Suggestions/28th-Jul-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

Stench of Death version 2

Timestamp: 04:35, 28 July 2006 (BST)
Type: World inprovement
Scope: All players
Description: Okay, maybe this will be better. When you are inside a building and there are 10 or more zombies right outside (on the same block) you will see "the scent of death hangs in the air" in the room description. i just think it makes scents (get it?) to have some sort of enviromentel change when there are like a bunch of corpses walking around right where you are... you wouldn't see how many are outside or who is outside, all thatd be added is that you smell rotting flesh in the air, adds to atmosphere and fear and isn't like xrayed eyes.

Votes

  1. Spam - Yeah...I just don't think it's a good idea. In fact, it's downright bad. Sonny Corleone WTF RRF ASS CoL 05:00, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  2. Keep - This would help survivors run and I'm all for anything that entices survivors to stay mobile. --Ron Burgundy 05:02, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  3. Keep -Definitely. I think we should be able to know when we are screwed. --Grigori 05:08, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  4. Kill - It would be a big help to survivors but a free runner would be able to map a burbs zombie poluation pretty quickly. I think it is a bit to potent. --Max Grivas JG,T,P! 05:11, 28 July 2006 (BST)
    • Re: Thats cool i understand, but really you can scout like that anyway if you just have a building you can go out and get back into. costs only one 2 ap more than seeing a death stench message and then you don't know exactly how many are outside do you? :)- John Teabags 05:16, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  5. Keep - Cool i'm glad some like it. - John Teabags 05:16, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  6. Keep - I like the suggestion, but not the joke. Youronlyfriend 05:41, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  7. Keep - Yeah, this is certainly much better. Max Grivas makes a decent point, but I'll maintain that this would be good. --Rgon 06:01, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  8. Kill - Change the mechanic so that it's a sliding scale — the more humans there are compared to zombies, the less likely they are to notice a piddling few zombies. I don't think there is a way to justify that flavourwise, but it's necessary to balance the suggestion. --Xoid 06:17, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  9. Keep - I think it's ok as it is: if there's already 10 zombies outside, only stupid survivors wuoldn't already know they're under attack. And the point Teabags makes responding Max Grivas vote is absolutely correct. It's just a flavor addition, it's not useful enough to need balancing. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC | T | W! 06:53, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  10. Keep - I think this will be a nice way for people at least to have a general idea if they're about to get smashed, especially if their building is heavily barricaded and they do not have freerunning/there are no good entry points around. --Experiment C 07:05, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  11. Kill -Wow The only thing that hasnt been spamminated today. Ok It is a plausable suggestion. A few quirks are niggling at me. 1 Humans bairly ever go outside. and 2 Dead bodies smell aswell. So im thinking maybe forget about the first point as that would give you an auto kill and theres nothing to remedy that. 2 on the oher had to maybe jack up the numbers before you see (smell) the message and add corpses to the Count. Nazreg 07:20, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  12. Kill - Your spelling is as poor as your idea. Try going outside and seeing how many zombies there are. Trenchcoater. –Bob Hammero Mod•T•A•C 08:07, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  13. Kill - I kinda like it, but I kinda don't. You would need fix those numbers and explain how dead ones don't smell. --Niilomaan 08:48, 28 July 2006 (BST)
    • Re: corpses that are reviving are getting better, corpses that are freshly dead don't stink yet, corpses of zombies that are killed will stand up soon anyway so it's barely a problem. explained okay? -- John Teabags 18:27, 28 July 2006 (BST)
      • Re: No. If you shoot zombie down, it will still stink, but with few holes in it. Not changing. --Niilomaan 21:55, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  14. Kill - Don't like the idea of survivors having a kind of "spider sense" system telling that something is wrong. --Nob666 08:55, 28 July 2006 (BST)
