Suggestions/25th-Jan-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

VOTING ENDED: 8th-Feb-2006

Newspaper-B-Gone

Spaminated with three votes. Not everything in the game is useful (i.e. blunt weapons), it's been done before. Anyways, you can always drop them for free. --Mikm 02:32, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Batting Practice

Timestamp: 02:58, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Survivors, mostly Roleplayer's
Description: When I play my character, I like to use a baseball bat. There are many people who think the same. Here is a quote from the melee weapons section of the wiki. "It is better than fists, but still very poor. The inability to kill an enemy completely within 50 AP means that if trapped in a room with a zombie and a baseball bat as your only weapon, it is much better to flee. This is unfortunate, as one could imagine finishing off a zombie with a baseball bat would be a very satisfying RP experience." My suggestion to add a more satisfying rp experience to the game is to add batting practice. It would be a civilian skill, because anyone can train for baseball. The skill would add 10% hit probability to the baseball bat. It would give a baseball bat a 35% overall chance to do 2 dammage. It would not make the baseball bat better than an axe, or a pistol, or a shotgun. It doesn't unbalance the game. It simply adds a nice roleplaying experience to those who chose to buy the skill.

Votes

  1. Keep - I like it. --Poodge 02:59, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  2. Kill - I would like to bludgeon zombies to deaths with all the damn books and newspapers I find, as it would be fun for RP-ing. Save a few RP-ers, nobody is going to buy a skill that helps a weapon they'd never use. Anyways, there's always Blunt Weapon Training--Mikm
  3. Keep - I bought knife combat even though I never use it. anyway It would a little flavour to the game.--RAF Lt.G Deathnut 03:34, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  4. Keep - <3 I love this. MaulMachine 03:38, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  5. Keep - That would be nice, even though I have yet to find a bat. This is just a joke but mabye there should be a Plumber skill to increase the Hit % to lead pipe. Any way i think this would add flavor to the game. Argus Nole 03:45, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  6. Keep - maybe add some flavour text to zombies who get hit with baseball bats so they know what hit them? - --ramby 03:49, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  7. Keep--Lord Evans 04:33, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  8. Keep Chineselegolas hit your head out of the park, I like the sound of that. --RAF Private Chineselegolas 05:22, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  9. Kill - I take the same view of this that I do about laws, if it's not necessary, then don't do it. Only a few players would take advantage of this skill, and I hate to say this but it's just a waste of code to program this in. --CPQD 05:28, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  10. Keep -- Sounds fun, doesnt un ballance anything, and gives an alternative to low level players that dont want to waste ammo on 30%chance to hit. Why is it some people bitch about suggestions that wont hurt anywone? Just becasue a skill exists doesnt mean you have to buy it. --Kirk Howell 14:09, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  11. Keep - Yup, sounds fun. Maybe not for those folks who think they must buy every skill released in the game, regardless how useless it is (like Scent Blood and Diagnosis together), but I really like it. Besides, we're not here to argue about coding and useless code. Kevan implements whatever he sees fit, or whatever he likes in the suggestion pages. --Omega2 14:15, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  12. Kill - It doesn't add anything and is completely useless as axe will always be better. there just isn't a need for it roleplaying wise either, Nobody is going to say, WOW! the bat just went from 0.5HP/AP to 0.7HP/AP so I'm going to use it now! It still would be be a horrible weapon unable to kill a zombie in 50AP And the only People who are going to use it, are the people who think bats are so cool that they use them already. So there is no bonus there either. Why should we have a skill for every weapon out there, especially when they do nothing to boot? We're better off with suggestions that actually do something.--Vista 20:28, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  13. Kill - I agree with Vista. This would be even more useless than Knife Training currently is. Then we would have to endure an endless slew of suggestions to beef up baseball bats to where they are useful... The item already carries enough flavor for those who wish to use it. There is even a group dedicated to punching zombies to death - even without any current punch % increases (not baseball bats, but you catch my drift, yes?). No offense, but I'd rather see Kevan spend his time with other, more impacting suggestions, than ones like this. --Blahblahblah 21:03, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re - I understand you, but Kevan is free to add whateve changes he wants. If he feels that this is useless, then he can just not add it. --Poodge 00:03, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  14. Keep Eh, whatever.--Scorpios 01:34, 27 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  15. Keep --Perticus 02:13, 27 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  16. Keep - Because who doesn't want to crack some skulls with a bat? --Schlagwerk 02:22, 27 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  17. Kill - It's kind of pointless, unless you really desperately want to use a baseball bat. It's not hard at all to find a pistol and eventually get pistol training. I do agree, though, that the game needs more variety with weapons. That is, everybody uses a pistol at higher levels because pistols are the best. It sucks to not be able to have your own style. I also think baseball bats should be better than they are, but this just seems pointless, like I said. --Zaknrfama 03:28, 27 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  18. Keep - Civilian skill is what makes this skill golden. - Skarmory 15:15, 27 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  19. Kill - Just not worth it. --MorthBabid 20:50, 30 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Kill - I think using a bat as a weapon would still be a waste of time. It would be good for RP-ing, but lets face it, who uses baseball bats anywhay?? This skill makes them to the point where they are almost useful, but your time is still better spent finding an axe or pistol. --Poopman9Poopman9. - No timestamp. -Velkrin 17:19, 23 May 2006 (BST)
  20. Tally: Keep 13, Kill 7, total votes: 20. Keep ratio is 65%, thus undecided by 1%
    • Final Tally - 13 Keep, 6 Kill, 0 Spam. - 17:21, 23 May 2006 (BST)
  • Tally Guy Note - The previous tally took into account Poopman's invalid vote. Velkrin 17:21, 23 May 2006 (BST)

Forklift

Retracted.. to the extreeeeeeeeme! Keep voters, I love you. Kill voters, maybe you'll be Keep voters below, in which case I will start loving you as well. -- Amazing 19:25, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Reward For Payin’ Up

Timestamp: 04:29, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Type: Reward
Scope: People who paid Urban Dead
Description: I think that anyone who paid Urban Dead should have their profile description increased to 500 512 characters. Nothin’ more than that.

