Suggestions/2nd-Jan-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

NT Research & Development (The Edit)

Timestamp: MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 02:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Type: "Zombie Specialist" Science Skill
Scope: Scientist: Level 10+ skill
Description: NT Research & Development

Appears under science skills tree as a sub-skill of NecroNet Access. Adds no benefits to your zombie character.

As an additional pre-requisite (like the Zombie Hunter skill): must be level 10 or higher to purchase. This, is in addition to where it fits on the science skills tree, so this one is even harder to obtain that Headshot.

Getting this skill would definately be faster to access if your starting class were a scientist, a bit longer as a civilian.. and not so quick as a millitary character. Anyone could get it, if they meet the pre-requisites.. but you have to work for it (limits abuse, takes longer to impliment into regular gameplay for a while.)

Game Mechanics:

Inside of a powered NT building: you can manufacture revive syringes for 17 AP. Just outside of a powered NT building: You can revive even a brain rotted zombie, for 15 AP!

  • -3 AP to manufacture revive syringes but only if inside a powered NT building and only if no zombies are present (delicate work...) So with this skill it would cost 17 AP per manufacture instead of 20 AP.
  • Reviving brain rot zombies: without this skill only if that zombie is inside a powered NT building (costs 10 AP and a revive needle), with this skill you can also do it to zombies just outside of your powered NT building but it will cost 15 AP (& a revive needle) to do so, but it grants 15 XP (instead of 10 XP) for reviving a brain rotted zombie! (Short range, high dose revive medication.. loses potency in a very short amount of time after you leave the lab.. just for RP purpouses.. "Whooo Hooo" keep it cold, keep it cold! Stick the zombie!")

Okay Mr A, maybe we won't have to kill you, today...

Ah, that's a relief, not sure anything can kill me yet, but here goes.

But this would be an excellent end skill for the scientist character.. not quite as effective 24/7 as the classic Headshot, but it does have it's advantages. Mainly this is intended to add some fun to the whole revive situation, make playing scientists fun, make killing scientists.. more fun.

This isn't meant to nerf rotters, hardly, rotters get to clog up revive points, and cause human survivors to waste revive needles (and 10 AP per use, zombies having fun screwing up survivors!) But what this does do is show that NecroTech has some new experimental medicines (short range, doesn't make it 50 feet from the damn lab before it's potency drops to a "regular" dose.) There are concerns that this will make rotter revive clinics easier to have, but then again, noone says other zombies aren't going to just ransack all these NT buildings anyways.

This could be a hell of a lot of fun to roleplay (fight over NT facilities, generators going up and down.. zombies and people in labcoats everywhere, quite thrilling actually.) Additionally, it adds to the whole Zombie VS NecroTech aspect of the game. Science VS.. whatever the hell makes zombies, zombies. As for regular gameplay, well, zombie hordes will hate NT even more.. yayyy. Everybody has another reason to fight! And more labcoats coming outside, to use their medicine to get some XP.. no free lunch so both sides are taken care of.

This would also make rotters still very effective, not taking away from their Brain Rot skill (already purchased)... however NT buildings themselves would be the one building they might consider risky. Even then, I imagine zombies will continue to pummel and ransack these facilities with zeal. But now zombies have yet another reason to get rid of a generator in a NT building. And any time a zombie wants to die, use the tower.. or end your turn outside so your bro's get some XP.. zombies helping zombies.

Combat revives are already a part of the game, has nothing to do with me. (So stop throwing pots and pans at me please.. they're so... loud.)

But, this does make NT buildings a bit more relevant other than just set-up and search. They are now more of a base of operations. It is possible some outside fronts of NT buildings may be considered official revive points. Then again, um, if you don't have brain rot.. chances are if you're outside a NT building, you just might get revived anyways.. so that doesn't really change anything per se. i wouldn't worry, graveyards can't be ransacked NT buildings can, and unless your zombie can tell which building is a NT building.. you'll probably be found over there, waiting for your weekly innoculation.

Note: I made it 2 benefits on 1 skill on purpouse, the pre-requisites aren't cheap. And that 17 AP for syringe manufacture is a very minor benefit, but less annoying than 20.. might save on server load so players can just make them if they want to rather than search. All good.

