Suggestions/29th-Nov-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.

Just Look through the Darn Fences Already!

Timestamp:	Reaper with no name TJ! 15:17, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Type:	location alteration
Scope:	Junkyards
Description:	Junkyards. Just what are they? In the context of the game, they're big open areas where junk goes that happens to be surrounded by wire fencing. Now, that's all fine and good, but then why can't you see who's in them? Fences aren't walls; they don't hide anything from your vision. If you're standing in a junkyard, people should be able to see you. Therefore, I suggest that players standing inside a junkyard should be visible to those outside of it (but still in the same square). They wouldn't show up on the map, but the junkyard description should have a message added to it that looks something like this: "Inside the fencing is <insert survivor names here>, and <insert number here> zombies." By the same token, players inside the junkyard will be able to see who is outside the fence (but within the same square). The message would work just like the one above, but would replace "Inside" with "Outside". This is X-ray vision! Yes, it is. For ONE building. A practically useless building that technically isn't even a building but just an open area with a fence around it. And it works both ways. This nerfs distributed defense! If your distributed defense strategy relies that heavily on junkyards as places for survivors to sleep, then you've got much bigger problems to worry about than this.

Keep Votes
For Votes here

1. Author Keep - I mean, come on! It's just such an easy fix! And it's not like it's really gonna help anyone much...--Reaper with no name ^TJ! 15:17, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
2. Yeah I do agree this is not a huge shift in the way it would change game play and it would be a little bit more helpful instead of running itto a junkyard full o zeds tthen falling asleep cause your out of ap--Lonewolf17a 15:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
3. Keep - A nice bit of flavoursomeness without any of the damage.--Mr yawn 15:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
4. Keep - Junkyards are already freak buildings, you can't ransack them and they have no doors. This makes sense --Gene Splicer 16:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
5. Keep - Sure, why not. It won't have any significant impact on the game but it adds to believability and seems pretty easy to implement. --Wfjeff 17:36, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
6. Keep It's a 2 way fence and that's cool, and survivors using free running would be able to use junkyards to stop and take a look outside without going outside. You just made the junkyard a cool building!!! Kickass.MrAushvitz 00:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
7. Keep My last safe house was a junkyard and I still think this is a good idea. If you're worried about making the junkyard "useless", you could balance it out by playing with fence repairs/wire cutters. --Uncle Bill 02:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
8. keep with change There are some strategic implications that could be used for good -- such as calling out to somebody inside for help if you can see them. So, have the "speak" botton work for everybody in the same block, inside and out. Asheets 17:57, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
   

Kill Votes

1. Kill - Just makes Junkyards even more useless than they currently are. --_Vic D'Amato__Dead vs Blue_ 16:59, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
2. Kill - see above and below in the spam votes. -- Sgt. Expendable ^JG
3. Kill - Now that would make junkyards completely useless. -- Nob666 20:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
4. Kill - Will make junkyards useless. I might have voted keep if it didn't say the names of survivors, it would just say "you see a survivor standing inside." --Pvt De 22:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
5. Sorry - Sorry, as much as this makes sense, there are pro's and con's to barricading above VS, but this would nerf the cons. Plus it does kinda nerf distributed defense, Which I am a huge believer in.--Labine50 ^MH|^ME|^P 22:36, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
6. Change - make it survivor numbers and zombie numbers in both directions please. --ExplodingFerret 22:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
7. Kill - The idea is interesting, and perhaps for believability's sake you should be able to see into junkyards. However, if we are going for realism then you should be able to see out of any building with windows. --Ajforget 23:56, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
8. Kill - If realism is the issue, not hard to hide inside the trunk of a derelict car or behind an old fridge. --Nosimplehiway--Nosimplehiway 05:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
9. Kill - I'm sorry, but IRL junkyards are pretty hard to see into, as the JUNK is piled up to the fences as high as it can go. Sorry, no-go. Daniel Hicken 06:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
10. Kill - What Daniel said.--Wbleak24 06:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
    

