Suggestions/27th-Mar-2007

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

Death Rattle

Timestamp: OmishWarrior 00:33, 27 March 2007 (BST)
Type: Skill change
Scope: Zombies with death rattle
Description: My suggestion is simple and I have not found anyone else suggesting the same thing (not that i bothered to look).

My suggestion makes life (or death) easier for zombies. If two zombies are standing next to each other and have death rattle they can understand what the other zombie is saying. If a zombie does not have death rattle, then they can not understand zombie speech. Humans with the death rattle skill can not understand zombies either. This makes zombie organization better without giving a huge balance change.

Keep Votes
For Votes here
Kill Votes

  1. Gangbang suggestion! -Why do you think zombies can't just speak in perfect english? I sit so survivors can't understand them? is it so low-level zombies can't understand them? --AlexanderRM 00:57, 27 March 2007 (BST) Huh, that was odd. I have the feeling I just deleted "fight or flight" by accident. but... how?
  2. Kill - The whole idea of the zombies is that they are a scarcely intelligent shambling horde, not some organised strike force. This game has enough zombie advantages and that's even before metagaming is considered. --The Hierophant. 03:09, 27 March 2007.
  3. Kill - The zombies appear to have adapted to the constraints of Death Rattle quite well, thank you very much. --Specialist290 ♠♥♣♦ 03:20, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  4. I believe there are better Death Rattle "enhancements" already in Peer Review.--Pesatyel 04:57, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  5. Kill - No, this is a double-edged sword and both edges are bad. On the one hand, two zambahz with death rattle can talk to each other openly without being understood by harmanz. On the other hand, directing low-level ferals (let's be honest here, they're the bulk of any good fighting force) will be even more like herding cats. This potentially screws both sides, so screw this. --Mold 08:34, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  6. Kill - The problem of having a year and a half of suggestions you can't find links to dupes any more. This has been suggested countless times when the skill was first introduced, and many times thereafter. It always got justly killed. 1. 90% of deathrattle is already more coherent as what any survivor says. 2. Zombies already have survivors beat in in-game communications. Giving zombies the ability to quote shakespeare towards each other? --Vista 08:56, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  7. Kill All reasons outlined above. - BzAli 12:47, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  8. As above. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 12:53, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  9. Kill - Although there are certainly some very annoying zombie speech limitations that I would like to see removed (let the zeds use "D"s, dang it! It's the only letter that sounds remotely like a "T"!), this is taking it too far. I actually like having zombie speech limited. It makes things more fun. You need to strike a balance between understandability and fun gibberish, not destroy it. --Reaper with no name TJ! 16:10, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  10. Kill - As Spec. --ZombieSlay3rSig.pngT 19:22, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  11. Kill - Think of this game as "Dawn of the Dead", not "Land of the Dead". - Downinflames 05:37, 6 April 2007 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. Spam - This actually started as a kill vote. Zombies don't need it easier right now. There's no in game reason for zombies to understand eachother. I acknowledge my zed characters would love this, and it would make things easier, but it's still stupid. All you're basically doing is allowing zombies to talk to eachother like humans, without the risk of being overheard, for just 100xp (except the thousands who already have it). In fact, I would hazard to guess it takes MORE processing capability to figure out some poorly constructed Death Rattle mutterings, so a zombie being able to understand while a human cannot is out of genre. But you are right about not giving a huge balance change. It just takes the existing dominance zombies have and helps them increase it. --Sgt. Expendable JG 00:58, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  2. Spam - no, no and triple no. No. Just no. --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 09:52, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  3. Spam - Quadruple No! --MarieThe Grove on Tour 16:13, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  4. Bizarro Keep - Yes! --Lord of the Pies 16:54, 27 March 2007 (BST)

Fight or Flight response

Timestamp: Dman206 01:44, 27 March 2007 (BST)
Type: Skill
Scope: Surviver
Description: Only applies outside when a surviver has 10 hp or less and there s a zombie around. Allows the player to go 2 blocks for 1 ap. Mainly for survivors stuck outside a building and have low hp and ap. Adds realism to the game because this skill is human nature already. Goes in military skill tree because they are trained to survive. To be fair to zombies if they catch the surviver who used this skill and kill him they gain 20 xp.

