Suggestions/30th-Apr-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

Gruesome Spatter

Timestamp: 01:19, 30 April 2006 (BST)
Type: New Zombie Skill
Scope: Your zombie dies messily, on occasion covering spraypainted messages in blood, entrails and bile.
Description: Gruesome Spatter

Appears under zombie skills tree just under memories of life, has no benefits for your human character. Has no additional prerequisites.

Your zombie has this tendancy, on ocassion, to die rather messily. There is a 1% chance whenever you die to a pistol shot or a fireaxe, and a 3% chance when you die to a shotgun blast that your character's death leaves a disgusting spray of blood, bile and entrails all over the nearby spraypainted message. Rendering it unreadable.

Player who just killed you reads: "Your killing blow inadvertently coated the nearby message in this zombie's blood and entrails. The message is now illegible."

Your zombie reads: "With your death, a message of the living has been lost!"

Need:

It isn't really needed, but just a very disgusting way to rid the streets of the "STREETS". I did some research, many zombie anti-message skills have been attempted, this one is more in genre. However, it is a messy way to mess with human non-verbal communication.

SPLAT!

Votes

  1. Keep- Why the hell not? Besides, in high killing zones it makes sense that it costs a bit more AP to ocassionally wash the walls and repaint your favorite message. My main reason for suggesting, adds to the mess in Malton. --MrAushvitz 01:19, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  2. Keep - what the hell. I feel crazy today. I'll go with it.--'STER-Talk-Mod 01:35, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  3. Keep - I was going to spam it since it is the day of spam,but actually this suggestion is not bad. Maybe it is because its too late now or somethihng...:s.--Changchad 01:37, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  4. Keep - Somewhat useless. After 100 deaths, you erase only one Spraypaint message? And what if you are in an area without a spraypaint message? Ouch. Still, I like it, and I am going to vote KEEP.--ShadowScope 02:01, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  5. Keep Why not, a little more flavour KyleTravis 01:59, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  6. Keep Definitely great, but I'd recommend that Kevan increase the percentages by 5x. -Wyndal (talk)-(W!)-(SGP) 02:05, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  7. Keep I like it, and the fact that the zombie has to die makes it hard to grief with it. -HamsterNinja 02:05, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  8. Keep - Why not? I don't mind the % being low, otherwise paint would be useless in a mall siege. --Norcross 02:12, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  9. Spam - This is ridiculously nonsensical. Not only does this have a chance of deleting key information (Revive point 4N anyone), it's a waste of code. I realize server issues are not an adequate spam vote, but come on. Tokakeke 02:27, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  10. Keep - There should be some sort of message in place of the usual spraypaint text explaining that the walls are covered in corpse bits. --Dickie Fux 02:57, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  11. Keep - Seems to me zombies would want to delete key survivor information. Currently, there's no way to do so. This provides a flavorful means for doing do without it becoming too common. Good one, MrA. --John Ember 02:58, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  12. Spam - This makes Knife Combat look good. - CthulhuFhtagn 02:58, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  13. Keep - The critics agree: lawl, splatter pattern. --Undeadinator 03:40, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  14. Spam - This doesnt make sense at all. You can just wipe blood off. --Grim s-Mod 03:47, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re- You wipe the infected blood off man, I ain't cleaning that! Besides, it would be fun to go "oops" when you splatter some zombie all over the side of a building (near the message anyways), come on, you'd find that cool from time to time. --MrAushvitz 06:02, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  15. KEEP - Grim, blood dries. Very quickly. How do you think we get scabs? Anyway, cool suggestion. Mattiator 04:02, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re you're kidding right? take a 6th grade science class. Blood clots because of platelets. Zombies do not have platelets. They are dead. Platelets would not clot on a splatter on a wall. Hurrrrrrrr--Mpaturet 05:13, 30 April 2006 (BST)
      • Re - They teach zombie biology in sixth grade science? --John Ember 05:35, 30 April 2006 (BST)
        • Re - No, but they do teach what happens to a body after death. Which is what a zombie is. A dead body. --Cyberbob240CDF - Arb - W! 06:05, 30 April 2006 (BST)
          • Re - Hey... hey guys... don't worry about whether this works in reality. Zombies don't really exist. --Ron Burgundy 06:29, 30 April 2006 (BST)
            • Re - Yeah, and blood will dry up anyways without the platelets due to evaporation, but to think about it, there won't be so much blood that it can actually cover anything. --Changchad 13:56, 30 April 2006 (BST)
              • Notice - Re is only supposed to be used by authors and the person being REed. --Swmono talk - W! - SGP 15:16, 30 April 2006 (EST)
  16. Spam - Further thought (never leave home without it!) led me to the conclusion that this, in fact, is incredibly stupid. --Cyberbob240CDF - Arb - W! 05:37, 30 April 2006 (BST) Keep - Hilarious! --Cyberbob240CDF - Arb - W! 04:32, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re- Wow, you really liked it, now you hate it.. okay... --MrAushvitz 06:04, 30 April 2006 (BST)
      • Re - I still think it's hilarious... except now in a stupid way. Like a monkey who's on drugs. --Cyberbob240CDF - Arb - W! 06:07, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  17. Kill Stupid--Mpaturet 05:11, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  18. Kill -I don't mind the slight chance to mar tags, but the flavor of this one seems a bit...off. The gore/splatterpunk tone doesn't quite jive with the world of UD as I see it. Just because UD is under the vague "zombie-apocalypse" genre-heading, it doesn't mean you can shoehorn every idea from every zombie movie you've seen.--Xavier06 05:29, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re- We got players currently headshotting zombies all the time, this is only one more step in the same direction. Not far off from what already exists. --MrAushvitz 05:56, 30 April 2006 (BST)
