Suggestions/3rd-Jan-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.

3rd January, 2006

VOTING ENDED: 17th-Jan-2006

Fast Reloading

Spaminated away with 3 spams and no non-author keeps. We've seen this all before, people. CthulhuFhtagn 19:23, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)

---

Anonymous (No More)

Timestamp:	SCAScot 00:42, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Type:	Combat mechanics
Scope:	Survivors & Zombies
Description:	Zombies are shown on the map as '1 zombie' or '12 zombies' or whatever. The reasoning behind this is that the appearance of zombies is so generalized, you cannot tell one from another, unless you have them on your contact list (i.e., you 'recognize' them). Why, then, are you able to attack the same zombie in a large horde? IMO, this is against the 'anonymous' nature of a large zombie horde. Sure, an argument can be made that you keep sight of your target, etc. - but why, then, can't you choose to attack 'Zombie 7' in the stack? Effectively, the way combat works now allows a survivor to whittle one zombie down, while ignoring all the others. If you happen to be the zombie at the top of the 'stack', you're it. I propose that when attacking a horde of zombies, your attack is against a random member of the horde each time you make an attack. Benefits Spreads the damage out amongst the horde, which will increase zombie survival, while still giving the player XP for successful attacks. Being a member of a horde is supposed to give you the benefit of protection, not to serve you up for being the head of the line. Encourages low(er) level zombies to congregate in a horde. To balance this, I further propose that if you are attacked by a member of a horde, you can then concentrate your attacks on that individual until you leave the city block where the horde is (this simulates separating out your attacker from the horde during combat, and allows the zombie to blend back into the horde when its target runs away). Of course, if you want to take the time to add the zombie to your contact list during combat (so you can come back and kick butt later), that's up to you, and you should suffer the HP damage you get while doing that.

Votes

• Kill - This would effectively mean you'd have to deal a thousand points of damage against a 40 zombie horde on average before you are likely to kill a single zombie. That's unbalanced. Rhialto 00:47, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill Today, we'll learn the difference between theory and practice. In theory, this is a good idea. In practice, Z's with Digestion will be damn near invincible. --Slicer 00:48, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Unbalanced --Mikm 00:51, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill -Damn Slicer and Rhialto, I was going to say that... How about a bit of flavor then... NED! shoot the one standing by the water cooler, gnawing on Jane! No! not the one eating Larry by the potted Plant at the other end of the room! (Damn zeds, they all look alike to me!)--Vista 01:13, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - It's a stupid, overpowered suggestion. NEXT! CthulhuFhtagn 00:58, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - On top of the digestion problem, it makes it even more random than it already is as to just who's going to get the XP kill bonus (which is already bad enough in that one person can get extra XP just committing 1 AP to an attack after another person's already whittled down the 1 Zed's health for ALL their AP.) Now all you need is one survivor to peg every 1 HP zombie in the stack and BAM!, super levels. With 25 pre-loaded shotguns and advanced training and a little dumb luck, you could end up getting, what, 20XP per 1 AP spent, or 10 levels in a single 50 AP sitting? Madness! I always wanted to see a well-thought out "wild swing" or "wild shot" suggestion that ups your chances of hitting at the cost of hitting whatever (including other survivors in the block/building), but at the cost of knowing who or what you hit. And even that would be really unbalanced (hello XP farm!) Mojo 01:02, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Holy crap, that's awful. Bentley Foss 01:06, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - *Bonks author on the noggin* --Zaruthustra 02:03, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Re - Ow! *Takes 1HP damage and wanders away to ponder other ideas* --SCAScot 17:59, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - No. Just no. --Daednabru 02:49, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - We could just make those awesome 'spread' guns from contra that fire in a full 90 degree arc all across the entire block at the same time; you'd need to find special bullets, but it would at least allow you to hit everyone at the exact same time. Including buildings, which would strangely bleed to death. But really, no thanks - this is not needed. --krupintupple 21:57, 2 Jan 2006 (EST)
• Kill - Makes sense in-context, but too overpowered in practice, and adds some unnecessary server load. --Signal9 04:55, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - The mechanic makes sense, but not in the current execution. Even if you can't tell Joe Dead from Bob Dead, you can still count two zombies. Regardless of that, this isn't really NEEDED in the game. --MorthBabid 09:02, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - The reason I don't hit a random Zombie is because I can tell the difference between the one with the Axe in it's head and the one who doesn't - Jedaz 05:05, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - way too overpowering, but if you change it so that you hit a random zombie on the first attck on a horde then after this attack the person you hit first would go to the top of your attack list so all zombies get an equal chance of getting killed, realistic as you would notice the bullet wound you put in a zombie or the zombie you shot would notice and head for you. -- Freakarama 18:12, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)