Keep Votes
For Votes here
Kill Votes

  1. Kill -Somewhat underpowered, kinda double-edged, goes against suggestions do's and don'ts, and on top of that programming complexity. --AlexanderRM 01:50, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  2. Kill -Yes, and how exactly are you going to travel two squares in one AP? The visible map only shows one square in every direction, and you very well know. --Storyteller 02:46, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  3. Kill - So, because your legs are broken, you can move twice as fast? Aside from that, goes against suggestion do's and don'ts, survivors don't need a buff right now, clearly not thought out. This feels like it should be spam, but ... well, I can't really justify that. It just feels like spam. --Saluton 02:49, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  4. Kill - Sorry, survivors need a little bit of a buff to keep a few more alive, but this isn't it. --The Hierophant. 03:13, 27 March 2007.
  5. Kill - As above, logic would dictate that someone who was very badly injured would move slower, not faster. --Specialist290 ♠♥♣♦ 03:22, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  6. I think what you are thinking of is more of a "panic" response to a deadly situation. The adrenaline kicks in and allows you to run faster to escape. As the others said, logically, it doesn't make sense. But I think it has some merit with a different approach.--Pesatyel 04:55, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  7. Change - The objections before me have more or less covered it. Though along the lines of a "panic" suggestion, making it a skill (so only those willing to do it would have it happen) and causing, say, 10 blocks of random travel for 5 AP in the conditions you mentioned (not necessarily straight line - could be running in circles and end up where you started) could be interesting. --Mold 08:43, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  8. Kill -The current situation reflects quite well that getting caught outside in a zombie apocalypse is a BAD thing. not just a minor inconvience. Besides new zombies get a lot of XP out of people in the street.--Vista 09:12, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  9. Kill - One might assume that being in Malton allready has you high on adrenaline all the time. - BzAli 12:48, 27 March 2007 (BST)]
  10. As above and up. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 12:56, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  11. Kill - Injuries would counteract the effects of any extra adrenaline with regard to physical capabilities. --Reaper with no name TJ! 16:12, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  12. Kill - Injury slows you down, but adrenaline counteracts the injury, so movement would be normal. --ZombieSlay3rSig.pngT 19:24, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  13. Kill - I'll only vote "keep" if you add a leotard and red cape to this suggestion. --c138 RR - PKer 22:35, 27 March 2007 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. spam - superheroic leaps not allowed. --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 09:52, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  2. spam not actually appaling, i just can't think of anyway to fix it so it would work in this game! --Honestmistake 10:43, 27 March 2007 (BST)

Wirecutter (do something!)

Timestamp: Heretic144 03:35, 27 March 2007 (BST)
Type: Item change and possible elimination
Scope: Survivors or Zombies, depending on the fix
Description: Basically, this is a call to make the wirecutter worth keeping around or just remove it entirely.

The options are basically as follows:

Make a change so that Junkyards can be resealed, and perhaps give the Zombies something that can let them (inefficiently) take them down. The wirecutter itself needn't be changed for this to work.

Eliminate Wirecutters outright, increasing search %'s for useful items.

Give wirecutters another use, perhaps relating to barricades

Keep in mind, the above are just examples, not hard-and-fast rules. Basically, vote on whether you want Wirecutter decisiveness or not.

Keep Votes

  1. Author Keep--Heretic144 03:35, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  2. Keep - Useless items are wasted searches. I'd rather get nothing at all than bloody wirecutters. --The Hierophant. 04:26, 26 March 2007.
  3. Keep - Useless items should be given new purposes, or completely eliminated - Kai Tan Sying

Kill Votes

  1. kill Poetry books. Your second GPS/axe/flak jacket/crowbar/etc. Cruzifixes. 'nuff said. - BzAli 12:52, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  2. Kill - Incomplete. --ZombieSlay3rSig.pngT 19:31, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  3. Kill - Please use talk:suggestions in future. A suggestion is supposed to be concrete, with established numbers for searching, hitting and the like. --Ducis DuxSlothTalk 23:32, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  4. Kill -As dux. I will vote kill on most of those options to. --AlexanderRM 02:59, 2 April 2007 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. Spam - I agree that wire cutters need a use, but this belongs on the discussion page if you want to do a brainstorming thread. --Uncle Bill 04:54, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  2. This is NOT a suggestion. As Uncle Bill says, if you want to discuss wirecutters, put this on the discussion page. Also, look through both the old suggestions AND the archives on the discussion page. There are a plethora of discussions/suggestions on the subject already.--Pesatyel 05:00, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  3. Spam - This suggestion has no mechanics, not even a defined idea what it wants to do. How can people judge an idea were there is nothing solid to judge it on?--Vista 09:24, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  4. Spam - because this is an incomplete suggestion. By the way, have you seen my (*ahem*) Peer Reviewed New Fence Rules suggestion that provides a use for wirecutters? --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 09:58, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  5. Above. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 13:01, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  6. Spam - This isn't even a suggestion. "Do something with wirecutters" is spam to me. Also, your examples are dupes. --Gm0n3y 18:47, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  7. Spam - Thou shalt not make a suggestion for the sake of it. -- Dance Emot.gifTheDavibob T 18:49, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  8. Incomplete - What are we supposed to vote on? Getting rid of it? Changing it? What? Put this on the Talk page until you actually know what it is you're suggesting. --c138 RR - PKer 22:37, 27 March 2007 (BST)

