Suggestions/26th-Feb-2006

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.

You can't just run through zombies if they're blocking the road

Timestamp:	06:32, 26 February 2006 (GMT)
Type:	Game Mechanic
Scope:	Survivors crossing into heavy zombie populated squares
Description:	If there are 100+ zombies in a single square survivor movement out of the square costs 3 AP. Simple logic: If the road is packed full of zombies it's not gonna be quite so easy to pass by. Let's say you leave a building and find yourself surrounded by 200 zombies. You're not just going to be able to say, "oops, I take that back" and walk back inside. No, you just walked into a horde of zombies. In a zombie movie, when have you ever seen someone walk into a crowd of zombies and not have some trouble getting to safety? In every zombie movie I have ever seen it took some time and planning to leave the safehouse because getting past the zombies outside was tricky. To represent the trouble it takes to navigate through lumbering crowds of zombies it will now take 3 AP to move past large crowds of them.

Votes

1. Kill - This idea has come up (and been shot down) about twenty times so far. It's not a good idea for a lot of reasons. My personal favorite is that the whole premise of Free Running is that you are an extremely agile, nimble person who can take any obstacle in stride, bypassing it when others without your abilities would be unable to proceed. Go to wikipedia and look up Free Running--you'll see what I mean. Bentley Foss 07:16, 26 February 2006 (GMT)
   • Re - Author - From what I've seen in free running videos it's mostly hopping from building to building, climbing walls, fences, etc. I've never seen a free runner in the middle of a crowd jumping from head to head. It's not about being agile and nimble, it's about jumping and climbing. If you were to find yourself in the thick of a crowd of zombies no amount of free running is going to help you. Watch some free running videos. The spirit of the sport is bypassing buildings, not all obstacles. If it were about overcoming any obstacles, why can't we just free run straight up H, VH, and EH barricades? --Pool Cleaner 00:06, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
2. Kill - This idea, I feel has merit. I like the idea of trouble coming from passing through densely zmobied areas. However you need to clarify what you mean by this suggestion. I think you meant you could freerun to avoid the ap penalty, but I'm not sure enough of what your talking about to vote keep. With some clarification I might give you a keep. -Banana Bear4 09:15, 26 February 2006 (GMT)
   • Re - Author - Sorry, was giving an example of how to deal with the penalty, not how the skill worked. Does this clarify? --Pool Cleaner 23:31, 26 February 2006 (GMT)
3. Dupe - there all the same, just differant numbers [1]. Slavik 10:24, 26 February 2006 (GMT)
   • Re - Author - If this particular skill doesn't work I'll be happy to change it and try again. I just feel that being able to wade through a crowd of zombies and not get hurt is ridiculous. Perhaps that's why it gets suggested so often. --Pool Cleaner 23:31, 26 February 2006 (GMT)
     • Re -Every time I stood still in a horde of +100 zombies for more then a minute I got attacked. And if you have a problem with the fact that people don't get hurt when they wade through a zombie horde, why target AP and not HP? AP is a counter that limits the actions of players per day, to make the playing field equal. It bears no resemblance to the actual cost in time or troubles of those actions. It is simply there for balance reasons. If you can't point to why wading through a zombie horde is unbalanced instead of merely annoying for some people, You don't increase the AP cost.--Vista 23:50, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
   • Re - My reasoning is that the zombies would act as a road block because if they were crowded together it wouldn't be likely that a human could just walk into their crowd and then walk past. Could you imagine if survivors did this in a zombie movie? they'd be shredded. I see what you mean on the damage aspect though. My original idea was that if enough zombies gethered it would not allow any survivors to walk past them, but I felt this was too much of a good thing so I changed it to cost AP rather than being a dead end. I'll try a few different versions of this idea. Maybe it'll catch... I doubt it, but what the hell. lol --Pool Cleaner 07:55, 28 February 2006 (GMT)
4. Kill - This really is frequently suggested. Bentley Foss already stated my usual kill reason. --Blahblahblah 16:03, 26 February 2006 (GMT)
5. Kill - I can actually see this working. Make this only happen to people without free-running. they can still walk around it for 2AP, so it would only hurt them if there were hordes in several consecutive blocks. --TheTeeHeeMonster 16:43, 26 February 2006 (GMT)
6. Kill - If you want this to accept, you have to make it different from the last few that got shot down.--Uncle Willy 19:40, 26 February 2006 (GMT)
7. Dupe I suggested something similar a while back but I don't think it's a good idea anymore. It's already dangerous entering a square with a large number of zombies...some of them may attack you. --Jon Pyre 06:43, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
8. Kill - all the movies show the planning etc. because the zombies might attack them not because it is harder to walk with zombies in the same block. This is already in the game, if I go through a large enough zombie horde chances are I'll get attacked, sure not as much as in the movies but then again it was easier to keep zombies out in the movies then it is in game. This is a game not a movie, there are going to be changes according to the media used, this is simply one of them, get over it.--Vista 12:18, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
9. Keep - This is an advantage for large groups of zombies being in your area, and the game mechanics makes it more difficult for you to LEAVE without spending extra AP. In short your survivor character is more "trying to hide" if there are a LOT of zombies nearby (maybe you're taking your time trying not to get their attention). It makes sense when you think about it, the highly concentrated zombie population.. how it is any different than being "behind the lines" it HOT enemy territory. You don't go out of your way to draw attention to yourself when you're severely outnumbered. Keep it. --MrAushvitz 15:40, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
10. Keep - I think the net effect would be that survivors try to go around such large hordes. To me, that seems a natural enough thing to do. --John Ember 02:34, 28 February 2006 (GMT)
11. Keep - It would be difficult to move through an area where zombies were packed 'shoulder to shoulder', freeruning would help, but only in the sense that one could enter a building and then free run accross the blocked area. Not in the sense that one could use zombie heads as steping stones. --Zanfib 15:29, 10 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Final Tally - 3 Keep, 6 Kill, 2 Dupe- 20:42, 26 May 2006 (BST)