    • Re: its okay. just to defend i should say smell isn't a otherworldy sense John Teabags 18:27, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  15. keep - I like the idea, even though a few even though a few people seem to think it stinks. I do agree, however that corpses should be included in the count - they smell pretty bad and are probably going to stand up as zombies anyway. The Mad Axeman 09:44, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  16. Keep - I like this idea Kill After reading the other's votes, I believe Xoid has a good point. - HerrStefgantheGreat 15:02, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  17. Spam -Hmmm whats that smell and OMFGZOMBAHS!!!!!!!!--LCpl Mendoza 11:13, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  18. Spam - X-Ray skill. If you're so desperate to see how many of us are attacking, come out and visit. -- BeefSteak WTF 12:04, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  19. Spam - go outside n00b--Gage 12:35, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  20. Spam - X-Ray vision skills should not be added for either side. --Grim s-Mod U! 14:18, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  21. Kill - I like what Xoid said, make it dependent on the delta from zombies to meat sacks humans. Flavour is fun!--Burgan 14:19, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  22. Spam - Unless us zombies can tell how many survivors are in a building based on the strength of the smell of the vaseline from all the circlejerking. – Nubis 15:06, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  23. Kill - This suggestion smells bad. But not as bad as spiced ham. It's not xraysvision, but i don't like it.--Thari CFT 15:13, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  24. Kill - The game already provides this flavor through the big piles of bodies that you see after a major siege. It's not hard to imagine that they smell. --Ember MBR 15:14, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  25. Spam No X-ray vision--Mookiemookie 15:24, 28 July 2006 (BST)
    • Re: All your Xray eyes voters see through ur noses? John Teabags 18:27, 28 July 2006 (BST)
      No smell-o-vision. Happy now? --Mookiemookie 21:26, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  26. Kill - I'm not that against it, but it does need adjusting. I would have this as - if more than 10 zeds or a single dead body, then those inside get the smell of rotting flesh. So the presence of a single dead body would mask the presence of all the zeds.--Ray Vern phz •T
  27. Spam-Gage and John Ember is right.--ShadowScope 16:18, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  28. Spam - Another crapy writ- ur, I mean suggestion... -- 343 U! 17:21, 28 July 2006 (BST)
    sausage - it is kinda funny how i put votes liek this all over the place and the only reason they get removed is because of no time stamp!! =)--Poopman9 1:36 p.m. EST
    Note: Ridiculous false vote struck. –Bob Hammero Mod•T•A•C 18:38, 28 July 2006 (BST)
    so what - they can all still read what i say, even if u strike this out they can still read it. woot!! --Poopman9
    Invalid vote. --Brizth M T 19:20, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  29. Keep - This would add realism to the game, in the real world, you would be able to smell 10 rotting corpses from a block away, we can't do 'that' here for balance issues but if I was in a building and ten or more dead guys were outside, I probably should be able to smell it. --Marty Banks 20:38, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  30. Kill - As per Nubis. -BrainsYummy 00:41, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  31. Spam -Don't be anal. X-Ray vision doesn't specifically mean vision. What about the stench of the survivors...or do THEY bathe regularly? Regardless, as other pointed out, you want to know how many zombies are out there? Go outside or use NecroNet (man THAT is scary, using the Net and seeing zombies EVERYWHERE). And Bob, unless I'm mistaken, you can just delete that vote instead of striking it out.--Pesatyel 05:05, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  32. Spam - Urban Dead, now on SMELL-O-VISION! Also as a radiographer, I'm going to shoot down most ideas that smack of Se-ray vision. David Malfisto 18:28, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  33. Kill - It would be a very useful skill for free runners who are looking for a place to hole up in unfamiliar territory. However, not knowing if you'll wake up with a wide open safe house is part of what makes the game entertaining -- Boxy 03:51, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  34. Keep - alright, I think this makes sense, were I in a building I find it would be about as easy as looking out a window. --Kiltric 07:53, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  35. Kill - As per xoid. --Poopman9 17:55, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  36. Kill - It's the apocalypse. I bet the whole city smells pretty bad by now. --DirskoSM 19:04, 11 August 2006 (BST)