      • Re - Yes, I know gore and blood is implied in the game. I know that when I shoot a zombie in the head, it isn't a discrete flesh wound that fells the unholy abomonation. It's all a matter of wording choice and storytelling. The current tone of the game doesn't shy away from the fact that you are in a day-to-day struggle in a town in perpetual chaos, but it doesn't need extra gore to act as the exclamation marks on its point. I liked Dead Alive too; I have a pretty strong stomach. But shoving this kinda, dare I say, slapsticky blood 'n' guts in my face just saps the grim survival tone of UD. If you wanna start your own zombie-apocalypse MMORPG where every kill results in anime-volume fountains of blood (of varying colors) and survivors wield lawn-mowers to get them through the zombie mobs, go right ahead...I'm sure it'll do great. But let's keep the core aesthetic of UD serious...as a heart attack. Clarification: Said it before, not opposed to the mechanic of the idea, just the flavor *wink, wink*--Xavier06 11:44, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  19. Kill - I don't like it. It may delete important messages. --Abi79 The Abandoned 06:35, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  20. Keep - keep more Gore. Conndraka 06:37, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  21. Spam - Too rare to be much use, too annoying when it works. I been poppin my spam. -Banana¯\(o_º)/¯Bear 06:52, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  22. Kill - The only place you'd really see this effect in a decent amount would be prolonged sieges, which would be easy to spray the message right back on. Velkrin 07:22, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  23. Kill Now you're really reaching. --Jon Pyre 08:14, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  24. Keep - I don't know why everyone is so worked up about it. The messages can be replaced easily any way. - Jedaz 09:08, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 14 Keeps, 5 Kills, 5 Spams/Dupes -- 12:21, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  25. Spam - Stupid Idea. --Cinnibar 13:03, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  26. Keep - I love it. *laughs* --ramby T--W! - SGP 13:15, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  27. Kill - doesn't actually do anything, for every 50 zombies killed in a safehouse (average AP spend at least 1500) you need to spent 1 AP repainting a message. In that time you've had about 50 spam messages replaced. really: why?--Vista W! 13:22, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  28. Keep - Its a Keeper. oh well. Its a Flavor suggestion that does somehting. go for it. Nazreg 16:23, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  29. Keep - I like it; hope it gets implemented at a higher percentage rate, and a message about a gory mess of gizzards covering the wall. --WibbleBRAINS 16:53, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  30. Kill - I see no reason to keep this. I don't have a specific reason to vote kill and wouldn't mind a bit if it did pass - but I'd like to keep the Peer Reviewed Section full of good ideas that would make gameplay better for all. DavidMalfisto 17:57, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  31. Spam - Ridiculous in effect and useless -- do we really need spraypaint message degradation? Per implementation, zombies have to buy a passive skill that a survivor activates in order to help them remove "STREETS IS WATCHING" from Malton? No thanks. This is a survivor buff by virtue of giving zombies a useless skill. --ism MotA - R'sR 17:44, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  32. Kill Sorry but I've been advised that my vote should be a kill because I think there should be changes. If you make a few changes, I'd definetly say its a keep Krazy Monkey 18:17, 30 April 2006 (BST) Keep - I like it BUT I think it should have a few changes made to it.
  33. Spam - Too rare to bother putting in. - Tirion529 19:38, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  34. Keep - Why not? I don't see what you guys are getting worked up about, it won't happen often. --Swmono talk - W! - SGP 15:20, April 30 2006 (EST)
  35. Keep - The overall suggestion is interesting, and at the bare minimum just seeing The blast from your shotgun splatters the zombie would be amusing to see. --Darkstar949 20:24, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  36. Keep - You're gettin ready to blow? I'm a mushroom-cloud-layin' motherfucker motherfucker!! Every time my fingers touch brain I'm "Superfly T.N.T." I'm the "Guns of Navarone." I'm what Jimmie Walker used to talk about!!! In fact, what the fuck am I doin in the back? You're the motherfucker should be on brain detail. We're tradin. I'm washin windows and you're pickin up this nigga's skull!! --- Jules in "Pulp Fiction" Dickus Maximus 21:17, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  37. Kill - I like the idea, but 1%/3%? Too low. Maybe 5%/8% instead?--Pesatyel 23:54, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  38. keep - percentages need boosting to 5 and 15 --xbehave 01:13, 1 May 2006 (BST)
  39. Keep - mmmm. funny, flavorful. why not? --Bulgakov 15:54, 3 May 2006 (BST)
  40. Keep - Ok, I normaly kill changes to Spraypaint, but ... as it occurs via death and is not the result of a zombies expenditure of AP I'm with it. --Spraycan Willy MalTel 07:00, 4 May 2006 (BST)
  41. Keep - Fun, Flavourful, doesn't unbalance or break anything. -- Mettaur 17:11, 7 May 2006 (BST)
  42. Keep - Yes! I hope this gets implemented with a bit higher percentage rate and a message like spraypaint messages. "There is a large splotch of brain and blood on the wall" I love it! -Monkeylord 03:23, 13 May 2006 (BST)
  43. Kill - Not really worth 100 xp --Toejam 14:36, 13 May 2006 (BST)

Nails

Ooops. I guess I frogot I already submitted it. Sorry. Mattiator 04:01, 30 April 2006 (BST)

Wrench (Revision)