Keep Votes

  1. Author/Mad Scientists Keep The change I made with the edit was thanks to Reaper with no name (he gets some credit/blame if it goes through.. hee hee), so I made it possible to revive brain rots just outside the NT building as before but now costs +5 AP and gains +5 XP. That and I made the revive manufacture a bit less shitty 17 AP instead of 20 AP.. but you have to buy this skill to do it. MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 02:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Keep - Good idea.--Labine50 MH|ME|P 02:53, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. keep excellent idea and if the rotter doesn't agree then its the poor sod who stuck him who will no doubt pay the price! Oh and Gage; combat revives are a bad idea, but they are fun and given that many people hate the idea of being a Mhr cow they can (sometimes) work in your favour, they do if you get my caracters Bob or Ben!--Honestmistake 03:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Keep I play a zombie and combat revives are annoying. I've been tempted to buy brain rot but it'd be too hard to become a survivor again since finding an unbarricaded and powered NT and getting revived before someone smashes the generator is pretty unlikely. This way I'd be safe from combat revives but able to switch back without winning the lottery. --Jon Pyre 03:17, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  5. I don't really know what changed, but I'm handing in my Keep again. -Mark 03:57, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  6. Keep - As somebody who plays mostly brain-rotted zombie characters, I still like it. Combat revives seems a non-issue to me- they can already revive zombies that get inside, and really, who is going to leave a powered NT building to combat revive zombies standing outside of it? Besides, with a 37 Ap cost (12 to find syringe, 15 to revive), the "combat revive" is not any more effective than good old fashioned COMBAT. All a brain rot zombie needs to do to not get revived (outside of combat) is avoid "sleeping" in a NT building block. Big deal- wake up, walk a block, attack the NT building. {I did consider a different RP justification; Necrotech has managed to bring online the "revivication field generators" in their buildings, which greatly enhance the potency of any revivification syringes used in close proximity. Far fetched, but it would explain why a tech could walk up to a powered NT building, never enter it, pull out a 4 month old syringe, and revive a brain rotted zombie.} --Swiers 05:47, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  7. Keep - I voted keep last time, and now I'm doing it again.--J Muller 05:59, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Re I'd like to apologize to all voters (keep, kills, even spams), something this important deserved to be worded and defined 100% before submission-age. MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 06:04, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  8. Keep - I'm actually a fan of combat revives...Conndrakamod TDHPD CFT 06:47, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  9. Keep - Same reasons at the first version. --Preasure 09:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  10. Keep - Its hardly combat reviving- its more a help to revive people who bought brain rot and changed their minds. Much better. Anyway it serves the zombie right for standing outside a powered NT Building. --MarieThe Grove 13:26, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  11. Keep - In a world where it often costs only 1 AP for a zombie to stand up and 11 thousand zombies can fight 23 thousand survivors to a stand still, combat revives are not only not bad, they are are a necessity. Zombies are overpowered. Way overpowered. I mean, like, the Soviet Union invading Latvia overpowered. Anything that helps balance that is a good thing. --Nosimplehiway 15:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  12. Keep - --Deras 16:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  13. keep Combat Revive Eligible Society loves combat revives, but wouldn't neccesarily do it to a rotter. Even so, we vote yes here. Asheets 17:05, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  14. Keep - I said in the other revision why I liked it, so i can't be bothered repeating myself here. Suffice to day that I feel it is not a large enough tweak to trigger a game imbalance. --Ducis DuxSlothTalk 02:07, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  15. Keep firstly, shadowscope: then the zombies step inside and fire off the 25 fully loaded shotguns they'd each been carrying, and incenerate the generator and radio with two punches before jumping out the window to begin smashing at the barricads again. yes, they were DEFINETLY defeted. This would give rotters some reason to carry items other than flak jackets. --AlexanderRM 7:57 PM, 5 January 2007 (EST)

Kill Votes
Get your hands off me, you damn, dirty, zombie!