---

Deadeye Dick

Three Spam votes for being ridiculous and pointless. --TheTeeHeeMonster 01:16, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT) }}

---

Skills Improvement: Zombie Hunter

Timestamp:	21:40, 2 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Type:	Skill Improvement
Scope:	Survivors
Description:	Zombie Hunter Insignia (You have killed 100 zombies and have been awarded this medal for your efforts. All your attacks against zombies have a 1% bonus to-hit.) Prerequesite: Headshot, Must have killed 100 or more zombies as a survivor.

Votes
Vote Here

• Kill It's just too trivial to be worthwhile. --Jon Pyre 02:47, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - See above.--Arathen 02:49, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Agreed, too trivial and survivors do not need more advantages at this time. --Daednabru 02:50, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Not overly worth it. --krupintupple 21:56, 2 Jan 2006 (EST)
• Kill - Urban Dead works on 5% increments. This would cause a massive change to the code. CthulhuFhtagn 03:07, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Comment - Wrong sir. Many items such as FAKs and guns have a percentage of chance to be found ending in 1, 2 or 7. --Jason Killdare 03:08, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Comment - That's because the total percentage is being divided by the number of items available to find.CthulhuFhtagn 03:11, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
      • Comment - Your mother called, she told me to tell you, you are wrong again. The items don't exist until the RNG creates a number and compares it with another random number. You don't actually think the game holds temp inventory in buildings waiting to be found? Silly man... --Jason Killdare 03:13, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
        • Comment - Yes, I know this should go on the talk page, but I feel I must point out that those 1s, 2s and 7s you are seeing are reported percentages. If you actually took some time to look at what they're doing over on the search odds page you'll find that it's probable that most of the game fits around the 5% pattern. --Daxx 14:45, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
        • Comment - It checks to see if you found something. If you did, it checks to see what you found. Is it that hard to understand? - CthulhuFhtagn 23:57, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - HULK SMASH POINTLESS SUGGESTIONS! Where's Bruce Banner when you need him? --Slicer 03:44, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - I don't know whether it's a positive change that we've gone from awful, broken, overpoweringly stupid suggestions to useless suggestions. (If you've been around this page long, you know that that's a compliment.) Bentley Foss 06:12, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill Pointless. --Zaruthustra 06:37, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill -I could swear that this was suggested before, but I can't find it. but anyway any thing that alters HP/AP of attacks significantly is overpowered, any alteration that isn't a significant change is not worth it. a bit of damned if you do, damned if you don't, sorry--Vista 13:57, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Again, Survivors dont need that much help. Yes, Zombie numbers are on the rise but that doesnt mean we need to screw it up again by giving meaningless power to survivors. We LIKE Zombie numbers on the rise and we want them to KEEP rising until humans are the ounumbered ones - personally I think 62/38 ratio is fine, but it needs to be the OTHER way.. Zombeis/Humans. Finally, I will never vote kill on a bonus like this that just gives you something (even if its almost nothing) for no cost. Skills should cost XP, period.
• Kill - It's another of these "It's to low to be worthwhile and the moment you make it high enough to become useful it immediately becomes overpowered" suggestions.--The General 20:48, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill, a medal makes you a better shot? SIGNS POINT TO NO. --LibrarianBrent 23:07, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)

---

New Skill: Pile of Rot

Timestamp:	22:00, 2 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Type:	New Skill
Scope:	Zombies
Description:	Pile of Rot (You can create a Pile of Rot that has 50 HP. While the pile stands, all zombies in the same square as the Pile of Rot deal 1 extra damage per attack.) You may only use this skill once every 24 hours. There may only be 1 Pile of Rot per block. The pile may not be healed with FAKs. Survivors may attack the pile, and if it takes 50 damage it is destroyed.