Withdrawn by author. Mattiator 20:55, 30 April 2006 (BST)

Mindless Scavenging

Spam with 10 Spam votes out of 13. --Brizth M T 09:22, 30 April 2006 (BST)

Dropping (revision 3)

Something about dropping stuff out of windows. Was kind of crap. 7 spams and one author Keep. And Grim, please try to be more modly.--'STER-Talk-Mod 05:54, 30 April 2006 (BST)

I was merely making an observation and comparison of suggestion quality. --Grim s-Mod 06:33, 30 April 2006 (BST)

Rend Clothing

Timestamp: 05:11, 30 April 2006 (BST)
Type: Skill
Scope: Humans and zombies
Description: A zombie lurches up to the human, and wraps its arms around them. The human struggles, and hits the zombie over the head with his lucky fire axe. The zombies staggers back, it's claws still intertwined in the humans bulletproof vest. With a loud tearing noise, the vest gives way, and the zombie collapses with the survivors vest clutched in it's grimy claws. This skill is for zombies to be able to, for 5 AP, attempt to destroy the Flak Jacket of a survivor who they have entagled with at a 15% chance (+5% for each of the zombies claw skills {rend flesh, death grip}). The attempt, successful or not, makes the zombie lose their grip. This really has no more effect then temporarily annoying the survivor, seeing as the zombies can't deal more then 4 damage.

Votes

  1. Keep Author Vote. -- Jorge 05:11, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  2. Spam - Just plain stupid. - CthulhuFhtagn 05:19, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  3. Kill I like the basic premise but as you said, it's essentially useless--Mpaturet 05:20, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  4. Spam - "Hey guys, get this! That zombie ripped my flak jacket off, but didn't have the energy to kill me! Let's all laugh at it!" *laughs* --Cyberbob240CDF - Arb - W! 05:22, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  5. Spam - Leave other people inventories alone. --Grim s-Mod 05:42, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  6. Spam Tastes like grief! --Zaruthustra-Mod 06:01, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  7. Kill- I'm all for half naked survivors running around Malton, just not zombies doing the stripping of them. Stripper zombies, agh, jesus, someone save me from my mind "aieeee!" (Jumps out window.) * Note: I'd rather see it done like this: zombie temporarily nullifies flak jacket until said survivor comes online and puts it back on (1 AP), item is not lost, just suspened for a time due to zombie enthusiasm/lust (memories of life this skill?) --MrAushvitz 06:08, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  8. Kill Though MrA's idea- zombies humping flak jackets off survivors- would be quite entertaining. --Cerebrus13 06:13, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  9. Kill - I thought this would be a stripper suggestion. I am very disappointed. --John Ember 06:13, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  10. Kill -Don't mess with people's items! Mr. A's nullify idea would make it a Keep, for me anyway. Sure, it's a griefing skill, but survivors get, ya know, HeadShot. Wait, cancel that. Kill all the way. Why the hell would a Zombie care about a flak jacket? It's griefy for the survivor, an utter waste o' time for the Zed. That's Lose-Lose for those keeping score. Final note: Jorge, if you're new to this suggestion game (and I can't say that I've seen you around a lot), I didn't mean to be dump on your suggestion. Keep on trying suggestions, though you might want to workshop them on the discussion page first...--Xavier06 06:29, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  11. Kill - --Steel Hammer 06:32, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  12. Kill - Can I get a picture of that Hot Now Naked Amime Chick running around? BTW messing with peoples inventory is a BAD thing --Technerd 06:34, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  13. Spam - chicken chicken.. chicken head -Banana¯\(o_º)/¯Bear 06:50, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  14. Kill Why would zombies want to destroy an item that mainly benefits zombies? --Jon Pyre 08:16, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  15. Kill - Make it automatic when the zombie kills a survivor. Underpowered Headshot. -Wyndal (talk)-(W!)-(SGP) 10:20, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  16. Spam - I'll decide when I want to throw away an item. -- Buncy T GBP 12:32, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  17. Spam - Griefing, flak jackes don't stop zombie attacks anyway. --Cinnibar 13:06, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  18. Spam -You do know that if this would ever be implemented, that ever zombie who'd have this would meet the cries of OMG PK-ER SPY! But why would zombies get a skill that not only doesn't benefit them, but that actually hurts the general zomby population?--Vista W! 13:40, 30 April 2006 (BST)\
  19. spam - OMFG, griefing. Spam day still happening? --Changchad 13:45, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  20. Spam - Grief. And don't write suggestions in the style of MrAushvitz, please. --Mookiemookie 15:55, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  21. Kill - Don't mess with other peoples inventorys. RWXSM 17:35, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  22. Spam LEAVE MY INVENTORY ALONE! And on a lighter note - if it takes more than 1 AP then your suggestion is stupidly overpowered and completely lacking in balance. DavidMalfisto 17:41, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Sorry about the Re rule breaking here, but I just have to ask this. If something takes more than 1 AP, how is it overpowered? Wouldn't it be underpowered? --Cyberbob240CDF - Arb - W! 17:45, 30 April 2006 (BST)
      • If something takes more than 1 AP then it takes more than 1 AP for a reason. The extra AP would be a "counter balance" that lets you do something unusal. If an action has an extra cost (such as spending more AP) then what you're trying to do must be too powerful to start off with. DavidMalfisto 22:11, 1 May 2006 (BST)
  23. Spam - Pointless. Inventory. Griefing. Unfun. --ism MotA - R'sR 17:49, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  24. Spam - After you typed the last sentence in your suggestion, did you expect any different? --Blahblahblah 18:26, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  25. Spam - Maybe if zombies can strip female characters. Then we'd really have a banaa gangbang. Until then, no.--Wifey 20:04, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  26. Spam - Survivors don't need to use Flak Jackets quite as much as zombies. Would this effect zombies in a ZK? My PKer gets himself zombified and goes after targets to steal their Flak Jackets, then gets revived.--Pesatyel 23:59, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  27. Kill -Before you make another brain dead (theres a pun there) sugestion, 1) think about it for a while 2)Make one to help survivors because the game is already giving zombies a huge advantage. We don't need one more thing to worry about. Labine50 02:07, 14 May 2006 (BST)