  1. Kill - I liked the first version better. --Wikidead 03:32, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Okay I guess, but isn't searching STILL better? And how is this a "combat revive?" EDIT: Thanks Shadowscope. I think I just have a "different" definition of combat revive. If the zombie is just standing there, it is just a revive but if he is attacking you and you revive him, then THAT is a combat revive. There IS a difference. And don't discount the AP cost.--Pesatyel 04:08, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. Kill - Was gonna vote keep because rotters would be surprised, but then I remembered that if I was a rotter I would just enter the building by foot and unload my reemergence shotguns on everybody inside. - Terra 13:14, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Kill Reviving a rotter is a no-no. --User:Bassander 8:14, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. * Gage hits MrAushvitz with a frying pan to remind him that combat revives are a bad thing.--Gage 02:59, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. To pestayal...A Lot of Brain-Rotted Zombies lay seige to Powered NT Building. Scientists pops out and revive all of them. Congrats, the Humans defeated the Zombies!--ShadowScope 04:25, 2 January 2007 (UTC)EDIT: Oh, and Mr.A, you'd probarly be better off just linking over to the actual voting rather than edit and change it. No point, I believe. The same people who vote Spam will vote Spam. The same who vote Keep will vote Keep--ShadowScope 04:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Re God I hope so, I had more keeps than I had spams and kills. But yes you all have valid points, I'm just making it possible but easier for the zombies to pull off a time on the live side, and easier for survivor scientists to do the impossible. All good, when you think about how pretty weak it is to be honest. MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 05:04, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. Spam - Super Combat revive madness. --Grim s-Mod U! 04:26, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Spam - The idea of having an alternative in Brain Rot clinics that instead of giving free access to your precious genny for dangerous undead beings is somewhat atractive, but the fact that this shape of the concept totally nerfes Necrotech combat and boosts combat revives (that as a Survivor may seem a fair tactic but as a Zombie is kinda bothersome) makes it REALLY overpowered. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC☺T☺+1 07:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  5. Spammage - the 15AP Syringe Manufacture suggestion in Peer Reviewed takes care of part one of your suggestion, at a lower cost and without the need for a skill. The reason you can revive inside a powered NT is due to all the specialised equipment - what roleplay explains how that now works outside the NT building? So, this is Dupe/Magic. Pointless. --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 10:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Re CNR ~ Sorry, I covered why it works for RP purpouses in the suggestion.. better medicine but it doesn't make it 50 feet from the lab before it loses potency. So that ain't magic, just the limitations of the needle.MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 14:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Yeah, like I said, it's magic. --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 15:09, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  6. Spam - Reviving rotters outside a powered NT building...sorry, still a dumbass idea. Like Funt Solo said, it's magic. --Aeneid 21:17, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  7. Spam -- From what I understood I can come with a month old syringe and just stand outside a powered NT and stab a zed with brainrot and it works which makes no sense with your "keep it cold". This should only work with a syringe made in the powered NT just before you stepped outside and stabbed the zed (hard to make work.. maybe make the syringe only valid on brainrotters for two moves after creation and outside powered NT's, I don't know much of the mechanics) but I can't find anything saying so here. Point out to me where it says so and I might reconcider. -- Whitehouse 23:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Burn XP For Glorious Battles

Timestamp: Jon Pyre 03:50, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Type: Several Skills
Scope: Players Who've Been Around For a While
Description: XP just piles up and there's no use for it. I think I have 5000 spare xp. This isn't an entirely new idea but I suggest letting people burn some xp for temporary boosts in different areas. This wouldn't be used by newbies but instead by advanced players with nothing to spend their stash of xp on. You'd only use these during major battles and sieges, times when you want an extra edge. Each boost would cost 100xp to use and last for 24 hours, and each different boost would need to be unlocked by buying a different skill for it. You could use several different boosts at once, but each would cost a seperate 100xp. You could not use the same bonus more than once in the 24 hour period. To toggle the boost you'd use a drop-down menu listing all your available options. You be able to tell which boosts you had currently active since the skill for ones being used would be tinted yellow on the "buy skills" page.

These below skills are only examples of what could use in this 100xp for 24hours of benefit model, and could be altered or replaced at Kevan's discretion. When voting for the suggestion don't do it in support or in opposition to these specific examples since it's unlikely anyone could suggest eight skills worthy of being passed in one suggestion. I doubt that even if Kevan acepted the idea he'd implement these specific ones. The vote is on just the idea of burning 100xp for a 24 hour bonus, and the following list is just to illustrate what kind of stuff you could do with that concept. I was only able to think of four examples for each side but in theory there's no limit to the number of bonuses there could be.

Survivor Boosts

  • Rousing Speech: Increases the amount of text you can say each time you speak by 50%.
  • Steady Hand: Accuracy with firearms increases by 5%.
  • Endurance: Raises your maximum health by 5 and gives you 5 health.
  • Close Combat: Knife accuracy is increased by 20% (making it slightly better than the axe if you've maxed out all your skills, 14 damage per 10AP spent attacking compared to 12 damage per 10 AP.)

Zombie Boosts

  • Frantic Grab: Odds of a successful hand attack when you are not holding someone with Tangling Grasp go up by 5%.
  • Feeding Frenzy: Bite attacks increase in accuracy by 5%. If you have Digestion it restores 6 health instead of 4.
  • Regeneration: When under 25hp if your last action was a successful bite attack on a survivor you'll regain 1hp every half an hour until you reach 25hp.
  • Inhuman Hearing Allows you to hear Feeding Groans from as far as 10 spaces.