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam - Junkyards are some of the best buildings to hide in now because they are inconspicuous. Don't nerf that. Anyone sleeping in a junkyard if this is implemented might as well hold a sign that says "Eat me!". Also, read the suggestion Dos and Do Nots. Don't argue for realism? Oh yeah, that applies here. Junkyards are huge places anyway. It would be totally possible to be in the center and not be visible from any of the outside fences. Totally reasonable IMO.--Gage 17:31, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

   Re - Once again, there's a huge difference between realism and believability. I'm shooting for believability here. The Suggestion Dos and Don'ts are violated all the time, even by suggestions that get into peer reviewed. And the junkyards in this game clearly can't be THAT big or else they wouldn't take up only 1 square. Junkyards also aren't as inconspicuous as you might think; certainly not as inconspicuous as some random pub or office building. And they lack doors, which make them much more dangerous to sleep in. --Reaper with no name ^TJ! 18:54, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

   When was the last time a set of door saved you from a ravaging horde of zombies? Never? My point in case.--Gage 22:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

2. Spam: Don't nerf Junkyards. Doing so would be a big, BIG buff to Zeds.--ShadowScope 17:40, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
3. Spam: Junkyards are strategically important as part of a distributed defence strategy because they can't be ransacked. They're easier to defend. The fence could be wooden. The barricades themselves could provide shelter from view. The junkyards could be large. Realism can be counter-argued in most cases. Don't nerf junkyards. --Funt Solo 18:04, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
   • Re - Your arguments for realism aren't very, well, realistic. The barricades are only at the hole in the fencing, and the junkyards can't be that big because they only take up one square. The fences can't be wooden because they are wire fencing. However, I do see what you mean with the strategic importance. I hadn't considered the effect on it's non-ransack-ability on it's importance. --Reaper with no name ^TJ! 18:54, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

   • Re - Well, I could assume that it's a junkyard full of cars. Or large piles of other stuff. There - realism solved. I know from my own experience it's a real shitter when something I hadn't thought of pulls down one of my suggestions. But there it is. It happens. --Funt Solo 19:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

4. Spam - nerf this, nerf that get yourself a nerf, get yourself as nerf, get a nerf, don't become a nerf, nerf this, nerf that, nerf your brain, don't need no nerf just turn up the game. (plagurised from song do this do that by freefaller) --Marie^{The Grove} 18:08, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
5. Spam - It's a game essential. If you think it's unrealistic, imagine they've all buried themselves in garbage. --Joe O'Wood TALKCONTRIBSUD 21:25, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
6. Spam - For once, I must agree with my fellow, Jon. Nevermind the Bullocks, and Cherrio!! --Poopman9 23:00, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
7. Spam - No. For reasons stated repeatedly above.--J Muller 01:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
8. Spam - Yah that's the ticket! There hiding in garbage! Thanks Joe! --Officer Johnieo 02:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
9. Spam -You seem to have forgotten that junkyards can be barricade just like other buildings. If you can't see in or out of any other building while the barricades are down, why would you be able to here? And what about buildings like schools with LOTS of windows?--Pesatyel 02:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
10. Junkyard nerfers. Don't you know the survivors could be hiding in all that trash? And come on! Junkyards don't even have the second line of defense.....doors! --Axe Hack 04:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