Decapitation Notification

The suggestion received 3 dupe votes and was found to be a duplicate of these two peer reviewed suggestions. --ZombieSlay3rSig.pngT 19:37, 27 March 2007 (BST)

Body Drag

Timestamp: lardass 09:49, 27 March 2007 (EST)
Type: New Action
Scope: Surviver
Description: basically it would be the ability of survivors (or zeds i guess, but they would have less use for it) to drag one body from one block to another; it would be limited by requiring an 25% or less encumbrance and body building (bodies are heavy after all) the reason for this skill would mainly be the ability to clear out zeds from forts, although in theory it would provide survivors the ability to actually clear areas from zeds entirely. (at least temporarily) of course active/standing zeds and other survivors would be exempt.

Keep Votes
For Votes here

  1. Keep - Don't see why not. It's not a major boost to survivors, but it is believable and moderately helpful. As a little change suggestion it may be interesting to consider the possibility of a fit survivor (40+ HP) with the same very low encumbrance being able to rescue a dying survivor by carrying them away for a large AP cost (5-10 per move). Just an idea. --The Hierophant. 03:19, 27 March 2007.
  2. Keep - the ideals of the revolution support anything to help survivors so it is a keep. VIVA LA--Darkmagic 03:26, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  3. Keep - I still don't see what the problem is. They have to be a body for this to work, so you don't have to worry about griefers. And besides, feeding drag and body dump essentially do the same thing, only worse. It'll only take 1 AP to go back to where you want. Body dumps cost a lot more for zeds when you consider barricades. This'll be nothing to them. --Reaper with no name TJ! 16:06, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  4. Keep/Change - limitations are needed, like only being able to drag through 2 blocks or just only being able to drag bodies in fort. i agree that without this features forts are crap and cannot be defended--Duke Garland 12:13, 28 March 2007 (BST)

Kill Votes
Against Votes here

  1. Kill - I hate to do this to ya, but KILL. I made a similar suggestion once and it got shot down faster that a fighter pilot in WWII. I can now see why my idea was rejected. read the dead water page. OmishWarrior 12:41, 27 March 2007 (BST)OmishWarrior (moved vote to correct place - BzAli 12:51, 27 March 2007 (BST))
  2. Kill - Leave dead bodies alone. Dump them, don't drag them. - BzAli 12:51, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  3. Kill - Pied Piper skills = Bad. That's all there is to it. --Saluton 15:16, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  4. Kill - Extremely close to one of OmishWarrior's suggestions which got rejected, so guess what? --ZombieSlay3rSig.pngT 19:30, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  5. Kill - My stance on "teleport"-type actions: Being able to clear bodies out of forts = good. Being able to bring badly-wounded survivors indoors = good. Being able to move any dead body anywhere = not so good. --Specialist290 ♠♥♣♦ 19:55, 27 March 2007 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. Dupe- See the dead in the water page--Heretic144 03:24, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  2. Spam This is much better because it has a limiting factor the same way Feeding Drag does. Whats to stop some asshole from dragging you across the city, just because they can? Basically speaking, dragging you where you DON'T want to be (such as into a horde if you are a survivor).--Pesatyel 04:52, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  3. Spam - Thou shalt not move other people's characters around. It's bad enough folks can be moved from inside to outside unwillingly through body dump and feeding drag (though those are at least reasonable, if annoying). --Mold 08:40, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  4. Spam / Dupe - Man, this hoary old monster again? No teleportation! No pied-piper skills! Even Feeding Drag doesn't move people between squares, and neither does my (*ahem*) Peer Reviewed Fireman's Carry skill. --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 09:54, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  5. Above. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 13:01, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  6. Spam/Incomplete/Dupe/yadayadayada... I've suggested a variant on this too, and I too see why it was rejected now. There's so many versions of this in Rejected it's not even funny. And this isn't even complete -- How many AP does it cost? 1 additional AP per square? 5? 10? Not that it matters anyway... --Matt Scott 9 16:19, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  7. Holy Dupe Batman - This has been suggested numerous times. --Gm0n3y 18:45, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  8. Spam - It was written - Thou shalt not move my character. -- Dance Emot.gifTheDavibob T 18:47, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  9. Spam - NO! Leave my characters where I left them! --c138 RR - PKer 22:36, 27 March 2007 (BST)
  10. Spam -It's been done. And better at that.--Vista 10:08, 28 March 2007 (BST)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Suggestions/27th-Mar-2007&oldid=1882678"