Votes

  1. Keep Author vote.--RAF Lt.G Deathnut 04:29, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  2. Keep --Lord Evans 04:37, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  3. Keep If it would help raise funding its fine by me. --Jon Pyre 04:40, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  4. Keep - I don't see any real need for uber-long profiles, but I have no objection, especially if it helps bring in extra donations. --Mikm 04:42, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  5. Keep - I hate the limit. With a VENGENCE. -- Amazing 04:59, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  6. Keep - UD♥$$$ --Signal9 05:10, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  7. Keep As long as you don't HAVE to pay and can pay if you want, I'm all ears. And eyes. And hands. And feet. AllStarZ 05:25, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re So you're the one who has been stealing body parts from mortuaries! -- Andrew McM 09:47, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re You dont have to pay just when you donate.--RAF Lt.G Deathnut 16:55, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  8. Keep - Sounds golden. --Blahblahblah 05:34, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  9. Kill - Issues about gameplay, I'm happy to add my two cents. Donations and Kevan's, well earned, money for providing this great game, I keep quiet about. I hate to rain on your parade, but Kevan chose to set character limits for his own reasons, which I'm sure are quite valid. --CPQD 05:42, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • comment It's really a cost issue. Having no ip limits is more expensive to Kevan but worth it for the $5 he receives. If this would cost Kevan more than it'd take it we'd all be against it. --Jon Pyre 05:57, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
      • Re - My main objection to this suggestion is the way that it's worded. The point that I'm trying to make is, sycophantic sounding as it might be, Kevan has done all this great work to create this game and keep developing it, I don't want to make any demands of him in return for donating money (beyond the reward he already gives). I just don't like that this suggestion sounds like a demand. --CPQD 04:47, 27 Jan 2006 (GMT)
      • RE - the whole thing to the suggestions part is that it is a Suggestion. If kevan wants to implament it he can otherwise he wont. we cant demand S*** from him.--RAF Lt.G Deathnut 19:22, 27 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  10. Keep - A reward that can't give an intrinsic gameplay advantage for having deep pockets sounds good to me. Rhialto 08:06, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  11. Keep - I like the idea, but I suggest it to Make it 512 characters, so it's a multiple of 256. Dunno, maybe it helps when calculating server stuff? --Omega2 11:28, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  12. Keep-- Even though i might not ever take advantage of this fine extra, if it helps generate more Donations, and gets better/more/whatever servers I'm all for it. I think Kevin should sell Merchandise too. Id SO buy a Urban Dead Hooded Sweatshirt! --Kirk Howell 14:21, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  13. Keep - Nice. MaulMachine 14:26, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  14. Keep - Like usual, CPQD makes an invalid assumption about Kevan's motivations. If the text limit was a burden, then old, abandoned characters would be auto-deleted by the system after so long. Giving paid up characters the abilit to increase their profile lengths by a small amount would increase the size of these files by an almost negligible amount. -- S Kruger
  15. Keep - It's a miniscule addition to the size of player profiles, and may encourage contributions. I'm going to hate reading all the trenchcoaty life stories, though ;-) --WibbleBRAINS 16:53, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  16. Keep -Just like the expanded contact list, simple, briljant and well deserved for those forking over the dough and paying for all those freebees like me.--Vista 20:16, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  17. Keep - Totally. I too fear the trenchcoaters though. --Carilgar 17:24, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  18. Keep Especially with the recent IP it reduction (From infinite to 300). I can see a lot more people paying just to RP a bit more.--Scorpios 01:36, 27 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  19. Keep - Kevan deserves some extra cash flow for his game, don't you think? Plus, I wouldn' mind the extra limit. --Schlagwerk 02:24, 27 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  20. Keep - It would make me pay :) - Skarmory 15:16, 27 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  21. Kill - I already donated but I don't need such long descriptions for my chars. I'd rather see something else, maybe some clothing that others can see or whatever. Also, note that people WILL donate if they get something unbalancing like maybe +5 AP total or a higher search %. But I know that this will upset all you whiners out there. --Janzak 10:15, 8 Feb 2006 (GMT)
    • Final Tally - 19 Keep, 2 Kill, 0 Spam - 18:28, 24 May 2006 (BST)

Fencing to Increase Fort Defense and to Aid New Players

Timestamp: 07:26, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Type: Improvement
Scope: Survivors
Description: This idea is to implement fences as a way of A) Increasing defense at appropriate locations, like forts. AND B) Aiding new players without Free Running.

Fences: What they are

  • Fences are tall barriers of metal wire. Some blocks are enclosed in them, such as junkyards. Some complexes have them on their borders, such as the forts. This leads to two kinds of fences, block fences and perimeter fences.
  • Fences would be similar to barricades except instead of keeping a zombie player from entering into the interior of a building it would prevent the player from moving to an outside square from an adjacent square.
  • Fences would be attacked and repaired like barricades. They would have the same strength as barricades and cost the same amount of AP to repair. Fences however do not prevent survivors from crossing them at any level of strength as they can always be climbed.
  • You would be able to see who is on the other side of a fence as they would be outside.