Radio Airtime

Timestamp: 17:33, 28 July 2006 (BST)
Type: Stats Improvement.
Scope: A small but usefull statistics page update.
Description: I think it would be usefull if the statistics page were to show the most popular military and civillian radio frequencies. It would appear under the 'Mobile Network Coverage' statistics, and could have titles such as 'Most Used/Popular Millitary Frequency: 26.15 MHz' (For example). I don't think it would be that difficult to keep track of the most used radio frequency, and I think this would be a small but usefull addition as the most used frequency tends to be the most usefull.

Votes

  1. Keep - Author Keep. And my first suggestion in ages. --Andrew McM W! 17:32, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  2. Keep - I almost voted spam, because showing the most used shows would create more spam... but I really would like this idea, so unless someone could convince me otherwise, Keep this baby. -- 343 U! 17:35, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  3. Keep - Sure. I haven't seen much spam recently, but I've been on good channels. --Burgan 18:21, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  4. Keep - Why not? It could be helpful. –Bob Hammero Mod•T•A•C 18:37, 28 July 2006 (BST)
    Burgers - this is absolutly stoopid as it would break the game by telling every1 which channel is used the most. Zombie spies ringin a bell to ne1?? Also, every1 would only use that channel, and the others would be blocked out. In closing, i don't know how to do a timestamp.--Poopman9
    Invalid vote. --Brizth M T 19:20, 28 July 2006 (BST)
    Keep - Nice idea, I look at the radio list, and i have no idea which ones are used, which ones are dead, etc. Poopman, four ~s make a timestamp.
    No signature. That ~~~~ comes handy :D --Brizth M T 19:20, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  5. Keep --As per 343--Paradox244 19:18, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  6. Keep -I like it. --Grigori 20:30, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  7. Keep - Willy loves numbers. –Spraycan Willy MalTel·T 20:33, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  8. Keep - Seems useful. --Tanza 20:37, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  9. Keep - Sure, why not? Agent Heroic 20:38, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  10. Keep - Not sure how useful it'd be, but it wouldn't hurt anything to have it there --Mookiemookie 21:25, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  11. Kill - Would just gather most people on same channels. And what stats would it count? How many people are tuned on it? How many messages are sent on it? Naah... I don't like it. --Niilomaan 21:43, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  12. Kill - Explain what is meant by "most used" and I would probably vote keep, but I'd like to see that first. Most transmissions on the frequency? Most transmitters tuned to the frequency? Most radios and transmitters? I'd just like this clarified. --Rgon 22:08, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  13. Kill-Rgon is right. If it is most transmissions on the frequency, then one can say "blah" over and over to get to be the top. Most transmitters and radios on the frequency means people will find radios and transmitters tune them to the station they want to win. Basically, it gives a target that spammers will do whatever it takes to reach. So, no.--ShadowScope 23:04, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  14. Kill - It's like giving a mention award to the most spammy frequency of the time if it counts the number of broadcasts, or telling spammers what frequency to attack next if it counts the number of radio/transmitters tuned to that frequency. A no-no I think. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC | T | W! 23:56, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  15. Kill - Alright! SPAM CONTEST. Youronlyfriend 05:01, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  16. Keep - I'm lazy Gene Splicer 23:19, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  17. Kill As I said above, but with no burgers and with a timestamp ;) --Poopman9 17:57, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  18. Keep - Because it would help newer players who want to metagame. (But ShadowScope has some good points.) 'Most transmitters/recievers tuned' would be harder to mess with, I think. -- Catriona McM 17:40, 4 August 2006 (BST)

Barricade Variance and Tactical Value

Timestamp: 20:04, 28 July 2006 (BST)
Type: Fundamental spam barricade change
Scope: Everyone attacking/using barricades
Description:

Whereas this game has become focused on hoarding inside shopping malls, and
Whereas these malls have become self-sufficient fortresses, and
Whereas the game has turned into siege after siege, and
Whereas a children's day school is as defensible as a military installation, and
Whereas the strategic value of a building is determined only by the resources available therein,

I would like to propose a change to the mechanics of barricades. For the above stated reasons, I feel barricades should be changed, to alter the dynamic of the game. After maxing characters from both sides, I am tired of siege after siege of guerilla raids sallying forth from malls and hoards knocking down barricades to have them repaired within minutes. The intent of this suggestion is to add another value to be considered when selecting safehouses, to decrease the homogeneity of all buildings, and to increase the defense value of more tactical locations.
I propose that the upper levels of barricades, specifically, anything above 'Very Strongly Barricaded', or a level at which a survivor can not enter the building from outside, be reserved for certain structure types only. Effectively, barricades will be limited to certain levels based on the structure type, as set out in this list of maximum barricade level per building type:

  • Very Strongly Barricaded: Railways, Churches, Libraries, and Schools
  • Heavily Barricaded: Junkyards, Non-NT Buildings, Cathedrals, Malls, Hospitals, Towers, Cinemas, Hotels, and Stadiums
  • Very Heavily Barricaded: Museums, Zoos, NT Buildings, Auto Repair Shops, Factories, Warehouses, Fire Stations, Arms, Clubs
  • Extremely Heavily Barricaded: Armouries, Banks, Police Stations, Mansions, Power Stations
  • This leaves the ratio of VS/HB/VHB/EHB buildings at approximately 15/35/35/10 throughout Malton.