Votes

• Kill --Lord Evans 03:07, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - I'm being overly generous here. - CthulhuFhtagn 03:08, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Spam - I'm not in a generous mood. A huge pile of zombie shit that increases attacks? Looks like another one for the humor department. --Slicer 03:10, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT) - Yup, definitely- I just added Zombie Turds to Humorous Suggestions. :) Slicer 03:19, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Comment - You people vote kill just to vote kill. You're all hateful little wretches. --Jason Killdare 03:11, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Re: No, we vote kill because we actually think about what the consequences of doing things will be. If, in some bizarro world, this were actually implemented, the moment any zombie broke into a safehouse, it'd take a 50 HP dump on the floor (zombies aren't housebroken, you know) and start hammering away with the 4 damage hand attacks. Are you for real, or is this just some protracted troll? --Slicer 03:17, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Maybe if it were some kinda necrotech beacon or something, but as it stands, too diablo-monster-buffer-shriney. P.S. when you try to scold someone, try not to come across as a cockney old tyme shopkeeper from the late ninteenth century. - krupintupple 22:16, 2 Jan 2006 (EST)
  • Comment - Joke is on you. I am a cockney old tyme shopkeeper from the late ninteenth century... buy something will'ya? --Jason Killdare 03:18, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Jason, you may want to be quiet before you say something even less intelligent than you have today. --Arcos 03:21, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Comment Boohoo, I am going to cry into my pillow now. --Jason Killdare 03:23, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re: - Fine, make yourself look like a dumbass; just trying you give you some helpful advice. --Arcos 03:27, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re - Yeah, free running modification which causes free running to cost 2AP a move,gets keep votes, but my suggestions don't. That makes a lot of sense. --Jason Killdare 03:28, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re - hey I liked that idea --Freakarama 18:16, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• KILL - not just no but h*** no the idea would make hords unstoppable. --RAF LT. General Deathnut 03:26, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Re - Yeah, you know you're right. It's not as if survivors can do 50 HP worth of damage in less than 10 AP with shotguns... --Jason Killdare 03:30, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • RE - again I say HORDS you dumb ass so shut up and live with the fact that your stupid idea is killed. --RAF LT. General Deathnut 05:01, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
      • Re - So says the person who cant spell "hordes". --Grim s 06:25, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - This is just too powerful. Jason, I suggest thinking of skills that provide new ways of zombies to play that don't rely on simply increasing damage or attack percentages. Those add up too quickly when used by a huge crowd and unbalance things. Think of things that are useful but don't directly make anyone more powerful in combat, that's probably the right way to go. --Jon Pyre 03:35, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • ReOk, now there is a comment I can respect. --Jason Killdare 03:38, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - The problem people are havign wiht you Jason is not that yoru an idiot. You're trying and thats good, but you CONTINUALLY fail to think of the thigns covered in the Suggestion guidelines. In this case, Multiply by a Billion. If you would filter your suggestions a bit more, we wouldnt get so frustrated. I'm workign on a Skill Sugegstion for Zombies, but Im running it throguh numerous mathemeatical calculations, comparisions agains Suggestion Dos and Donts and Guidelines, AND checking the entire Suggestions section (Rviewed, Rejected, previous days, undecided, AND humourus) before I post it. It SEEMS, and maybe Im wrong, that you dont do alot of tha.t Not playign aroudn with math, I can understand.. its not everyones strenght.. but the others EVERYONE should do before makign ANY suggestion. --Jak Rhee
• Re - Before you start telling other people to think about their suggestions before posting please proof read your own post.--The General 21:05, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Spam - This is too silly. We should change it so steam comes from that pile of rot for full humorous effect. Rhialto 03:46, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Re - This was NOT intended to be silly dang it! --Jason Killdare 03:50, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re - I understand it wasnt meant to be. But I hope you can see how it can be SEEN as silly. And, youve got to understand, we tend to be VERY critical here because we're tryign to make sure these suggestion will work, as written.. as in all Kevan has to do is code them and put them in if he should so choose. If I dont feel a suggestion is perfect or VERY close, I kill it. -Jak Rhee