You wouldn't use these every day unless you'd want to quickly expend all your experience points. And it wouldn't help earn the experience. Even bonuses that could somewhat increase your rate of xp gain by upping your attack % wouldn't be enough to offset the 100 point cost (alternatively bonuses that raise attack percentages could have xp costs higher than 100). When would these be used? For major sieges, events, and epic group battles where pride is on the line. It'd be worth it to spend 200xp you have no use for and give 110% percent to the cause.

  • Note- Voters have pointed out that zombies often earn xp at a slower rate and might deserve a cheaper cost to activate some of their boosts. Additionally they've suggested that boosts that could increase your xp gain rate by raising attack % be made more expensive to offset that gain.

Keep Votes

  1. Keep Clear your mind of distractions, clear your account of unneeded xp, prepare for battle, and fight for your ticket to Valhalla! --Jon Pyre 03:59, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Keep- I like it. I've got 2500 odd xp just piled up, and this would help with that for sure.--Grigori 04:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. It sounds reasonable. -Mark 04:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Burn XP to go berzerk? Could be fun, so long as it costs more XP than it would grant you with the bonuses, number crunchers please show up and slap up your vote for us lazy assed voters. "Olaf... go Berzerk.. it's the latest rage." MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 05:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  5. Keep - Excellent...--J Muller 06:05, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  6. Keep - One of the better suggestions like it to be suggested.--Labine50 MH|ME|P 06:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  7. Keep - Conndrakamod TDHPD CFT 06:49, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  8. Keep - Excellent. Just the edge for siege situations. --Preasure 09:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  9. Keep OMGDON'TGIVEANYNEWSKILLSORIT'LLNERFTEHN00BS. *ahem* The rationale that making veterans more powerful than new players is unfair doesn't quite strike right with me. Again, I fully support the general idea behind this- since when were concrete numbers ever implemented by Kevan anyways? --Karloth Vois RR 14:05, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  10. Keep - I have not run the numbers, but this boost might pay back the XP spent, so I am hesitantly voting keep. If it boosted non-combat skills (say, things like search percentages and barricade busting odds), it would be a strong, strong keep. Oh, and keeping things "fair" for the newbies has the perhaps unintended effect of helping zergers.--Nosimplehiway 15:08, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  11. Keep this would be great! I myself am not an advanced player yet (being at level 8) however in about two months I could have already maxed out my stats and I know that the maxed out players would love this!Darkvengance 17:21, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  12. Keep But add the note Grim said for zombie skills --Deras 17:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  13. Keep This is a very good suggestoin. I actually like it. --Axe27 19:30 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  14. Keep --'STER-Talk-ModP! 19:41, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  15. Keep - Yes.--Canuhearmenow Hunt! 20:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  16. Keep - Because no one cares about noobs! Moderately good idea. --Peterblue 21:08, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  17. Keep - Something like this should be implemented to slow the disruption that the current XP surplus system creates whereby a large portion of Malton's population upgrades instantaneously every time a new permanent skill emerges. Oh, and it sounds fun too. --IrradiatedCorpse 21:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  18. Keep - I like the general idea, but more xp should be burned for these boosts than a suggested 100 --Aeneid 21:21, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  19. Keep - Because I like it. -- Schizmo 23:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  20. Keep, but change the zombie skills - They're either overpowered or unuseful. I liked the temporary boosts to bite and tangling grasp, but the other two wouldn't work. Restoring HP with just one bite wouldn't be a good thing. How about a boost against barricade attacks (pretty small, though), or a wider range in speech?Waluigi Freak 99 00:30, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  21. Keep - Love it! HZH 20:58, 16 Jan 2007 (UTC)