Useful Flare Idea

Timestamp: 09:20, 30 April 2006 (BST)
Type: Skill
Scope: Survivors
Description: Here's an idea to make flares useful by color coding them. The idea of color coded flares has been suggested before but here's a new take on an old idea. A survivor with the skill Signaling is skilled at using flares to communicate, and better at knowing where to find them. This doesn't translate to an increase chanced of finding flares, but when they do find a flare they find additional cartridges, allowing them to fire multiple colors of flares (although they'd only get the one flare message, and the flare gun would be used up as normal). Next to the button to fire a flare there would be a small text box they could input up to three letters into. They could enter R for Red, Y for Yellow, G for Green, B for Blue, W for White. Up three of these could be inputed in any order so you could have RYG, B, YWR, RW, GY, GGW, etc. This would hardly cause any clutter, being incorporated into the current message like this: A flare was fired 2w 4s (RWG).... If you don't enter any letters and fire the flare the current message is sent out without any colors specified. This would allow survivors to send coded signals to each other without adding spam. To prevent this from being used to signal to zombies (for instance if the code (RRR) was established to mean "survivors here, come and eat") we can assume zombies might have trouble discerning the color of a flare they see just for an instant and in lieu of any letters zombies would just see asterisks. So (BYW) would appear to zombies as (***), letting them know a code was sent and the location but not the contents of the code. This change should be simple to implement and would make flares useful. And for the record this wouldn't change how flares operate when used as weapons at all. You couldn't color code them then.