Perimeter Fences

  • The open squares of the fort would have a perimeter fence between them and the outside city squares. There would not be a fence between the open squares and other open squares or the open squares and the armory.
  • If a zombie player is outside next to the fort complex and the open fort square directly adjacent to them has an intact fence then none of the open fort squares on the screen would be clickable links. Each fort square would have its own seperate fence and would be attacked an repaired seperately. Corner squares could be attacked from either side or diagonally.
  • Fences would not prevent zombies from moving between open fort squares or to and from the open fort squares and the armory or stop them from leaving. It would act as a one way barrier.
  • A survivor would be able to dump bodies outside the fence if they were laying in an open fort square. This would move them to the square directly outside. This is not a "pied piper" ability because you cannot move zombies great distances with this, only to the square directly outside the fence. You would not be able to dump bodies laying outside the armory to the outside of the fence.
  • The armory would not be changed in any way. It could still be attacked and barricaded as normal.
  • The only example of where Perimeter Fencing would be appropriate that I can think of at the moment is the exterior of the fort complex but this could be implemented elsewhere as well.

Block Fences

  • Junkyards (and a few other appropriate places like some zoo enclosures) are outdoor areas protected by a fence. Junkyards and these other places would not have barricades, doors or interiors, they would have fencing instead.
  • A block fence is a singular fence. When intact it would prevent zombie players from moving onto the junkyard square by not making it a clickable link. It could be attacked from any adjacent or diagonal square and repaired from inside. Each side does not have a seperate fence like the seperate open fort squares, there is one fence and if it is broken then it can be entered from all directions. It would not prevent zombie players from leaving.
  • Players in junkyards would be visible from outside. They would also be able to see outside. They would not be able to hear feeding groans however and woud be able to free run to other buildings.
  • You would be able to dump bodies outside of the fence from inside the junkyard. This would move them to a random adjacent square. This is not a "pied piper" ability because you cannot move zombie players a great distance, only to an adjacent square outside the fence. If there were two junkyards next to another bodies dumped out of one would not end up in the other, they would simply be put in a different adjacent square.
  • I only mention junkyards and zoo enclosures here but more places I have not thought of could have block fencing instead of barricades.

Destroying and Repairing Fences

  • Any player next to a fence, either inside or outside, can attack the fence. It would have different levels of strength: intact, slightly damaged, strongly damaged, broken, etc. They would not be harder to destroy than barricades are.
  • Repairing barricades would not require the Construction skill. Instead you would need wirecutters to cut replacement fencing and need to be inside the fence. Any survivor with wirecutters can repair a fence. It would be assumed that all other materials you need are on hand, the same way it is assumed that there is furniture handy to barricade and it makes sense you could find materials to repair a fence in a junkyard or fort. Repairing fencing would cost the same as barricading and get progressively more difficult the more intact the fence is.

The Purpose of Fencing

  • Perimeter Fencing would make it possible to defend the entire Fort Compound. Once breached however zombies would be able to camp in front of the armory and no longer be affected by them. This would replicate the way forts operate in zombie movies: It's possible to defend the entire compound from incursion but once zombies enter en masse all you can do is flee or hole up in a building and wait for the end. It would give forts an additional defense, prevent more zombies from arriving if the armory was sieged, but it would not make it impossibly hard for zombies because once they broke through the fences they would not need to worry about them unless they left. Zombies would not need to break through two barricades to enter the armory every time they're killed and dumped from the armory.
  • Block Fencing is meant to aid new players that are without Construction or Free Running, and to prevent players from being stranded outside provided they conserve enough AP to reach a junkyard if worst comes to worst. It is said that Free Running is a prerequisite of survival in many areas and sometimes players through no fault of their own can perish because entire suburbs are barricaded above very strong and there are no barricaded buildings they can enter. Junkyards would serve as guaranteed shelters for new players. They could "barricade" it themselves with wirecutters and they would be able to enter no matter how strongly it was blocked. This shelter does not come without a price however. The presence of survivors would be visible to zombies, making staying behind fences dangerous because it would be the first target of any zombie. It would still be better than standing outside completely undefended.
  • Fencing would add variety to gameplay, allow special places to have additional defenses, and help new players not be doomed because they do not have certain skills yet. In addition to helping new survivor players and players venturing into barricaded suburbs it would also help zombie players by providing them a "building" in which they can check for meat first, reducing the frustration of not even knowing if there's anyone behind the barricades you're attacking. And it would also help zombie players in that exploration is quite dangerous since you have a good chance of not being able to find a new safehouse to enter. This keeps survivors staying in the same location for months straight. If they knew junkyards served as emergency shelters and entrances survivors would be more willing to spread out, explore, and occupy safehouses in smaller numbers and in surburbs they currently do not go. Making the forts more interesting would bring many survivors to defend them, leading to huge battles between zombies and humans. This is as good for the zombie stomach as it is good for human survival.