---

‘Terrify’ Skill Tree

Timestamp:	Wfjeff 22:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Type:	new skill tree
Scope:	zombies
Description:	Playing a survivor makes for very dynamic gameplay because there’s so much you can do. There’s necrotech, healing, bounty hunting, PKing, searching, radio, barricading, etc. to make the game interesting. By contrast, all zombies can do is attack. This makes sense, of course, because all zombies do in the movies is attack; they are very simple creatures. However this doesn’t make for fun gameplay. My proposal is designed to add another interesting element to playing a zombie without diverging from the genre’s conception of the undead. Imagine you’re in your safehouse, exhausted, about to drift off to sleep. You gazed out the window at the black sky and BAM a rotting maggot-ridden zombie face presses against the window, gnashing it’s half-shot-off jaw at you, bloodied and covered in dirt-encrusted scabs, before sliding down the wall and falling away from the building. You’re so startled you nearly piss yourself. This group of skills would allow zombies to get XP from something other than assault without departing from the spirit of pop culture’s idea of undeath. They would create a new ‘condition’ like infected but would be called ‘terrified.’ When a character is terrified they have a 5% bonus to melee attacks against the terrifying zombie but a 10% penalty to all firearm attacks for 5 turns. This reflects the adrenaline rush and immediate hack/beat/pummel reaction when a zombie scares the living daylights out of you as well as the increased difficulty to properly aim and fire a weapon while pissing your pants. Every survivor can only be terrified once per day. It represents getting caught off-guard briefly, like in the movies, where no one gets hurt but everybody jumps a little in their seats. Terrorize: Targets buildings with a 40% chance to scare only the survivor who hasn’t been terrified that day and is closest to the top of the stack. Each building can only be targeted once per zombie every day. If successful, the target survivor would get one of several messages, depending on the building, saying something like: A rotting, putrid, undead hand bursts forth from the barricade and snatches at the air briefly, inches from your ankle, before retracting slowly and disappearing from sight. Your heart races and you nearly stumble over your own legs you are so startled and disgusted. You have been terrified. The zombie would get 3 XP and one of several messages that read something like: You claw fruitlessly at the air between the barricades and are rewarded with a shriek of pure unadulterated fear emanating from inside. You have terrified Surviv0r88. Gruesome Visage: This skill would be a subset of Terrorize and is designed for combat. With it, the zombie’s appearance has become so perverted and inhuman from decomposition and repeated headshots that with a little effort they can terrify a victim simply by snarling or grimacing intimidatingly. It works as an attack but instead of causing damage it has a 40% chance of terrifying the victim. The survivor would get one of several messages like: A hideously disfigured zombie with half a bullet-ridden skull and an exposed ribcage picked clean down to the bone slowly settles its feral, unblinking eyes on you and lets out a hungry moan that shakes you off balance. You are terrified. The zombie would get 2 XP and one of several messages that read something like: Your overpowering hunger manifests as an uncontrollable wail that nearly topples your victim. You have terrified hUm0nXxX. The first skill would primarily benefit lower level zombies who can’t get into buildings and both would add some nice flavor to the game. Also, survivors who are low enough in level to be using melee weapons would actually benefit. It’s all very in line with, if not a tribute to, the movies we all know and love and which Urban Dead is based on. All the numbers are negotiable and more skills can be added to the tree.

Keep Votes

1. Author Keep - I kind of rushed this one so I may need to come up with a second version later. --Wfjeff 22:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
2. Keep However I dis-agree with you, Radios are border line useless, I don't care what anyone says.--Labine50 ^MH|^ME|^P 22:39, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
   • Re: - Hah touché --Wfjeff 02:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
3. Keep - That'd be nice. Also, the survivor should have to spend 1 extra AP to make another move.--Billy McGoggenhammer 22:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
   • Re: - I would definitely be okay with including that if other people think it's a good idea. --Wfjeff 02:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
4. Keep - XP wise, survivors get tagging, healing, reading books, etc. An equivalent zombie skill has been greatly needed for some time. -BrainsYummy 22:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
5. Gage, please dont vote. - If you do, you will probably spam this, and i think it is a good idea, worthy of implementation. --Poopman9 23:03, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
6. keep - gage voted, but he didnt vote "Spam"... A: the end times are coming! B: this may actually be an okay idea! --Kaminobob 23:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
7. Keep - Great idea. new zeds need a way of getting xp other than killing other zeds and finding survivors locked out of a safe house. --Ajforget 23:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
   • Re: - Yeah it's a pain trying to get XP as a low level zombie right now. That was the reason I started thinking about this in the first place. --Wfjeff 02:21, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
8. Keep "Eeeek!" Kevan may do the mechanics a tad different if it takes up too much memory, but if it doesn't all good. MrAushvitz 23:59, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
   • Re: - Yeah I posted this immediately after thinking it up and didn't really put as much thought into crunching numbers and streamlining as I usually do. I'm definitely open to suggestions for changes that might reduce server load or make for more logical percentages. --Wfjeff 02:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
9. Keep - Sounds good. I can definitely imagine "scare squads" of zeds following in the cade smashers and scaring all the survivors in a building.--J Muller 01:05, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
10. AAhhhh!! - Finally something a zombie can do beside kill! --Officer Johnieo 02:22, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
11. Awesome! - Although not too useful combat-wise, it gives zombies something interesting to do for experience. Sort of like how survivors have DNA scans. (No real tactical value but helps new players.) I also like the idea of it taking an extra AP to take that first action... it simulates freezing up at a critical moment. --Uncle Bill 02:30, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Re: - Yeah, I thought it was similar to DNA extraction as well. I think terrorize has combat value though during sieges though, and Gruesome Visage could help if you use it during live combat. I could up the percentages if that'd help too. A second vote for the extra AP too, if we get any more I may have to repost with that addition. --Wfjeff 03:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
12. The first one seems nice, as it will give a decent AP/XP for when a newbie just can't find a survivor to hit. And the second one would be a fun one to kick in for a higher-level zombie when they break into a safehouse and they get bored of infecting people. So yeah, neat. --ExplodingFerret 06:39, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
13. change realtime terror only, please. Asheets 17:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
    