      • Re: - Come on, zombie poop with FIFTY hp that increases attack dmg? Give me a break. Pleas, please Jason think before you suggest.
• Spam - I am laughing my head off here... this is the single silliest most ridiculous suggestion I have ever read today. And the fact that the author didn't intend it to be so humorous just adds to the humor worth - I suggest that it goes straight to the humor section. --Daednabru 04:02, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• keep - I defend my keep vote by saying I feel sorry for the guy that everyone was attacking him dispite his trying. I think it is called the underdog effect. - --ramby 07:49, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Yeah. I could have sworn I voted on this --Mikm 05:16, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - See above. -Torfin 05:24, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - "A huge pile of zombie shit that increases attacks?" Bwhahah. Send it to the humorous department based on that quote. --LtMile 05:33, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - I'm sorry, but this is completely nonsensical. -CWD 05:34, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - I take back what I said on the previous suggestion. We have not moved past awful, broken, overpoweringly stupid suggestions . Bentley Foss 06:13, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill Smell that? Thats failure. --Zaruthustra 06:33, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Comment On the plus side it gives zombies something to do other then randomly walk around and kill/smash stuff. We're all looking to make zombies more interesting to play (or at least the smart people around here are), the very least that can be said is that 50 hp dumps is "interesting". It's not entirely unbalanced as I would figure the dumps would be the first thing to go in any survivor stronghold. If this thing had even had a remote chance to pass on a second time around I would recommend making the dumps harder to make by requiring the zombie to find a zombie item (which is another type idea that always gets this kind of treatment) or to otherwise use a hell of a lot of AP to "build" it. I would also say it would be only good for a certain number of zombie attacks. That would make it similar to suvivors who spend AP searching for shotgun shells and the like so they do more damage using guns instead of an axe. That would make me vote keep on the idea not to be different but because I think it would be a good idea. As it stands it is a bit unbalanced just not as much as everyone makes it out to be. --Zombie1313
• Kill - ramby, we know. But with 17 vote NAY and one YEA the two weeks don't matter either way. but if it makes you happy...--Vista 14:01, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Ramby, why on earth would you vote keep? I wanted to spaminate this myself. Jason, please for god's sake take some time over your suggestions and don't just vomit all over this page. --Daxx 14:37, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• KILL - Wow...thats bad! DarthMortis Jan 3rd 3:15 pm EST
• Kill - After reading the first sentence I knew how my vote was going to go.--The General 21:05, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Yeah, free running modification which causes free running to cost 2AP a move,gets keep votes, but my suggestions don't. That makes a lot of sense - perhaps its because the FRM idea made sense. This idea of yours, dont. --hagnat 22:40, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Zombie poopie is not an appropriate new attack. Also, I motion ramby's vote be removed as it is inane and is not based on the suggestion itself. --TheTeeHeeMonster 23:13, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Obviously, I vote kill as well, but I want to say something. There's a lot of personal attacks going on in this suggestion... something that this wiki does not need. His suggestion is not unfounded, lots of RPG's have characters with some skill that boosts the skill of the other characters in the party, or similar. As presented, and due to the non-real-time nature of Urban Dead, such concepts do not work well (and the idea of zombie's taking a skill boosting crap is kinda silly) it deserves a kill, but comments such as those by Deathnut and Arcos have no place. Just let the guy make his suggestion, and vote accordingly. On the flip side, of course, it's not really appropriate to respond to each criticism, Jason. Although your first few replies indicated you were taking the abuse with good fun (as opposed to the bozo's who replied to you), it was probably safe to move on after the first 5. Ok, I've horribly abused this little block of text, I just wanted to address the unnecessary arguments. --intx13 03:39, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Spam/Kill - This belongs in humerous. --Thelabrat 07:44, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Spam - This is not Warcraft --McArrowni 15:27, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)