In compiling this list, the primary factors considered were flavour and realism of a building's defensibility, and the ratios of the levels of defensible buildings. In the interests of gameplay, ratios were the deciding factor. To this extent, I wrote a script to compile the information on building distributions across Malton, the detailed breakdown of which is on my user page. Since there is nothing in the text distinguishing NTs from normal buildings, this uses the estimate of approximately 250 NT buildings.
There was a bug wherein any empty square containing the string "Mall" was counted as a mall (e.g. Mallack Walk), but this has been corrected in this suggestion's printout, and I am aware of no other building type which should create this error (e.g. Cinema Lane, the Hospital Monument). This error should be insignificant even if it does exist.
I tried to keep the levels as flavourful and realistic as possible, though there were concessions in the name of building distribution, as my favorite list based on flavour gives us a game-breaking 40/30/20/10 ratio initially.

Final Thoughts:

"No Stopgap Balance Measures": This is not intended to redress balance in the game. My intention here is entirely to create new and interesting dynamics within the game.
"Leave Barricades Alone … Avoid suggestions that excessively weaken barricades or allow zombies to bypass them entirely.": While this does affect barricades, it does not remove them or nerf them, just changes them to add variance and value to buildings.
"Make it More Fun, Not Less Fun": I like the panic that comes with a survivor, and I think that a game where you die from time to time, running back and forth from your safehouse to a tactical resource point is much more fun than hanging out in a castle and shooting from the parapets every two days.
"Forts will never be used at EHB": I think that this gives us interesting new opportunities for forts, since they would have a higher defense value that people will want to use. There is nothing stopping an organized group from holding a fort, and manually lowering the barricades for short windows, letting raiders in and out.
"NT buildings would be identifiable by their higher barricade levels": Yes. Yes they would be. That makes it your choice to keep them lower, or pay the price for extra protection. This game is about the players and the choices they make. Besides, of course, the in depth maps and zombies with NT employment skills.
"Spam - nerfs my safehouse": Please, evaluate a suggestion based on its place in the game for all players, not yourself alone. Safehouses can be moved.

Finally finally, thanks to everyone on the talk page, in particular pesatyel and raystanwick, for coming up with lists and the idea of building type distribution. Sorry for taking so long

Votes

  1. Keep - I was verbose enough in the suggestion. Sorry for leaving it on the talk page for a month to the day, I'm just a procrastinator. That's all I've got. --Burgan 20:04, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  2. Kill --With the survivor/zombie ratio approaching 60% in favor of zombies, I believe that I can definitaly say: Don't nerf my 'cades. --Paradox244 20:07, 28 July 2006 (BST) I was wrong, what Mookie said. --Paradox244 20:26, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  3. Keep Great for zombies, great for survivors!! No more overbarricaded entry points! No more EHBs on EVERYthing, blocking the undead! This is perfect and i wish i thought of it. If you like it or dont, this still better not get any spam votes... - John Teabags 20:14, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  4. Keep - I give this one my hesitant keep. I think it's dangerous to alter something as fundamental as barricades. However, I agree with your sentiment about what the game has become, and I think this could help change that. Nice work. –Bob Hammero Mod•T•A•C 20:20, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  5. Kill Keep - Paradox, the survivor/zombie ratios fluctuate all the time. To base a vote off of a one point in time thing like "ZOMG 60% ZOMBYS" is a piss poor reason for a kill vote. This suggestion could be implemented at a point in the future where the balance has swung back to 60% survivor. You're voting on the merit of the suggestion. Period, the end. Not merit of the suggestion at this certain point in time. That being said, I like this idea as it does add an element of strategy to the game. My concern is that you argue (rightfully so) against the "mega siege" mentality. But if you reduce the number of buildings that could be barricaded to heavily, these EHB-able buildings would become the focal point of where survivors would clump together for the extra protection afforded by the EHB cades, thus making the situation you're trying to fix, actually worse. Give me a convincing argument why that wouldn't happen (and you might already have on the discussion page but I didn't follow that thread, so rehash it here) and you'd have a "Keep" from me. --Mookiemookie 20:23, 28 July 2006 (BST)
    Re: These new spots will certainly suffer sieges, but they won't be the only places to be under siege. Malls have every item you need, plus high barricades right now. This way, there are more options for safety, and VHB is just about as good as EHB, so I think the 45% of structures those two levels represent under this suggestion would distribute the attacks over enough buildings, plus the first thing I'll do is camp in a school and hope zombies overlook it! Bear in mind, this dispersion effect will help survivors as much as zombies, since they'll be more spread out and less clumped.--Burgan 20:30, 28 July 2006 (BST) P.S. Thanks for pointing out the 'percentage at this point in time' thing
    Not a bad argument. As I said, I like the idea. Its good to break up the homogeneous nature of buildings. I am very intruigued by the strategy created if this is actually implemented. Lets hope you don't get a wave of trenchy survivor monkies puking up their knee-jerk spam votes on this good suggestion --Mookiemookie 21:23, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  6. Keep -As per Bob Hammero. I don't want to vote keep (being a survivor), but I have no reason not to and it is a good suggestion. --Grigori 20:29, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  7. Keep - It will take some getting used to by veterans but I belive this would actualy make the game more fun. (noobs need some warning a building is caded to the max) --Max Grivas JG,T,P! 20:30, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  8. Kill - I'm torn, In real life it's true some buildings are more defensable than others. But In truth you could secure really any location to the point were it is as defensable as a fort. Adding this dynamic would take realism away from the game, because really any building can be turned into a fortress. I have a suggestion, a skill tree for barricade's, the more you 'cade, the better you get at it and the higher limit you can 'cade a building... --MartyBanks 20:51, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  9. Keep - I keep getting distracted from reading it. I'll just trust it rules. (I can always change later?) --Niilomaan 21:06, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  10. Keep - This is the future of Urban Dead. Ybbor 21:07, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  11. Kill This would only be fair if as you lower the maximum barricades for some buildings, you raised it for others. For instance if schools could only be very strongly barricaded but police stations could be incredibly heavily barricaded, etc. But as said above, that would predetermine where survivors would want to go and lead to even more clumping. --Jon Pyre 21:08, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  12. Keep - Variance is always good. It draws people off from malls and it actually helps newbie survivors. --Tauron 21:11, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  13. Keep - I urge everyone to look at the discussion for this in the Talk page before voting to see the whole story; it's a few pages long, so the idea has definately been thought out. The difference between VHB and EHB is so small that they are pratically the same. This variance adds a new level of strategy to the game; should I stay in(or attack) high profile, EHB buildings, or a weaker but less important one? Malls should probably be EHB, at least till the other FAK/Ammo resource points become viable. Also, I would still prefer the Towers to be in VHB and that Clubs should be bumped back, but all if it is really just a suggestion for Kevan anyway. He knows the exact number NT buildings, he knows if some buildings are more easily caded then others already, and he knows the probabilities for a successful construction attempt... I support the general idea even if the "list" isn't exactly the way I would do it.--Raystanwick 21:21, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  14. Keep - Fun fun fun. Sonny Corleone WTF RRF ASS 21:22, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  15. Keep - I like more variety in barricades. This will help survivors, as it will ensure that there's always at least a few enterable buildings in a suburb. And zombies will be able to choose between a greater variety of harder and softer targets. --Ember MBR 21:28, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  16. Keep-See above. This suggestion is long overdue.--ShadowScope 21:32, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  17. Keep - Good Job.--Canuhearmenow 21:33, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  18. Keep - Personally, I think malls should be at VHB, since they are really a classic zombie film setting, but that's just a minor flavour argument. Otherwise, great choices for both balance and flavour. Excellent overall, sounds like fun. --Rgon 22:17, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  19. Keep - Maybe should wait for the numbers to balance out before being implimented, but a very great suggestion. -- BeefSteak WTF 23:09, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  20. Keep - I don't mind the change as a survivor, I like it as a zombie. Thanks =) --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC | T | W! 23:53, 28 July 2006 (BST)