---

Barricading Skills

Author delete for V.2 }}

---

Inhuman Hearing (revised)

Timestamp:	23:58, 26 February 2006 (GMT)
Type:	Skill
Scope:	Zombies
Description:	The zombie's hearing has becoming keener, much like its sense of smell has. If a zombie with Inhuman Hearing is indoors they can still hear Feeding Groans from directly adjacent squares. There would still be a tradeoff for staying indoors as you wouldn't hear groans from far or moderate distances, but it would be a useful skill for zombies to know if the barricades directly next door were broken.

Votes

1. Keep Author vote. I play as a survivor most of the time and I don't think it's overpowering or unfair for zombies to get this. Plus it'd be nice to have a skill to enhance feeding groan's benefit. --Jon Pyre 23:58, 26 February 2006 (GMT)
2. Keep - Would this be a subset skill or a whole new set? --TheTeeHeeMonster 00:01, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
   • Re It should probably go under Feeding Groan as it is part of the whole zombie communications skill set although it could work as a stand alone skill too. --Jon Pyre 03:42, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
3. Keep --hagnat ^talk 00:30, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
4. Keep you are promoted. -Banana Bear4 00:52, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
5. Keep - Much better than the previous version. --Reverend Loki 01:41, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
6. Keep - Sounds fine to me. Velkrin 03:18, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
7. Keep - Sounds reasonable.--Jim Stevens 03:29, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
8. Keep - Why not? --Lord Evans ^W! 05:12, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
9. Kill - Missing out on Feeding Groan is the price zombies pay for garrisoning buildings. Bentley Foss 05:58, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
   • Re I'd say the price zombies pay is having to attack the barricades if they want to be able to enter again. And there would still be a tradeoff, it would only inform them of groans from next door. Besides I think zombies should be harder to repel, it's kind of lame for zombies to invade a building and to leave it allowing it to be instantly retaken the next day without any combat whatsoever. --Jon Pyre 06:39, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
10. Keep I like it, humans should not be all uber powerful anyways. This helps to even that score. - --ramby Talk 06:02, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
11. Keep ramby uber powerful? survivors? I can't agree with you, survivors are more numerous yes, but one on one the zombie is always going to win easily.--Vista 12:23, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
12. keep - Pretty nice. --Blahblahblah 14:56, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
13. Keep - Cool idea, esp. for zombies in areas where they don't get killed and dumped on a daily basis. --John Ember 15:32, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
14. Keep - Would be useful occasionally. --Dickie Fux 19:33, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
15. Keep - Interesting, and good for an existing zombie "teamwork" skill. --MrAushvitz 15:46, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
16. Keep - I am impressed by this idea. --revoso 00:39, 28 February 2006 (GMT)
17. Keep - I like this one. --Strapon Bev 12:02, 28 February 2006 (GMT)
18. Keep - Does help, but not overpowering, good job working that out!--DicktheTech 03:25, 8 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Note - Already In Game. - Velkrin 20:40, 26 May 2006 (BST)

---

Barricading Skills V.2

Timestamp:	18:55, 26 February 2006 (GMT)
Type:	Skill
Scope:	Zombie Hunters
Description:	You can only get this skill when you're level 10 or higher under zombie hunter Description-You've been fighting zombies for so long that you've mastered the ways of barricading buildings and you're never in a situation where you couldn't get out of thus a whenever you try to barricade the chance of not receiving the message that you can not find a place to put things goes down by 5% What this skill would do is have it so that whenever you try barricading a building you have 5 % less chance of having a message that says you can't find a place for them except if the barricades are already at max

Votes

1. Kill - It does not need to be any easier to barricade buildings. - CthulhuFhtagn 02:28, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
2. Kill - Agreed. --Grim s 02:31, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
3. Kill - not worth enough to be implamented.--RAF Lt.G Deathnut 02:46, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
4. Spam - have you ever played in the zombie side of a siege ? --hagnat ^talk 03:11, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
5. Kill - Still bad. Velkrin 03:17, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
6. Kill - Barricades are fairly well balanced already. Add a barricade-busting zombie skill at the same time to maintain the balance, and I might vote keep (as long as it's a minor boost on each side), but not either one on their own. --Norcross 03:19, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
7. Kill I agree with Cthul and Grim on this one, barricading is fine the way it is. --Jon Pyre 03:43, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
8. Kill I'm voting kill but I kind of want this sort of thing to pass and get made just so that I can barricade entry points to the max and then laugh myself to sleep. hahaha. griefing is FUN! -Banana Bear4 04:25, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
9. Kill - Barricades are unbalanced, but only to Zombies --Lord Evans ^W! 05:13, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
10. Kill - Absolutely not. Barricades are fine.--Mookiemookie 05:40, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
11. Kill Barricades are already unblaanced on the zombies side of the wall, do not make it more so - --ramby Talk 05:47, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
12. Kill - What they all said. Bentley Foss 05:59, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
13. keep - Well you changed it how i recomended and 5 % isnt much of a chance so ill give you my vore.. ericblinsley 09:59, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
14. Kill - You're kidding, right? --Jorm 10:18, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
15. Kill -barricades are balanced both ways.--Vista 12:25, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
16. Kill - Barricades are too easy to put up as it is. --WibbleBRAINS 14:32, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
17. Kill - What's been said. --Blahblahblah 14:57, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
18. Kill - No chance. --John Ember 15:30, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
19. Spam - What part of "leave barricading alone" don't you understand? You do speak English, don't you?--Jak Rhee 15:58, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
20. Kill - They're already easy to build. --Dickie Fux 19:35, 27 February 2006 (GMT)
21. Kill - Is this a joke?--DicktheTech 03:28, 8 March 2006 (GMT)
    • Final Tally - 1 Keep, 18 Kill, 2 Spam - 20:39, 26 May 2006 (BST)

---