Votes

  1. Keep - Point made, I like - --ramby 07:53, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re Forts are pretty boring right now. Making them actually fortified would make them more interesting places. And the fact that perimeter fences could be used in other places (like perhaps the border of the zoo) prevents it being a waste of time to code them just for two locations. The zoo goes under the "things I haven't thought of but this could still be used for" category. I can't think of everything, I'm just putting forward the mechanic and listing one place it should be used. edit: thank you --Jon Pyre 07:51, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  2. Dupe Here. Overpowered and not needed. --Grim s 07:49, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re Not a Dupe. I suggested that and I suggested this. This suggestion is modified in light of comments people put in their votes on the last one. Please read both suggestions again, you will see they have major differences. Hardly overpowering to make useless forts slightly more powerful. Doesn't make junkyards harder to break into. Not needed but technically Urban Dead isn't needed, being a game. This would improve the game significantly. --Jon Pyre 07:51, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  3. Keep - A very hesitant yes. -- Andrew McM 09:55, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  4. Keep - I really think that directional barricades are too complicated, but this idea could work well if implemented. --Omega2 11:51, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  5. Keep -- I voted a very passionate KEEEP for your last fence idea, I love it. and this suggestion is even more well thought out, and has less to arguee aganist. As for junkyard idea, I'm level 18 and almost got stuck outside while doing recon, id prefer to hide in a junkyard then out on the street. --Kirk Howell 14:31, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  6. Keep --Lord Evans 14:36, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  7. Keep -- Sure. Why not. MaulMachine 14:37, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  8. Keep --Etherdrifter 15:48, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  9. Keep - What MaluMachine/Kirk Howell/Omega2 said. Also, makes sense from a tactical standpoint. --John Taggart 16:29, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  10. Keep -- And another well-thought out suggestion from Jon. I like the idea of forts being defendable. They're called a fortress for a reason. --Pinpoint 20:08, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  11. Kill - I like it overall. I'm voting Kill simply because I think it would be easier to implement and easier to use if block fences were implemented more like the inside/outside of a building (but transparent and easier to barricade). Perimeter fences could go either way, but what do you do about a zombie that gets into the middle of the fort? Can you dump her outside? Or is she free to stay there and bash away at the armoury? --Blobmorf 20:28, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re She/He is free to stay at the armory. Basically it gives you an external perimeter defense that the zombie must first pass, but once breached it no longer impedes them. This is to prevent a zombie needing to destroy 2 barricades to enter a building. It makes it harder to reach the armory but once you're there you can bash away as normal. It would reduce the ability of zombies to respond to feeding groans elsewhere and then return and would slow the rate of reinforcements. Transparent barricade fences for junkyards is not a bad idea and should be added to the notes of this suggestion if peer reviewed as another possible way of implementation. --Jon Pyre 20:51, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  12. Kill - Anything which hampers external movement is dangerous, fence around forts is ok, but otherwise it can cause too many complications. --Tobias Reaper 20:37, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  13. Keep - I like this suggestion better than I did the other fence suggestions. --Penance 21:28, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  14. Keep - By-Jov, I think you've got it this time. Gives wire cutters a use - gives new players some sort of protection from being dropped into the game in an over-barricaded area - let's zombies know where the food is - and hooray! on making locations vary beyond items alone. --Blahblahblah 22:00, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  15. Keep - One of the things I hate in FPS zombies games is the inability to do simple things, like climb a fence. (Needing a key for a padlock to get a FAK you badly need when you have a perfectly functional shotgun is another thing I hate.) --Matthew Stewart 22:15, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  16. Keep -- hagnat 22:27, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  17. Kill - There's no functional difference between a fort protected with block fencing vs perimeter fencing. Both remove clickable links, both are always climbable even at EHB, both are attackable in the same manner, why bother with multiple varieties? Plus, the survivors already have a huge barricade advantage, when a single ap spent building a 'cade/fence requires an average of several fully-trained claws to remove. Adding see-through 'cades to the game seems a bit much. Plus, the current possibility of being outside a junkyard, while appearing *on* the junkyard square, would be changed, essentially allowing person A to be 'inside' the junkyard and thus not seen on the map by a passing zombie, while person B is outside the junkyard yet still on the junkyard square and would be seen by a passing zombie, and that zombie would have to break the fencing to arrive at B's location, and never see A at all. I'm not comfortable with that. - Serpico 23:08, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re I think you misunderstand. Junkyards would no longer have interiors, as per the real world. There would only be an outside that is fenced off. Anyone in a junkyard can be seen by players outside. --Jon Pyre 02:03, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
      • Re So, you want to make junkyards just like a park or monument, but also fundamentally change the navigation by adding a "character can't enter here" flag to certain areas, a flag that does not currently exist... No, I'll stick with my kill vote. Essentially, it's still adding a see-through barricade, except there isn't any sort of down side for survivors, because they can always see through it and travel through it, and the junkyard freerunning breaks the thematic image of jumping from rooftop to rooftop. - Serpico 03:13, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
      • Re There is a huge down side for survivors. Zombies can see them when they're off line. They know that if they break the fence there are survivors to eat behind it. They would not waste AP attacking empty buildings. And I don't think the thematic image of jumping from rooftop to rooftop is lost. It'd be jumping from massive tower of rusted automobile frames and dishwashers to rooftop. --Jon Pyre 05:45, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Tally - 13 Keeps, 3 Kills, 1 Dupe --Pinpoint 05:16, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  18. Keep - Goood idea, adds flavor to some "normal" buildings (i.e. junkyards), helps new players (both zombie and survivors), makes use of wirecutters and is realistic to boot. Good work. --Rani 13:41, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  19. Keep - This is one I always thought should have been in the game form the start. --Reverend Loki 17:50, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  20. Kill keep it simple --Perticus 02:15, 27 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  21. Keep - I was about to say "Keep it simple" but this IS simple and effective :) - Skarmory 15:22, 27 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Tally - 16 Keep, 4 Kill, 1 Dupe -- Skarmory 15:22, 27 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  22. Keep - 'Cause we can never have too many Lxndr 15:58, 5 Feb 2006 (GMT)
    • Final Tally - 17 Keep, 4 Kill, 1 Dupe - 18:28, 24 May 2006 (BST)

Quickened Search

Three Dupes, one Kill, no non-author Keeps. Spaminated as a near-duplicate of Search X Times (and a seriously broken version to boot, as it would allow you to select an item and pretty much find it automatically - albeit with a varying AP cost). --John Taggart 17:28, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)

I acknowledge that it is a dupe which i didn't find glancing over the suggestions. Yet i formally protest that John Taggert is not telling the truth about the suggestions, as a key point was that this skill would NOT influence the item found in the search in any way. If you feel you need to add a comment to a removal, it vastly helps if you had understood the suggestion first, and it was very clear about that. --Falk 11:45, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Resistance to Revification Serum

Removed by author. I never expected this to get good reviews, anyway. If you think that forcing players to play zombie is bad, then remove all zombie attacks, because that's basically what they do: force survivors to play zombies. OK, sorry. No further comments. --Omega2 21:20, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Forklift Version 2.0.1.X

Timestamp: 03:34, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Type: Item
Scope: Survivors, against Zombies
Description: No, you don't find Forklifts with "Search". No, you don't carry Forklifts. No, you don't drive Forklifts around from place to place!! (end preconcieved notion attack.)

Forklifts would exist inside Power Stations, Warehouses and Factories ONLY, left behind in the evacuation. All Forklifts would start out BROKEN upon implimentation.

  • Any player with Construction in a Power Station, Warehouse or Factory with a broken Forklift will see a button that lets them REPAIR it for 1 AP per click. It would take multiple clicks to repair in the same way that it takes multiple clicks to build a barricade.
  • Any player in a Power Station, Warehouse or Factory with a WORKING Forklift will see a button marked.. of course.. "Barricade with Forklift".
  • If you do not have the Construction skill, using the Forklift will build up a barricade at the normal rate. (Hey, you can't barricade at all without the Construction skill, so this is an improvement..)
  • If you have the Construction skill, using a Forklift will build up a barricade two times the normal rate.
  • Zombies and Players can of course attack a Forklift to break it. It is somewhat sturdier than a Generator, but it can of course be done.
  • Forklifts need to be FUELED to work. If a Forklift is not fueled, there would be no button to use it. Fuel will be used up on a per-use basis. This prevents people from being able to use the forklift a rediculous number of times on one tank. Since Fuel Cans are, according to common sense, probably small - I would say you get about 10 uses before it's out of fuel.

Here are the various messages related to this suggestion:

Various states of the Forklift, as seen in room description as a Generator is now:

  • There is a forklift here. It is broken.
  • There is a forklift here. It is out of fuel.
  • There is a forklift here. It is running.

Using the Forklift:

  • You use the forklift to add a gigantic crate to the barricade.
  • You use the forklift to add some huge metal drums to the barricade.
  • You use the forklift to add a stack of wooden palettes to the barricade.
  • You use the forklift to add an old broken machine to the barricade.
  • The forklift runs out of fuel after you barricade.

You cannot drive a forklift out of the building. Why? Because they're not fast enough to evade anything, so it would be downright stupid. Plus if the building IS barricaded, there's no way you're getting it out the door. If the doors are wide open it's still simply a bad idea.

Some may say that this will make an unfair new type of safehouse for Survivors, but keep in mind that with this there will probably be less buildings "open" for survivors to run into for safety since the barricades will probably be very high.