  21. Kill - I don't like the fact that just because I am in a school, I can't EHB it. There were any changes, I would rather impose an AP increase on barricade attempts as the higher the barricade goes up but, in return, survivors get a higher success rate in building a barricade. Building a barricade costs 1Ap per attempt at the moment, each successful attempt adds more to the status of the barricade. I would have it that to barricade higher would cost more AP per attempt since I would be having to do more work to make the building a higher status (more realistic) but in return for having a higher success rate on attempts to barricade. --Rubix41 23:23 (GMT) 28 July 2006
  22. Keep - This is one of the best suggestions I've seen in ages. -BrainsYummy 00:56, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  23. Keep - good, solid, well thought out suggestion--Gage 01:30, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  24. Keep - Doesn't fix baracade bots, but one level would help. -- 343 U! 01:33, 29 July 2006 (BST)
    Keep - Great idea. I'm already sick of the siege game that is happening.--LeChuckBR
    Please read about how to sign. –Bob Hammero Mod•T•A•C 03:13, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  25. Keep - Kill - Soooooo close to a keep. But I'm being a stick in the mud because you didn't specify what should happen to buildings that already have their barricades above the allowed barricade level. - Jedaz 04:51, 29 July 2006 (BST) - I decided to change my vote, you make a good point. - Jedaz 02:20, 30 July 2006 (BST)
    Re: - I'm in favor of whatever's easiest to implement. If it works for Kevan that it's easy to knock everything down to it's prescribed max, that's my preference, but I've got nothing wrong with a transition period wherein buildings are above their max until brought down, at which point they stay at/beneath the max. --Burgan 15:03, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  26. Keep - Is this the same one that was on the talk page? It seems different. Youronlyfriend 05:07, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  27. Keep - This suggestion is definitely game-shaking, but not in the way the rocket launcher suggestions are. It is rational, and will force survivors to fight more along the lines of the way they should, tactically and often in small groups, not like the mobs at malls. I'd want to see this, and I assume if the barricade is above the maximum level when this change is implemented, once the barricade goes to or below that level, these rules would come into effect. --Experiment C 05:11, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  28. Keep -I'm glad my input came in useful on the discussion page. My only thing is (which we didn't discuss on THIS suggestion but another one) would be an alteration to the barricades in a Junkyard (but of course THAT is another suggestion). And Jedaz, I don't think it matters too much (when the large building mod was added, all non-zombie occupied buildings were automatically EH, if I recall right). Either those buildings over their max would get a "free" couple of levels for awhile or just automatically be lowered. Though I think the former would help people adjust.--Pesatyel 05:14, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  29. Keep - Interesting idea, I would like to know how you propose handling buildings that are over your proposed max when this is implemented. --Daidy 06:06, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  30. Keep - I like the idea, as it would make sense for some buildings to be well, just more defensible than other buildings would, and it would lessen the amount of times someone would get locked out from someone's over-barricading. Still, I would prefer Malls and Junkyards to be upped to VHB or EHB, since (from an RP viewpoint) there's a higher level of junk in both structures. --Marcus Payne 09:35, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  31. Kill - I love the idea of more strategy etc., but I hate the idea of being forced to a certain barricade plan (which is what this pretty much does). Yeah, I guess you can make the point it helps new people and it helps zombies, but it takes away from survivor groups own barricading plans and strategies. By limiting the barricading of simpler building (especially non-resource buildings), you will force more users to a building that can be barricaded more such a police station which is a HUGE part of a new military class survivor's life on UD. Also malls at Heavily only? It is really the only place a group of survivors can hold for a prolonged about of time and hell, it's held rarely versus a large amount of zombies in the first place. I don't like how a lot of buildings are in certain categories. And even if you did tweak it, I just hate the idea of taking away part of the main defense of survivors. The "added strategy" takes away from survivor groups, doesn't help newbies much, and I don't like the idea of zombies being able to take down barricades easier, and pinpoint survivor locations that much easier.--49ers 10:01, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  32. Kill - What Rubix41 said --EnForcer32 10:12, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  33. Keep - I think this would unmake malls the Uber Fortresses they are (Even though it makes sense gameplay-wise, it does not make sense literally.). Perhaps this will finally make other (more sensible) buildings into fortresses. There is a reason there are only two armories/forts in the entire game and they are completely unsurrounded by other buildings. --Yourbonesakin 13:54, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  34. Kill - Leave my cades alone. David Malfisto 18:32, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  35. Keep - Though I have to say, my old school would have been a frickin' fortress if you uput half an effort into it --Gene Splicer 23:24, 30 July 2006 (BST)
  36. Kill - I am a mall rat, and this almosty nerfes malls, as zmobies can get in sooo much more easily ---Poopman9 17:59, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  37. Keep - I thought I voted on this already, apparently not. This is a good suggestion and well thought out. It will add some good realism to the game, although in theory you could just pour some concret walls on the inside of a school blah, blah, blah, or not. --Mnbvcx 02:08, 2 August 2006 (BST)
    • Tally: 29 Keep, 8 Kill, 0 Dupe, 37 Total --Burgan 23:14, 9 August 2006 (BST)
  38. Keep - Well thought out. Stategy = good. Helps the city-wide overbarricading issue too. --DirskoSM 19:21, 11 August 2006 (BST)