Votes

  1. Keep Author vote. Simple addition to make flares useful. Just lets you add a three letter code to flare messages. Should be handy. --Jon Pyre 09:20, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  2. Kill - Theres too many different combinations for the flares I reckon. Either limit how many colours are show or how many colours there are. - Jedaz 09:34, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re I think that's their strength. You're able to send out a variety of coded signals in different colors as opposed to one or two things. This way individual groups could have their own signals, in addition to standard flare messages (just blue = medical emergency, etc.) --Jon Pyre 18:19, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  3. Kill - Too complicated. --Cyberbob240CDF - Arb - W! 10:16, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  4. Kill - I'd support this if the flares themselves were coloured, like 'You search the area and find a green flare.' and if the coloured flares, when shot, displayed something like, 'A green flare was fired 2w 4s'. Just some thoughts. -Wyndal (talk)-(W!)-(SGP) 10:17, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re That would dilute their use. For instance if I'm looking for a green flare and the message of a green flare is (many zombies here) if I just keep finding red, yellows, and white flares that'd make it impossible for someone to communicate effectively with this. Unless flares became a lot easier to find, finding each color individually would make it too hard to ever find the flare you need. --Jon Pyre 18:23, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  5. Kill -the lack of use of flares isn't the fact that they don't have meaning, its that that meaning can always be copied and used regardless of the fact of its applicable.--Vista W! 13:43, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re You'll never be able to dictate the time a person could fire a flare as it would seem to violate the person's free will. However having a wide variety of coded signals would allow specific meanings to be put behind different codes. The same way nothing dictates when someone can talk but you can still get meaning from speech by the variety of messages that can be imparted. --Jon Pyre 18:21, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • or you could change the way the message on screen appears depending the varying circumstances when it is shot. that way people can still use them voluntary any time, the communication is usefull and truthfull but limited. The point is that unlike speach were you know the person talking, you can't gauge how truthful the sender is, because you never know who sent the damn thing. But your version is better then it is now. I just have the feeling it can even better.--Vista W! 19:42, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re I feel zombies operate on instinct (see a human, groan) while humans should have more complex communications. You could know the sender, simply set up a code and wait to see it. --Jon Pyre 20:12, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  6. Keep -It may not solve the whole flare problem, but if it can help. --McArrowni 13:52, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  7. Kill - Why shouldn't zombies see the color combinations? If humans can hear groans, zombies can see flares. Firing off a flare always carries with it the risk of attracting the wrong sort of help. Also, I'd much rather see a more natural language approach to colored flares. Input it in single letters, sure; but the output should be "red, green and white flare" or whathaveyou. But mostly I'm killing for the zombie color-blindness issue. --John Ember 17:12, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re However humans usually don't hear groans as they are indoors. That isn't coincidence, that change was activated after zombie players complained that groans were just attracting humans to barricade up buildings they broke into. Flare/groan communications should be limited for the other side or it becomes counterproductive. It also makes sense scientifically since people generally assume zombies can see well at night, meaning they likely have better nightvision than humans, and nightvision is primarily black and white.--Jon Pyre 18:28, 30 April 2006 (BST)
      • Re - That'd make for a fine ad hoc explanation if the mechanic itself were sound. But as TeeHee says below, zombies can interpret all kinds of survivor communications already. Singling out one to be beyond zombies' sensory capabilities is something of a non sequitor, esp. for something so basic as color. --John Ember 19:54, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re However all current zombies skills are based on scent and hearing so far. And I do not say that zombies are fully colorblind, simply they might be better designed to see in low-light. But the flavor is not the important thing here. This is about making firing a flare better than not firing a flare. What's the point of using these items if they are entirely counter-productive? Feeding Groan used to be audible indoors and was changed to prevent it from calling survivors to assist. This is the same idea. --Jon Pyre 20:07, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  8. Keep - Makes flares more interesting. RWXSM 17:37, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  9. Keep - It makes sense for Zombies to be colourblind. It also makes sense to assume that even if they can discern colour that their brians can't understand the significance of the message. DavidMalfisto 17:44, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  10. Kill - If we can read your spraypaint and hear you talk, I think we should be able to understand a few fucking colored lights in the sky. --TheTeeHeeMonster 18:25, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re It's assumed zombies can see well at night. This means they have good nightvision. Nightvision is caused by cells caused rods in the eye. Rods can see in darkness but see colors in black and white. Since zombies have more rods they might have fewer of the cone cells that see color. That's my scientific justification for why a zombie might have trouble telling colors apart. It doesn't have to do with a zombie's understanding of the message at all. And the zombie player would still be able to see the location of the flare as usual so the risk in firing one would still exist. For the same reason feeding groans can't be heard indoors, if zombies could see the flare messages that would make using them counterproductive. Sound is pretty basic too, and you could argue that if survivors can see flares from windows why couldn't they hear groans from windows? It's not about game logic, it's about making aspects of gameplay worthwhile.--Jon Pyre 18:29, 30 April 2006 (BST)
      • And for my in-game arguement - Why isn't the zombie interface for UD only black and white then? If zombies are colorblind to flares, then it'd only be logical to make their maps black and white too, am I correct? --TheTeeHeeMonster 19:37, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re Your argument doesn't make much sense. That's a game interface, not flavor. That's like watching a movie and saying one of the bloopers is that it's a two dimensional image on a screen, and that the characters are actually fictional and portrayed by actors. Besides, I don't say they don't have any color vision, just that they might have trouble discerning the color of a rapidly moving flare fired half a suburb away. But quite honestly the flavor though fitting is unimportant here. This is about making flares worth using. Groans benefit zombies more than humans. It makes sense flares should benefit humans more than zombies, as they are items used by humans. --Jon Pyre 20:02, 30 April 2006 (BST)
      • Listen, I'm partially colorblind (the sciencey term being "color deficient.") Now I'm not one of those "the sky is blue and the grass is green" types of colorblind people, but believe me - I can look at green and see what it is. Now if you put a green shape on a red backround, then I'd have some trouble figuring out what the shape is, but I could tell you there's some green in there. --TheTeeHeeMonster 20:39, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re This really isn't about colorblindness vs. non-colorblindness. It's just about making flares useful. However if you really object to this idea of zombies being colorblind it could be simply that when they see a bright light of this magnitude it overwhelms their senses so they can only tell it's bright. Or that zombies don't really care about color so they don't notice the color of flares, just their brightness. As I said, the in-game purely flavor reason isn't that important in this case and could be something else that's more palatable to you. Note I don't say that zombies are outright colorblind, just that they might have trouble discerning flare color for one reason or another. It's just the gameplay mechanic that is important. --Jon Pyre 22:50, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  11. Keep -Not a bad idea at all. The zombie colorblindness is not too far-fetched, although this does seem to be the sticking-point for some people. I'm not sure that color-combinations are all that necessary when zombie can't see it (one color per shot would work just fine too), but it's a nice wrinkle. For the Kill voters: are you all that worried that flare might get useful again? Its a win-win idea since survivors get a limited coding-system and zombies know that the are humans at the end of that flare. --Xavier06 20:05, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  12. Keep - While I'm loath to throw the harmanz another bone after the last game change, I can't find any real arguments against it, and at least one or two for it. Also, colorblind people are creepy and my gramma says that they have no souls. TeeHee, confirm? --Undeadinator 20:46, 30 April 2006 (BST)

RENot really suposed to re-ing I think, but what do you meen by that? That last updates bennifited zombies way more than "Harmanz" Labine50 02:20, 14 May 2006 (BST)

  1. Keep- Nobody really seems to be able to come up with any major problems with this, and even if there are, it can always be fixed then. Urbandead is still Beta, afterall. --Rozozag 21:33, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  2. Keep - Good idea, but instead of having a list of color codes restrict it to a limited number, i.e. Red for danger, Blue for safe zone, Gray for revive point, ect. --Darkstar949 21:54, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  3. Kill - I want to vote Keep, but the whole zombies not being able to see the colors bugs me.--Pesatyel 00:04, 1 May 2006 (BST)
  4. Keep -I'd like it better if you just typed in the message you want to send and anyone else with the skill would understand it, but for everyone else it would just say "A coded message was sent above the city, but you can't understamd it. (location,timestamp)" Labine50 02:11, 14 May 2006 (BST)

EAT BRAINS!!!

Spaminated with 7 Spam Votes, 1 Kill Vote and 1 Author Keep. – Nubis NWO 19:23, 30 April 2006 (BST)

Dump Bodies Out A Window

Spaminated with 8 Spam Votes, 2 Kill Votes and 2 Keep Votes, including the Author. – Nubis NWO 19:33, 30 April 2006 (BST)

Plus, a better term would be "Defenestration."--Wifey 20:12, 30 April 2006 (BST)

I know its already dead but 'defenestration' gets my vote every time. honestly who does not appreciate the noble art of removing people via the window?--Honestmistake 01:01, 1 May 2006 (BST)

Flying Monkeys

Removed to Humorus Suggestions. Received one Humourous Vote before begin asked to remove it by Grim_s. Krazy Monkey 19:25, 30 April 2006 (BST)

Flak Jacket Damage (Revised)

Timestamp: 20:11, 30 April 2006 (BST)
Type: Improvement
Scope: Survivors and Zombies
Description: When a player takes damage there is a small chance that the vest will be damaged and rendered useless. While this does affect the inventory of the player the chances of destruction are minimal and contextual in terms of how it is destroyed. The purpose of this suggestion is primary to give a purpose to all of the extra jackets that can be found when hunting for ammo as opposed to merely throwing them away, this would also afect the degree of strategy involved in the game - should you keep that extra vest just in case or toss it for an extra clip of ammo?
  • There is a 2% chance of destruction from a pistol with the flavor text of The shot from the pistol damages the flak jacket and renders it ineffective.
  • There is a 4% chance of destruction from a shotgun with the flavor text of The blast from shotgun destroys the protective lining of the jacket and it is now ineffective.
  • There is a 6% chance fo destruction from a flare gun with the flavor text of The shot from the flare gun breifly ignites the flak jacket and it is now damaged beyond repair.
  • If there is 3 claw damage from a zombie there is a 1% chance of destruction and the flavor text is The zombie's claws rake your flak jacket and it is damaged beyond repair.
  • If there is 4 bite damage from the zombie there is a 2% chance fo destruction and the flavor text is The zombie bite tears a chunck out of your flak jacket, rendering it useless.
  • If the zombie grabs a hold of you using Tangling Grasp then the chance for destruction is doubled (2% for claws, 4% for bites).

Votes

  1. Keep - Author vote, the suggestion has been revised with more statistical information. I wasn't sure what to do with the old version of the suggestion, so I have moved it to my talk page. --Darkstar949 20:51, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  2. keep - Now that's better. But dude, you can't just revise it in the middle of a voting procedure, at least open one and notify your old one is gone, otherwise people might see it as vandal :/--Changchad 20:54, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Sorry about that, I kept the old version of it on my talk page - should I move it to a different page? --Darkstar949 20:57, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - I think the way to do it is to have your old one deleted but keep the title and saying how much vote you had and explain you have revised it or somthing like that, similar to the spam notification.--Changchad 20:59, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Thanks for the heads up, since the damage is already done I'm just going to leave things the way they are for now. But I will remember it for future suggestions. --Darkstar949 21:01, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  3. Keep - I like it. It makes sense that these aren't indestructable jackets. After being shot by a pistol 50 times you'd think there'd be sufficient holes to make it ineffective. Would be interesting if instead of it just being destoryed it merely became less effective, maybe after so many hits it only protects 10% of the damage (Which would i think make pistols still do 4, shotguns do 9, and flares do 13)--HamsterNinja 21:11, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  4. Kill, but possibly Keep after changes - Percentages are too high: you'd lose your flak jacket after only one or two deaths. Also, claw damages are 2 or 3, not 3 or 4. Ignatius Newcastle 21:17, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - The 4 claw damage was a typeo on my part - it should have been bite. --Darkstar949 21:38, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  5. Spam - The only ones who would suffer from this are the zombies, who need jackets a lot more then humans. Besides having to worry about getting shot and losing the jacket, this also makes them have to worry about getting ZKed and losing the jacket. ZKing is one of the few ways that newbie zombies are easily able to level up, but with this change ZKing would be a grave insult, as it would include a chance of destroying the jacket. This seems like little more then an 'I hate zombies!' change, and besides which you're messing with other people's inventories. Velkrin 21:43, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  6. spam - See above for reasons. --ramby T--W! - SGP 22:15, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  7. Keep - I agree with HamsterNinja, flak jackets should not be indestructible. --Swmono talk - W! - SGP 17:32, 30 April 2006 (EST)
  8. Kill Just hurts zombies mainly, as flak jackets are only useful against survivor attacks. --Jon Pyre 22:52, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  9. Kill - while the indestructible flack jacket is certainly illogical, changing that while there is no replacement for brainrotted zombies whould not be a positive change. as long as your suggestion doesn't adress that it would add no fun to the game.--Vista W! 23:00, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  10. Keep - I like this and agree that flak jackets shouldn't be indestructible. --Steel Hammer 23:47, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  11. Kill - While I like the idea, others have pointed out that zombies have more use for a flak jacket then survivors, so once flak is more useful to survivors, THEN give this suggestion a Keep.--Pesatyel 00:12, 1 May 2006 (BST)
  12. kill don't like the numbers but hate the idea of inventory being untouchable, lets face it folks even well looked after stuff breaks so who really cares if your trusty axe goes blunt or gun jams? get a new one and stop whinning.--Honestmistake 01:05, 1 May 2006 (BST)
  13. Spam - Hello, poorly veiled zombie nerf. - CthulhuFhtagn 01:14, 1 May 2006 (BST)
  14. Keep - Sounds good to me, just change some numbers. On a related subject, why in hell do flak jackets reduce damage from firearms? - John the Quicker 17:46, 11 May 2006 (BST)

Quick Reload - Shotgun

Timestamp: 21:43, 30 April 2006 (BST)
Type: Skill
Scope: Survivors, Shotgun skills
Description: This skill would be part of Military Skills tree and can only be acquired after Advanced Shotgun Training. With this skill the player would be able to reload both rounds at the same time (cost - 1AP) as opposed to one at a time (cost - 2AP). For most players the skill progression would not allow them to get this skill until they are level 5. However, Privates and Cops they would be able to get this skill at level 4.
  • Balance Consideration - Assuming the average damage for two shells is 13 and the enemy is not wearing a flak jacket then this skill would reduce the number of AP required to kill a 50HP enemy from 14AP to 11AP. Similarly the AP required to kill a 60HP enemy would be reduced from 17AP to 13AP.
  • In game Description - Your skill with the shotgun has progressed to the point that you can reload two rounds in the time it take for most people to reload one

Votes

  1. Keep - Author vote, while there are some balance considerations I feel that they are minor. --Darkstar949 21:43, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  2. kill - This will increase the effectiveness of shotgun. And as the balance with zombies and humans are stable, it will be unwise to change it again.--Changchad 21:49, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  3. Spam - Not quite a dupe of all the other fast reload suggestions because of the level requirement, but shotguns are supposed to be harder to reload. It helps balance out their higher damage. --TheTeeHeeMonster 21:51, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  4. Kill -- Not so ridiculous as to merit a spam. Actually, it's fairly reasonable for this type of suggestion. It's just not necessary at all. furtim 21:56, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  5. Kill Lets unbalance shotguns! Woooo. --Zaruthustra-Mod 22:01, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  6. Kill - Slow loading is part of the price you pay for the high damage. Velkrin 22:19, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  7. Kill - I think shotguns are fine the way they are. It was a good idea, though. Kudos. --Swmono talk - W! - SGP 17:34, 30 April 2006 (EST)
  8. Kill - There's a reason shotguns are balanced the way they are, and that reason is so that I can Kill your suggestion and act like a smug prick for the rest of the day. --Undeadinator 22:58, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  9. Kill - since when is there a need for an excuse to act like a smug prick? Anyway shotguns low HP/AP is better the way it is now. then with your suggestion. easy fix: lower the find rate equally so the AP cost stays the same. That way it would be less annoying to load shotguns but they would retain the same HP/AP they have now.--Vista W! 23:14, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  10. Kill - May I remind you that not too long ago, Humans outnumbered zombies by quite a bit. Then revives where changed and not only did the Zombies manage to catch up, but they have overtaken the human population - and it's still slowly going up. However even with this change, I'd still favour the pistol to the shotgun and I dislike all speedloading skills. DavidMalfisto 23:17, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  11. Kill - Both of my characters are human and I have to kill this suggestion simply due to the fact that right now the game is balanced and I am liking it. I think that the shotgun has been balanced and this would unbalance it in the survivors favor. --Steel Hammer 23:52, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  12. Kill Make it a Zombie Hunter skill (10+ level). I really don't see how this is THAT big a deal, personally.--Pesatyel 00:17, 1 May 2006 (BST)
  13. keep -and In response to the guy that said zombies and survivors are equal. Ha. Hahahaha! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!1 OMFG!!! HAHAHAHA!!! Wow... Haven't laughed that hard in a while.Labine50 02:38, 14 May 2006 (BST)

Commanding

Spaminated with 7 Spam Votes, 1 Kill Vote and an Author Keep. – Nubis NWO 22:06, 30 April 2006 (BST)

Baked Flesh

Timestamp: 17:52, 30 April 2006 (EST)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombies and Humans
Description: Having been swaying in the elements for so long, the zombies have begun to develop an almost leathery texture to their skin. This has caused some of the older zombies to be more resilient to damage.

To purchase this skill, as a zombie, the character must be at least level 10. The effect would be that all blunt force damage from bats, pipes, punches, and shotgun and pistol shots (yes, these are technically classifies as blunt force) are now minus 1. Claw and bite attacks are also at a minus 1. Axes have no change, but flares now cause an additional 1 point of damage, and knives do an additional 2 points of damage. The effects of this skill can be combined with the benefits of a flak jacket, and will transfer to humans should the zombie character be revived.

This suggestion is not inflexible and constructive criticism is appreciated.

Votes

  1. Keep Hmmm. Interesting. A tradeoff--no something for nothing here--they take less from firearms but more from melee...and makes the knife useful without really nerfing anything else, since not all zombies would have this, but not all wouldn't--the tradeoff is such that it seems to me the break would be something in the 60/40 range, and I'm not even sure which way it'd tip. You'd need to have ways to kill both.--'STER-Talk-Mod 23:01, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  2. Kill - In it's current state this could tip the bar for zombies a bit in regards to damage if they have this skill as well as a flak jacket. However, if this was revised to not stack with the flak jacket this might become a viable idea. --Darkstar949 23:03, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  3. kill - The idea is good, but theres inconsistancy with the weapon damage. Flare and guns are regarded as projectiles and therefore should be treated with consistancy. --Changchad 23:14, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - I looked at flares as fire damage, however, as flares are already the strongest weapon, but the least reliable, I could have the damage stay the same. I might do the same for pistols as they can also be seen as a piercing weapon depending on the bullets. --Savat 18:39, 30 April 2006 (EST)
      • Well, there are only two forms of human attacks in the game, one is direct impact, this include all attacks benefited with hand to hand, the other one is projectiles, all those that are benefited from basic firearms training. There must be a consistancy in order for it to be logical, like flak jacket having reduced damage too pistol, shotgun and flares. --Changchad 23:46, 30 April 2006 (BST)
        • I don't see why. Flak jacket eliminates every fifth point of damage, it's that simple. Blunt things doing less and sharp things or other alternative damage like fire doing more seems logical enough to me.--'STER-Talk-Mod 23:52, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  4. Kill I like the basic idea, but seriously - pistols doing 3 damage is bad m'kay. DavidMalfisto 23:19, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  5. Kill - You're close, as I like the basic idea. But the numbers seem a little off. Like David said, pistols doing 3 damage isn't so hot. --Mookiemookie 23:50, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  6. Kill - I like the premise but have to agree with David on the pistols doing 3 damage. --Steel Hammer 23:55, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  7. Kill - 3 damage and no flak jacket make Tirion go crazy... - Tirion529 00:15, 1 May 2006 (BST)
  8. Spam - I thought about voting Kill. So pipe, bat claw (without Rending Claw) ALL do 1 point of damage. A punch does 0 damage? A pistol does 3 points against this combined with flak and a shotgun 7? This seriously nerfs newbie zombies as well as making non-fireaxes, already inferior, even worse. We want to make those BETTER (but in a different way). And why would a knife do more damage but not an axe or bullet (yeah, I read the "blunt force" for bullets above)?--Pesatyel 00:26, 1 May 2006 (BST)