Votes

  1. Keep - much better than the original. --Arcibi 19:34, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  2. Keep Much better. --S Kruger
  3. Keep - I like this. --Signal9 19:44, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  4. Kill - I don't think that it is at all necesary. Safehouses are usually available in most suburbs, and if there aren't any then the survivor would probably be dead before he got the fuel needed, fixed the forklift, and barricaded. Users wouldn't have enough ap to do all this, therefore I think that the forklift is not very good. It would be easier to run around until you found a safehouse. --Poodge 19:48, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  5. Keep - an Ap storeage for barricading, dicey. But, they're only useable in useless buildings, cost a godly amount of Ap to use beforehand, and are vulnarable. Normally I'd vote it down because it is near useless because those buildings usually don't have prolonged sieges. But damn I'm in love with the flavor. (haven driven one regular in my teens, there is a very simple reason why you don't see many driving around town, they can't negociate any bumbs and get stuck, learned that the hard way.)--Vista 20:07, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  6. Kill - Repeat after me, one word at a time: Survivors. Don't. Need. A. Larger. Barricade. Advantage. Under. Any. Circumstances. Survivors have a 5:1 AP advantage already, and that's more than enough to get the job done if you play it smart. --TheHermit 20:13, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    re How do you calculate that number?--Vista 20:20, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    100% of barricading up to VS+2 versus only 20% chance of knocking anything off. Not that I agree with Hermit--Kevan has said this is because humans are supposed to be stronger than zombies on a one-to-one basis, to encourage hording.
    reI'm not arguing against the 5:1 AP advantage; that's in the game and not changing. But increasing that advantage under any circumstances is overkill. A single active barricader becomes nearly unbeatable, especially for the poor feral who already has his work cut out for him. Also: Zombie Spies. Serious Business. --TheHermit 19:24, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re: Don't pretend Crowbars, Zombie Groups, and Spies who break barricades don't exist. Thanks. -- Amazing 23:57, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  7. Keep - Much better than the previous one. TheHermit, it's 4:1 at best right now, not 5:1. Makes sense and I love the flavor. --Pinpoint 20:19, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  8. Keep - TheHermit, This is not a uniform larger barricade advantage. Forklifts require much AP to maintain, as is stated in the suggestion - and can be broken, requiring more even more AP to maintain. This does not affect a large % of buildings in the game, and does not affect the prime target buildings in any way (you will still find survivors easily accessible in hospitals, PD's, etc.). My zombies do not ever bother with the types of buildings referenced in this suggestion, and I have no trouble finding food on a daily basis. I see this as mainly a flavor/make the buildings different than item availability alone suggestion. Love it with the revisions. --Blahblahblah 20:25, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  9. Keep - voted keep with the previous one--RAF Lt.G Deathnut 20:29, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  10. Keep I'll vote keep for this because it's closer to what I'd like than the last but I think doubling the rate of barricading for people with Construction is a bad idea. I'd like your suggestion to be a way of new players without Construction to barricade buildings by searching for fuel instead. --Jon Pyre 20:57, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  11. Keep - The fuel and breaking possibility balance what could be a totally crap idea.--'STER-Talk-Mod 21:02, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  12. Keep - Now it's balanced, so I vote Keep. --Omega2 21:22, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  13. Keep - More efficent barricading.It's a good thing. --Penance 21:30, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  14. Keep - Well, this would explain how one can dump 10+ bodies with a single AP. --hagnat 22:07, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  15. Keep - I think it's useful but not overpowered now. --Sindai 22:09, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  16. Kill Kill - In Malton, there are 269 warehouses, 225 factories, 3? power stations. Did you realize you were suggesting giving uber-barricading ability to nearly 500 buildings?!? KILL KILL KILL KILL (It's easy to count them, if your cut/paste the entire block-map into a word processor, one that gives you the number of find/replace actions performed.) - Serpico 23:24, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re: There are 10,000 blocks in Malton. 500's not much. -- Amazing 23:55, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
      • Re Since someone decided to delete my explanation of why 500 alarms me, see(and reply if you wish) the discussion page... - Serpico 18:21, 27 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  17. Keep --Lord Evans 23:51, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  18. Keep - Less than 500 buildings in 10,000 blocks, and they are not primary resource buildings, including the additional effort of maintaining the forklift it isn't unreasonable, and adds flavor to building besides merely their search results. Note this is not actually an "Item" but a "Location Alteration".--Matthew Stewart 23:56, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  19. Kill - Humans do not need to be able to barricade faster. --Grim s 00:14, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re: - No one needs anything in a game. -- Amazing 00:42, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  20. Keep - Much better than the original. --Mikm 01:01, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  21. Keep - I like it, though I wouldn't have minded the origional either. --Argus Nole 01:11, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  22. Keep - Palamon 01:55, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  23. Keep -LIke it, the original was great too, but if this one gets more keep votes from the whiney zed voters, then kewl. --Kirk Howell 03:12, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re: - Yeah, it's kind of a trade-off. Reduced in power, but an added building type for it to be in. :) -- Amazing 03:28, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  24. Kill People (the smart ones) already use warehouses and factories as safehouses, along with a couple of other buildings, because zombies tend to ignore these buildings. Your suggestion turns them into fortresses, but they will attract tons more attention. AllStarZ 03:54, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re: You're right, it is balanced. :) Edit: AllStarZ idiotically says that more people will "live" in these buildings while missing the fact that more people in a building = more resistance when Zombies break in. He seems to think that all these people are lame brains who will run into walls and fall over when a Zombie steps in. AllStarZ, rest.. it's okay, you can struggle to find a smart Kill justification in the morning. -- Amazing 04:55, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
      • You sir, are an asshole. What I meant is that warehouses and factories aren't usually targets of zombie attacks. This will attract tons more attention because people will start living in these, and when they crack it open, the people will turn to yolk. AllStarZ 05:43, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)EDIT: Let me give you an example. I'm in Barrville right now and there are about 30 zombies in the 3x3 square I'm in. They tore open the hospital next to my factory, and are attacking the PD. And they ignore the factories, and the most that would be outside the factory are two zombies. Zombies mass attack on areas that have alot of humans there, and can easily tear open the barricades and cause significant casualties among survivors. Since everyone congregates at police stations, hospitals, malls, and necrotech buildings to get guns, ammo, FAKs, and syringes, the zombies mass at these points. Your suggestion paints a target on warehouses and factories because more people would use those as their safehouse due to the ability of it to barricade to an amount significantly higher than the average building. Also, AllStarZ 16:34, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  25. Question/(Kill until I get a clarification) - If there is a generator in a building with a forklift, how will the game decide which one gets the fuel when the user clicks on the "fuel can" button? Is there going to be "refuel forklift" button that appears in buildings with forklifts? -- Nicks 05:32, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re: - Sure. :) -- Amazing 06:46, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  26. Keep Voted keep before, and with the improvements, 'tis definatly a keeper in my book --RAF Private Chineselegolas 08:05, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  27. Keep - This is good. -- VinLumbtin 2:02, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  28. Keep - Good idea; adds flavor to some of the "normal" buildings (factories, warehouses) and balanced due to the fuel requirement and the need to have the forklift repaired. --Rani 13:44, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  29. Keep - Much better. --John Taggart 14:21, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  30. Keep - Now ya cookin with gas. --Carilgar 17:37, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  31. Keep - A suggestion that is useful from a game mechanic perspective, balanced AND adds flavor? How did this sneak in? --Reverend Loki 17:46, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  32. Keep _ I think it should be a subskill of construction though.-- Norminator 2 17:48, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re: - You never know.. a 'maintenance' or 'repair' skill may be added some day. In that case I think it would make sense to have it apply. We'll see what the future holds. :) -- Amazing 18:24, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  33. Kill - For the same reasons as last time--survivors already have a barricade advantage. They don't need further benefits even if it is for a small selection of buildings. Bentley Foss 18:28, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re: - Survivors have Search, Zombies don't. Would you like to remove enhanced Mall searching? All it does is benefit survivors when they already have the "ability to search" advantage.. -- Amazing 19:03, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
      • Tally - 26 Keep, 6 Kill, 0 Spam/Dupe. (One "Question/Kill".. heh) -- Amazing 19:05, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  34. Kill — UNLESS zombies get a hearse. Bartle 19:21, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re: - Oh, for the love of Pete, is this what we're reduced to? heh.. -- Amazing 20:38, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  35. Kill - You still don't know anything about vasic barricading. --Matson Jade 21:25, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re: - I know vlenty. -- Amazing 22:47, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  36. Keep I like the fact that I can finally have a safe refuge from my constant attacks from the zobies I have killed, injured, or just walked by. --Broton 22:06, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  37. Kill - I'm with Bartle on this one --Qwako 13:48, 27 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  38. Keep - I want more challenges for my zombie characters -Lxndr 16:01, 5 Feb 2006 (GMT)
  39. Kill - I see no compelling reason why we need ubar barricades. The mechanic is working well. --Zaruthustra 19:35, 27 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  40. Kill- I would only vote keep if you got to run over zomebies with the forklift. hey, it only makes sense!--Poopman9Poopman9 - No timestamp. - Velkrin 17:17, 23 May 2006 (BST)
    • Final Tally - 28 Keep, 10 Kill, 0 Spam - 18:28, 24 May 2006 (BST)