Statistics page link

Timestamp: 4:21, 28 July 2006 (PST)
Type: Interface change
Scope: Everyone
Description: There should be a button added to the control panel underneath the main world display that links directly to the Game Statistics page.

Votes

  1. Keep - It'd draw attention to groups. Then, maybe, more people would play cooperatively. --Ron Burgundy 00:36, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  2. Keep - Sure. You know about the link on the main page though, right? –Bob Hammero Mod•T•A•C 00:41, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  3. Keep - I think the logout page would be good as well, your out of AP and still interested in knowing more about the state of Malton. I almost never see the main page due to logging in through the toolbar which takes me directly to map.cgi. I use my toolbar link to get to stats but its not really advertised to me now... I have to know and want it. --Max Grivas JG,T,P! 02:49, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  4. Keep - Hmm... I guess so, but this would result in almost 100MB more of data being uploaded a day. Evidence, 40,000 players, spend 50AP. Thats 2,000,000 page requests a day. Times that by 50 bytes (the code length of the URL). Thats 100,000,000 bytes, or 97,656KB, or 95MB. I'm just wondering how much this would impact on the server speed, thats all. - Jedaz 04:43, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  5. Spam - Enough of these bullshit minor tweak "suggestions." This isn't even a suggestion. It's a waste of bandwidth. I'm invoicing you for part of my ISP bill this month. --Mookiemookie 07:48, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  6. Keep - I happen to like minor tweaks --McArrowni 15:05, 29 July 2006 (BST)
  7. Spam On Wheels - as MookieMookie, but with MORE HATRED!! ENUFF WITH BANDWITH WASTES!! MY BILL IS NOW BEING PUT ON YOU!! thank you. --Poopman9 18:01, 31 July 2006 (BST)
  8. Keep - folks, if you have bill problems then don't run 3 profiles. and if you have trouble affording one then maybe you shouldn't be playing mmorpgs. don't shoot down a perfectly good tweak because of your personal problems. --Kiltric 18:12, 31 July 2006 (BST)

Disallow Bots

Withdrawn. I learned a few things about a few Bobs... Mostly about people not wanting soemthing and not willing to do something about it. I dunno, but I'm going for the lengthy and confusing write out next. And I always thought methods to prevent cheating were generally secret to prevent circumvents of the prevention. -- 343 U! 02:38, 29 July 2006 (BST)

Heresay and unsubtle rude remarks struck. Read the rules for what is allowed when removing a suggestion. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 02:54, 29 July 2006 (BST)
Yup. Cyberbob  Talk  02:54, 29 July 2006 (BST)

Rotate URLs

Removed by author. I was assured by both Bob and Xoid that it was retarded. It would be too easy to get around by a competent programmer. --Gage 05:01, 29 July 2006 (BST)

  • I would like to note that Kevan actualy has implemented this idea so obviously he thought that it is enough. - Jedaz 03:02, 30 July 2006 (BST)

Disallow Bots V2

I think this is horribly broken now. Anywho, I think the best way to stop bots it to hand search all activities in random areas. Have the first place you look for bots be Caiger Mall. We all know that there is at least suspicion. Why not read the server hits for that mall as a "trail" and if no bots are found, drop the issue. Otherwise, randomly select suburbs every month for bot activity, human scanners, triple checking. Thats the advanced technique that uses no AP. :P -- 343 U! 03:33, 29 July 2006 (BST)

Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Suggestions/28th-Jul-2006&oldid=355442"