REWhat are you talking about? all those attacks that aparently do 1 damage, do 2 damage.Labine50 02:44, 14 May 2006 (BST)

  1. Spam - And now knives deal 1.6 damage per AP. - CthulhuFhtagn 01:17, 1 May 2006 (BST)
  2. Kill -- This just doesn't feel right to me. And I don't think combat is something that needs changing. I think if anything really works well right now in UD, it's combat. furtim 03:25, 1 May 2006 (BST)
  3. Kill - Basic idea is good, but numbers are off. -- Mettaur 17:19, 7 May 2006 (BST)
  4. kill -What the heck? The last thing survivors need at the moment is one more zombies friendly skill. Really, We have enough to worry about without weapons being less useful aswell. Labine50 02:45, 14 May 2006 (BST)

Rancid Flesh

Timestamp: 18:30, 30 April 2006 (EST)
Type: Skill
Scope: Zombies
Description: Under a layer of leathery skin is a layer of rotted and almost liquid layer of flesh. Piercing the skin at close range, with a weapon capable of doing so, causes the attacker to be splattered. Although infectious should it get into the eyes, mouth, or open wounds, this substance is more or less harmless. As a precaution, it is suggested that clothing and items covered by this substance be either discarded, or unused for 48 hrs., as the substance will remain a possible hazard for that amount of time.

The way this works it the player, must first have Baked Flesh, should it be passed, or at least be level 10.

Attacking a player who has this skill causes a 5% chance of infection to the attacker, for the initial attack only, should the attacker be using a knife, axe, lead pipe, shotgun, or revivification syringe.

Furthermore, the item that caused the initial damage and, should the character have a flak jacket on, their “outer most layer�? of clothing. Will now cause a 1% chance of infecting the owner with every action taken by them while the items are still in the their possession for the following 48hrs. of the initial attack.

This suggestion is not inflexible and constructive criticism is appreciated.

Votes

  1. Kill - Interlocking suggestions=teh noes. PLus this exploding-zombies idea everyone seems to love just does nothing for me.--'STER-Talk-Mod 23:34, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  2. kill- I dont see the relationship with discarding the clothing with flak jackets, plus the virus only work on the dead.--Changchad 23:35, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  3. Spam Kill - Interlocking suggestions=Spam, but i'm trying to cut down. Exploding zombies=Spam aren't I generous now? Making a suggestion that forces people to discard items=Spam. And there you went over the top.--Vista W! 23:39, 30 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - This is not an interlocking suggestion as it has a way described around the previous suggestion. I also would like to point out that the zombies are not exploding. Furthermore, the characters are not being forced to discard items, they can take a break from the game, which should cut down on server load as well. Granted I could make the length of time the liquid is infectious shorter, but I feel a 1 out of 100 chance of infection is survivable.-- Savat 18:56, 30 April 2006 (EST)
  4. Spam - See above. And if it's flexible then post it on the talk page. DavidMalfisto 23:41, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  5. Spam Interlocked (with a dying suggestion none the less). --Zaruthustra-Mod 23:50, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  6. Kill - Simply because this is dependant on the last suggestion. --Steel Hammer 23:57, 30 April 2006 (BST)
  7. Spam - Interlock = Dead - Tirion529 00:15, 1 May 2006 (BST)
  8. Spam - Disregarding the interlocking suggestions, we have Zombie Water Ballons now? Would the "attacking weapon" and flak be flagged as infected? How do you "not use" a flak jacket?--Pesatyel 00:31, 1 May 2006 (BST)
  9. Spam - Interlocked. - CthulhuFhtagn 01:17, 1 May 2006 (BST)
  10. kill sorry dude but this just doesn't make sense. the game needs to be more dangerous to harmanz to keep things interesting but this just is not a good solution. yes i know most people think the game already offers more to humans than zombies but that really only applies to newbies as far as i can see. once you have a few levels harmans spend more time searching than anything else while zeds can spare AP just to yell random (often incomprehensible) obsenities and can normally find someone to bite/annoy!(i play 3 characters all originaly human and resistant to becoming zeds but gave it a go and now love playing a shambling corpse)--Honestmistake 01:19, 1 May 2006 (BST)
  11. Kill - Interlocking suggestions and punishing survivors for doing what they supposed to (infecting for attacking) gets a kill from me. Dickus Maximus 01:39, 1 May 2006 (BST)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Suggestions/30th-Apr-2006&oldid=1064604"