Kill Votes

Define "advanced players" and you've got my keep. Players who have all skills minus Brain Rot? Players who have all their side's skills minus brain rot for zombies? Players who are level 22+? What? -Mark 04:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)} Like I said, changing. -Mark 04:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Re An advanced player is anyone who has enough xp that they're willing to use it up in huge chunks for a temporary benefit. There would be no minimum level to use this, just you wouldn't want to until you've bought all the normal skills first and started accruing extra xp. --Jon Pyre 04:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  1. I am sorry that I will have to kill this, because it is an awesome idea. The problem is the fact that I believe you can gain back your 100 XP just by having combat boosts. Someone needs to crunch some numbers, but the high accuracy, will, in the long run, help to pay off the 100XP cost, making you able to use profit and stockpile MORE XP. This means that one can, theoritcally, gain a permenant boost, and not temporary as per what the suggestion calls for. The fix? Get rid of the combat boosts.--ShadowScope 04:20, 2 January 2007 (UTC) EDIT: struck out the Kill vote for Mark because you changed your vote to Keep, and wanted to make the page cleaner, as well as saving Mark time.
    • Re I added a line to the last paragraph suggestion, different from the original draft on the talk page, saying that bonuses that give combat boosts (and thus xp gain boosts) could be given a higher cost to activate. Maybe 150? Maybe 200? This is all in support of a general concept instead of a specific skill or change so I apologize for having some hazy areas.--Jon Pyre 04:25, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
      • Re: I still believe that just increasing the XP cost is not good. You vioalte the protocols of having all skills cost the same amount of XP. And I maintain that even with increasing the XP cost, it is still possible to gain back the XP (and a bit more) through combat. You have to get rid of the combat boosts, I fear. The rest of the suggestion I most likely would KEEP.--ShadowScope 04:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Kill - Humans gain exp more easily than zombies, Naturally this means humans get more bonuses. On top of that i just dont like the idea of temporary boosts. --Grim s-Mod U! 04:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Re I can't do anything about your dislike of temporary boosts, but perhaps zombie boosts could have a cheaper cost to activate to compensate for their slower rate of xp gain. If you change your vote to keep or any keep voters request it I'll make a note on the suggestion saying that voters would like different costs for different bonuses.--Jon Pyre 04:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. Kill - As if having maxed out your skills isn't enough to give veteran players a clear advantage over newbies, you now suggest that veterans should have a chance to get even better. - BzAli 04:53, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Re Why should xp stop being useful? This will help those newbies out too. Someday they'll be players with 5,000 extra xp and they'll be glad of this feature. I don't think the game should be made suckier just because you can't do everything the first week you join. New changes shouldn't screw newbies (Like a skill for survivors to walk through EH barricades, which would get rid of all entry points for newbies), but having something for newbies to work for is good. --Jon Pyre 05:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Kill - Sorry, I like the general idea, but some of the details make me vote kill. I think 100XP is too small of a cost to gain the boost, 200 or 300 would be more appropriate. I also think being able to obtain all four boosts at the same time is quite overpowering. Only being able to have 1 boost in a 24 hour period would be more balanced. Sorry for not putting the previous line on the talk page. --Zombie slay3r 13:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  5. kill, requesting mods I like the idea but the numbers don't add up right. Asheets 17:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  6. Kill - So this would be burning XP to kill and gain more XP? No thanks. Besides, with 50 AP, I can talk to my heart's content even without the "Rousing Speech." --Wikidead 02:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  7. Kill, and change I know those specific ones probably won't be used, but none of them work. none of the survivor abilities are actually useful while the zombie ones would anihilate-and on top of that, your saying zombies should get these for less xp. I think not. note: when they acctually have survivors in front of them, zombies gain xp faster. zombies need to learn to work together, otherwise they don't deserve to be equal with survivors. make equal costs and make the survivor ones more useful, and you have my vote. also, the combat boosts woulden't actually increase XP gain, exept possibly the zombie ones. +5% accuracy with shot gun: 10 extra XP per hit for maximum (sligtly over it, acctually) of 50 attacks: 25 extra XP per 100 XP. --AlexanderRM 8:17 PM, 5 January 2007 (EST)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. Spam - First, these kind of bonuses are going to be used only ocasionally by everyone but the classic trenchcoater survivor, meaning that if you actually are useful to your kind (survivors reviving and barricading or zombies knocking doors) you are less likely to be using them often, as you hoard less XP. Second, the concept itself of using XP to buy temporal boosts was already presented to the suggestions page, and it sucks. Try to have fun, not to differentiate yourself from the newbies even more. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC☺T☺+1 07:45, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Spam - rare does not equal balanced. You're talking about creating super-players. Plus, you say that ALL the skills could be taken at the same time, so for 400XP I could turn myself into uber-survivor, and with a stash of 4000XP, I could do that for 10 days straight. This is overpowered. --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 10:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Re None of these skills are superpowerful. They're all just minor enhancements to existing abilities. This would hardly create superplayers. And sure you could be slightly better for 10 days straight but you'd only be able to do it once a year. --Jon Pyre 11:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Re - That was another of your pointless replies to a vote. You made all your points in your suggestion - repeating them won't make me change my mind about your overpowered suggestion. If you're going to offer nothing new, then why bother replying? (That was a rhetorical question.) --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 13:20, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  3. Let's not make it harder on the newbies. --Joe O'Wood TALKCONTRIBSUD 12:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  4. Oh God - Newbies are people too you know! - Terra 13:19, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Suggestions/2nd-Jan-2007&oldid=1481924"