Kill Votes

1. I like Gruesome Visage, but not Terrorize. This would only be useful in real time combat, so I don't see how terrorize would be useful considering the fact that you would be scaring people who are APed out inside a building. Also, this suggestion is very similar to this one.--Gage 23:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
   • Re: - Yeah, Terrorize is designed mostly for newbie zeds and loses some of its usefulness at higher levels. For clarification though, the effect lasts for the next 5 AP spent so it would still be useful the same way headshot is useful, mostly just as a way of sticking it to the Man. Besides, it would still be somewhat useful in siege situations, and it would make for a very scary time inside the building. About that link, that's quite a coincidence, I hadn't seen that suggestion. Theirs sucks though, and they used the lamer spelling of the word terrorize. --Wfjeff 23:33, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
2. Kill - More info please. How do you get cured from being terrorized? --Wikidead 01:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
   • Re: - It's in the third paragraph. The effect only lasts for 5 turns. This is supposed to represent the survivor being a little shaken after the encounter so once they use 5 AP their mind is off it and they're fine. --Wfjeff 02:10, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
     • Re to Re: Ah, I see. That wasn't so clear because you used the words "turns" instead of "AP". Still, I'm not too fond of altering other people's percentages. --Wikidead 06:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
3. Kill Eh..I like that fear can actually exist in the real world and forces survivors to say, flee a mall and hasten it's collapse. Besides, I don't think this would really help zombies all that much. --Jon Pyre 01:34, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
   • Re: There's no reason why the actual characters shouldn't show the effects of that fear though. It's mostly helpful for lower level zombies right now but other skills can be added to the same skill tree. If you think it isn't useful in the current state I would consider upping the percentages to something more substantial like 20%. Is that what you meant by useful? --Wfjeff 02:10, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

   • Re Well, my character wouldn't. He's a fearless member of C4NT and butters his bread with battle. Seriously, little bits of zombie brain on the toast. --Jon Pyre 03:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

4. Kill - Auto attack from OUTSIDe of a BARRICADED building. No, just no. (Unless survivors can now magically shoot out from behind barricades) Plus, do you really expect to terrify a level 42 Zombie Hunter?? Rolo Tomasi 02:37, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
   • Re: - Okay, seriously, you have to actually READ the suggestion before you vote. Nothing about this resembles an auto attack. It's not even an attack, really, it doesn't do any damage. Heck, the description doesn't even have physical contact. And maxed out zed hunters don't take brain rot so they are level 41. Why couldn't a level 42 zombie scare them? --Wfjeff 03:24, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
   • Re: - It is a zed OUTSIDE a building affecting the play of survivors INSIDE a building. It ignores barricades. Also, I don't care what level a Zombie Hunter is; 41, 42, or 385. Also, why would a young zombie pick this over a combat skill or Memory of Life skill which is more useful to them,and why would an older zed care enough to take this to begin with? Rolo Tomasi 05:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
5. Not bad. As other said, Terrorize doesn't seem all that useful. Whether or not people are APed out, the zombie is outside and the survivors inside, so the penalties for being afraid are negated. What about, instead, the target suffers a penalty to searching? Also, it seems to me that Zombie Hunters should get a bonus against this. After all, they wouldn't be as scared, would they?--Pesatyel 02:49, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
   • Re: - Why thank you for being so polite, unlike some voters. Actually, the primary usefulness of terrorize is for the XP, much like DNA extracting. The penalty is very useful in siege situations though, when survivors leave the building to attack or when the building is breached. And since you phrased it so reasonably, of course I would consider adding a bonus against it for Zombie Hunters if that'll get me your keep vote and no one objects. --Wfjeff 03:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

   Well, the "Gruesome Visage" has a direct impact that is difficult to avoid. The "Terrorize" can be easily avoided simply by barricading searching, reloading or even talking. That's why I suggested the search penalty.--Pesatyel 08:04, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

6. In agreement with all that voted kill. --Axe Hack 04:56, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
7. Kill - Goes through barricades so yeah, not good.--Mr yawn 06:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
8. LOVE the concept, but it's the details... There are two problems I have with this: 1) It buffs melee attacks (which don't need it) and weakens firearms twice as much (which are just barely as good as melee weapons as it is) 2) Those status effects work through barricades 3) It works on zombie hunters (who shouldn't be affected psychologically by anything a zombie does). If you removed the status effects I wouldn't mind the fact that it works through barricades and affects zombie hunters and would vote keep. Heck, if you fixed any of those three problems I would probably vote keep. --Reaper with no name ^TJ! 00:22, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
   • Re: - Thanks, but I need clarification: 1) The buff to melee attacks is so newbies with low percentages don't get screwed, but how are melee weapons better than firearms which have a much higher damage per AP? 2) The effects of terrorize are so marginal and it's not an attack since it doesn't do damage. I understand the concern, but what could I change without scrapping the concept? 3) You only have to be level 10 to be a zombie hunter which most people are, so if they were immune the skill would suck. Besides, everybody gets caught off guard once in a while. I can reduce the duration to 2 AP instead of 5 for them and change the flavor text so they're not pissing their pants, they're just a little shaken. Deal? --Wfjeff 18:40, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
9. Kill - It is not just X-Ray vision, in that it tells an outside zombie who is inside and has been scared, it's an attack on the survivor, through the barricades. The fact that that attack is a drain on their hit percentages doesn't make it not an attack. How would players who run zombies feel about a skill which gives a survivor XP, drains zombies' bite percentage and works from inside a barricaded building? --Nosimplehiway
   • Re: - Touché. I clearly have to rework the Terrorize skill. What about Gruesome Visage though? Your critique doesn't address that part. --Wfjeff 10:36, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
10. Kill - sorry, but I think the skill tree's good as it is. We don't need another Scent Fear or whatever. Daniel Hicken 06:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Re - These skills are completely different from Scent Fear. Are you suggesting that we should stop trying to come up with new skills? I think you may find you're in a pretty small minority on that one. --Wfjeff 10:36, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
11. Kill - You got me jumbled up but I admire the flavour it brings, the thing is the survivors have now been chopping up zombies with axes for a year now and would have steady hands using guns. Not only that but when I read descriptions of people, they read they've been dead so many times that they act Just as much dead as alive cause they think what this again? This means experts can't be affected and this working on newbs would be griefing. I'm sorry but I don't see it having a future.--Wbleak24 06:53, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
    

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam --Funt Solo 08:48, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
   • Re: - How is this spam? --Wfjeff 23:03, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

---

Movement training

Mod Spaminated with 9 Spams, 7 Kill votes and no non author keeps. The author vote wasn't even signed.--Gage 03:21, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

---

Body Desecration

Spaminated with 10/14 Spam votes--Gage 03:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

---

Terrifying Groan

Removed by author for daily edit, needed a non-increased AP cost. Origional suggest_time=MrAushvitz 23:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

---