Zombie Grab

Timestamp: 22:00, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombies
Description: I propose a new attack called "Grab" which has a 20% to hit and maybe 2 damage. To add to this, upon a successful attack, your to hit percentage for a Teeth attack would increase by 5%, or maybe 10%.

This would improve the usefullness of teeth, but not make it great, since you need to perform a 20% chance "Grab" first. It mainly adds more variation of attack for zombies.

This will not prevent an online survivor from running away.

Votes

  1. Keep - Wow. Really good, and really simple. I'm not certain on the numbers (I'm sure other voters will comment on the effectiveness/ineffectiveness of them), but I really dig the idea. --Blahblahblah 22:04, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT) EDIT - I know I assumed a lot of the things your didn't include specifically in your suggestion (bite only person grabbed, no hand attacks while grabbed, etc, etc.). As this appears to be going down, recommend resubmitting clarifying details many have questions on. It still may not succeed - as some people seem to just not care for the idea in general (though this is NO midget ninja zombie cyborg suggestion, AllStarZ) - but may have a better chance with the people who are killing because you failed to clarify certain details. --Blahblahblah 18:33, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  2. Keep - Yup, good and simple indeed. I'd take it. Maybe throw in a skill to increase the chance of a Grab hitting to 30%, so people won't get frustrating by having to attack 5 times just to hit a few improved Bites. Oh, and I'm assuming that bonus only applies to the survivor hit by Grab! If not, this is a straight Kill! --Omega2 22:18, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  3. Keep - Nice, simple, but makes zombie attacking significantly more interesting. Just calced and, if I'm doing it right, with 20% for the grab to hit and 10% bonus for the bite it'll still kill even a full HP survivor slightly slower than clawing (even for 30% grab it would still be very slightly slower I think) --Kingreaper 22:27, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  4. Kill - You're missing some details: It would only make sense for the accuracy to increase when attacking the same person you grabbed, and what is the duration of the grab? I'm assuming it ends when the survivor runs away, when the attacker moves to a different block, when the attacker makes a non-bite attack, and when the attacker logs out. --Signal9 22:33, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT) - Vote changed because Serpico and Vista both raise good points. A more detailed description of the mechanics might have saved this one. --Signal9 01:36, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  5. Keep Conditional keep. I'm not sure how hard this would be to program and run, after all the server would need to keep track of which person a zombie has grabbed. Like most people here I'm not a programmer but unlike most I'm not going to vote kill on a suggestion I like just because I don't understand how easy/difficult it would be to have technically. I think 5% is good. Small but worthwhile if you grab a survivor near full health before starting your attack. As long as a survivor leaving the square breaks the grab automatically I'm fine with it from a game perspective. Also I assume it only increases bite attacks against the person you grabbed and that you can only grab one person at a time. Also you shouldn't be able to use hand attacks when grabbing someone. --Jon Pyre 22:46, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  6. Kill Bite is already the attack wich gives you the most result for your AP in the game. per 50AP spends on bite you do 60HP damage and gain 60HP plus the variable damage of infection ranging between 3 to 45 damage extra. (3HP on average per infection, 1 to 15 infections). it cost a survivor with his best attack (maxed out guns found at the mall) 40 turns to equal the standard damage + 24 AP to gain as much health (6 faks found at the mall) + another 2 to 30 AP to equal the infection damage dealt. that means for 50AP spend by zombie bite a survivor has to spend 66 to 94 AP to equal that. Why should bite need a boost? it is already the best attack out there.--Vista 22:49, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    Correction: spend 50 AP on maxed claws, 50% to-hit, yields average of 25 successful strikes, at 3 damage each, dealing 75 damage to the target... Slightly higher than the average 60 damage for maxed biting. And biting doesn't guarantee any hp points lost to infection, as someone else could use an FAK on your target, without the target ever doing a single action. - Serpico 23:46, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    RE to your RE to be a correction you actually need to correct the data Serpico. Yes, claw has a garantied HP/AP of 1.5 and is the most powerful attack in pure damage dealt in the game. You could've spared yourself the trouble of the math and just copied and pasted the HP/AP of claws from my userpage where I put up that huge relevation months ago. Does that change the fact that Bite is still the best attack? No because it works other then claws, and pistol in more then one way. You are right however that it doesn't garantee damage. That is why they invented something called Average Damage. Over the months I played I tried to work out the average. You see for every say 10 persons who are healed without an action made there is one stupid enough to fight infected without healing himself, barricading himself to death in a siege, or simply died, stand up infected after a revive and shamble to safety infected , Etc. You count up all the damage devide it by the total people, and presto, AVERAGE DAMAGE, (see, it's like a magic trick! only more fun!) But, no it isn't garanteed. it's slighty over 3 according to me but hey, I'm still well below the thousand samples you need for it to scientifically proved. It's however very likely (long live the bell curve) that the healing and infection pay of more then the extra 15 damage of claws if