---

How Powers Plants Could Work 2

Timestamp:	07:27, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Type:	Improvement
Scope:	Electricity
Description:	I think it'd be fun from a gaming perspective and interesting from a simulation perspective to allow the power plants to be operated to restore limited power to the city. I say limited because if plants restored power to every building they would simply make generators less important, just a less preferable option to power your building. Instead I suggest that the power restored only affects certain utilities that operate on a different grid than the electrical power that's sent to your home, such as street lights. This makes sense as it would be hard to run a plant at full efficiency during a disaster, there might be breaks in the general grid that would render it dangerous to turn on, and this would keep generators an important part of the game. Restoring Power Turning a plant back on would require a new science skill, Engineering. Reactivating a plant would be difficult and would operate on a percentage system with a good chance of failure. Failing to turn on the system would result in a message like "You tap at the controls" or "You flip a few switches." Zombies would be able to attack the control panel (no doubt bothered by the lights and noise) and have a chance of randomly striking a button that would trigger a shutdown. Each power plant square would be activated and deactivated seperately and each would correspond to power in a seperate sixth of the city. What Power Plants Would Do When Activated There are six power plant squares in game. Each would power approximately a sixth of the city with each square powering specific suburbs. To indicate to the residents of a suburb that power has been restored the description of every outdoor space (excepting things like parks and cemetaries) would change to say that the streetlights were turned on. At this point there is nothing for this power to affect (I have a few ideas in the idea selection below here) but this would be a good system to implement along with other power-dependant suggestions that generators simply aren't powerful enough to be used for. Random Ideas These are just some seperate ideas I have for power usage and I hope when voting you don't consider them linked to the above suggestion of power plants. These are just examples of things that could be implemented if the above change was. -Landline phones: Regular telephone service could be restored between plant powered areas. You could enter a mutual contact's name and their (x, y) coordinates and send them a message for one AP. You would in game world be entering the appropriate telephone number, the coordinates would just be a way of representing you know their location and look up their number. It would give people an incentive to stay in a specific location and inform allies of it. -Various Suggested Necrotech Database Concepts: Their citywide computer network could also be dependant on having the plants activated. -Various Building Alarm/Report Break In/Call For Help Concepts: Perhaps requiring both a generator in the affected building and the building reported to (PD?) as well as Power Plant power. There are clearly a lot of things that can be done with the Power Plants. I think this is a balanced and simple way of implementing them.

Votes

• Keep - I like it, not very simple and might require a lot of coding, but I like it. - --ramby 08:00, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - I don't like it, it's a bit needlesly complicated. Also I personaly like this more so. I would have voted Dupe except for the fact that you added Random Ideas, and also removed the section about chosing a suburb to power up. Other than that I don't belive that the idea has realy changed. - Jedaz 08:29, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Re: It is the same basic idea. I just changed it in light of the criticisms most people had of How Power Plants Could Work, which is really the point of this suggestion page; to help refine ideas and put the finished products in peer reviewed. Don't forget, this proposal also accounts for the portable generators and makes sure they stay necessary. I also think this is as simple as implementing the power plants could be while keeping each power plant square important.--Jon Pyre 08:42, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • abstain I wrote the first one, and I dont think this is too bad. Yay skill. Yay control panel. But not the 1/6 city division. Say someone wants the power on/off in their sixth they have to guess at which is which? I'd love to talk on it more though. bbrraaiinnss 14:43 Jan 3 2006 more on Talk:Suggestions
      • Re: I suspect that it would not take long for suvivors to figure out which squares power which suburbs. Or that could be announced as they are implemented to save time. Trust me though, give it a week and this wiki would have a listing of the suburbs powered by each square.--Jon Pyre 16:05, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Keep - --Kcold 15:39, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Keep - --Omega2 16:21, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• abstain - Some how I still feel like there is something missing, But I don't know what. (It keeps bugging me that I don't). but no kill because it'll all work fine and add a lot of fun, no doubt that. But I believe you can make more of it yet (I'm not trying to be unhelpful, see it as a vote of confidence in you).--Vista 16:54, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Re: Thanks. If you have any ideas/comments feel free to post them on my talk page. --Jon Pyre 17:02, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Keep - Was going to kill because it looked like it wouldn't make sense that generators are able to do things that the power grid can't, but decided that power grid electricity could be too unstable to perform surgery with. I do think that power grid should still power indoor lights. --Signal9 19:44, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Keep --Lord Evans 21:25, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Keep - Makes the power plants useful, and would create another focus for battles --Kindie 22:58, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Urban Dead, for the most part, is localized to a few suburbs. If my doctor is working in the northeast corner, and you flip a switch in the southwest, I don't want my healing stats going down because the power just went out. This ties large portions of the map together, something that I think Urban Dead's gameplay doesn't function well with. --intx13 03:43, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• abstain I like this idea. I like the city divisions, I like the execution. I like the new skill. But I don't understand what services would be turned on. For example, would hospitals in a powered section have power or not? Difference Engine 19:36 Jan 4 2006 (AEST)
• Keep I like the idea as well, but I think there needs to be something that intergrates it with the current power systems - maybe a new subskill (wiring?). Norminator 2 11:10 Jan 4 2006 (GMT)
• Keep - