists and [headbutt/ knee/elbow/etc] and [fail/succeed] to break free although the you are [stronger/weaker/strength is equally matched] than [player name/the zombie]." --Tom mot 01:37, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - Could use tweaking, but the idea is sound. Would make my high-level survivor actually worry about being caught by a high-level zombie in realtime. --Sindai 04:28, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill Too powerful! Bites are deadly enough as it is, and garuntees that zombies will win in real time combat (which they can already do ratner easily), but that's not what makes this overpowered as much as the fact that it wastes survivor AP! This would make seiges rather unfair, as zombies who get in only have to latch on to a survivor and don't even have to bother attacking, as once the survivors break free enough times, they'll be too out of AP to be able to fight back! Also, as stated before, it doesn't make sense that pistols couldn't be used and that melee weapons would be unaffected, I mean, something latched onto you is going to be a lot easier to hit, that's for sure! I like it when sieges are evenly matched, but if another caiger were to happen with this implemented, it would be over in only a matter of hours, a couple days at most! --Volke 07:13, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT) EDIT: I also see that this can have survivors hurt another survivor by mistake. This is bad, because that means people will be wrongfully labelled as PKers, even though they did not intend to harm the survivor, but rather the zombie. This, too, adds to my reasoning for kills. --Volke 07:15, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - The concept is nice, but the application isn't well-balanced. A small mob of zombies with this skill could devastate at least one medium-sized safehouse a day. Tweak it a bit more and I'll vote keep. --Omega2 14:06, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - This suggestion is too complicated. Go read Keep It Simple!! for the technical reasons why this is so. Bentley Foss 22:13, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep - This skill sounds like a good step towards balancing headshot. - Tereseth 9:55, 26 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Kill - Say me and my zombie horde break into a safehouse; I "Morbid Latch" onto the first guy in the stack - can my zombie chums carry on chewing/clawing on him until he's dead, then I latch onto the next guy? Sounds as if survivors would be powerless.--WibbleBRAINS 18:50, 27 Dec 2005 (GMT)
- Keep Rather like it. Concerns by Tom mot are valid. --B.Z.B. 10:00, 2 Jan 2006 (GMT)