used prudently. not only that but the HP/AP of guns is so near claws that the total AP difference between claws and guns is only 2 or 3AP so yeah, not that impressed with your reaction. Next time you feel the need to comment or Re do so without a big important sounding Correction espescially if it's useless info that doesn't correct what I was saying. That pisses me off you know.. Vista 00:28, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  7. Kill - I like the idea... Hell, I LOVE anything that lets us deal out just a little more damage, but it's messy in a thematic way. How do you explain it coexisting conceptually with Death Grip? What about Neck Lurch? Where exactly is this on the skill tree? Since it builds on both arm strength and biting, should it stand alone, or build under neck lurch, or under death grip, or even rend flesh because it both enhances other attacks and does damage itself... - Serpico 23:46, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  8. Keep --Lord Evans 23:53, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  9. Kill - Vista said it best --Mikm 01:00, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  10. Kill - The best idea the game never needed. --Zaruthustra 01:57, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  11. Kill - Bite would raise from 1.2 to 1.6 HP/AP. This would mean a zed would only spend 38~40 AP to kill a bodybuilded harmam. And cause infection. And heal. And do the midget dance. And NO. --hagnat 03:16, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  12. Keep - Way to sound pretentious there, Vista. I believe the purpose of this skill was to facilitate the use of bite in focused fire on one target, as atm the best way to kill ONE target, in ONE 50 AP day, is to claw them. Allowing an attack like this would give a bit of variety. Bite is the 'best' attack, if you get into Caiger Mall and bite everyone. After biting a single person once, biting them again and reinfecting them is pointless. The HP regeneration of a zombie from biting is also less than useful since it's fairly rare that a zombie will login wounded. FireballX301 03:39, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  13. Kill GET HIM, MY ARMY OF MIDGET ZOMBIE CYBORGS! AllStarZ 03:56, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  14. Kill - I like it and I'll change my vote as soon as I know just how long the grab precentage boost lasts. -- Nicks 05:39, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  15. Keep - Those of you who say zombies rearly log in wounded have never played a zombie, I rearly log in at full hp, and without digestion I have no way of regaining that ap. I think that if you fall asleep the grip is lost and if the target moves, the grip is lost. That way, you can spend 1 ap not attacking and waiting for your next ap to attack, and during that time your garget might move away from you. It should come with text saying a person has been griped, also, I think there should indeed be a way for grip to be improved to 30%. eople, you are not taking into account the ap spent to grip the "survivor". as that would take away from the bite. Yes, there is bound to be some lucky zombie who gets a grip the first try, but there are also the lucky zombies, who knock down barricades, from VH+ to zip in one days ap. But, I would like to point out, that the ability to incress bite attacks should come at the cost of claw attacks. Maybe reduce damage to 2 or 1 for every claw attack made, and make it so that if you do use a claw attack it breaks the victem free? - --ramby 05:43, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  16. Dupe - This is a dupe of my suggestion that got shot down a while back, slightly different percentages but the whole grab and then increase bite bit is the same. Also bite is overpowered as I learnt when mine was killed. I am sorry to say I dont know where my suggestion is, if any one knows would they put a link to it to prove that this one is a dupe--Whitehouse 07:27, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  17. Kill - Something about stacking combo attacks. Rhialto 07:34, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  18. Kill - Worthless. Works out to an effective 1% or 2% increase in Bite hit rate, at the expense of AP, when Bite's only a situationally-useful attack to begin with. Under what circumstance do you envision someone wanting to use this skill? I can't think of one. --Centerfire 11:10, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  19. Keep - More damage is good, especially for zombies who currently can't kill more then one human a day. --Rani 13:37, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  20. Kill for the reason of suggestion not being clear. How long would the effect last? One attack? 10 attacks? Until zombie does something else? Until survivor does something? Until log out? Until APs run out? --Brizth 14:06, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  21. Kill - Biting already does way too much. --Carilgar 17:43, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  22. Kill - What have we told you people about Stacking combo bonus skills, hmm? And no, teeth are quite powerful enough already. Bentley Foss 18:31, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  23. Kill I am having a bad day so I am voting kill on your suggestion. --Matthew Stewart 18:40, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re - I'm loving the attitude. Of course, no matter how much time, effort and thought he's placed into the suggestion, you shoot it down in flames because "you're having a bad day." --Matson Jade 21:28, 26 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  24. Keep I guess zombies need some improvements too. --Scorpios 01:40, 27 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  25. Kill I think grabbing them in "certian places" should do more damage!--Poopman9
  • Added! - In a manner of speaking. Check the Recent News, and congrats. --MorthBabid 21:38, 3 Feb 2006 (GMT)
    • What he means: Tangling Grasp - Velkrin 17:17, 23 May 2006 (BST)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Suggestions/25th-Jan-2006&oldid=260389"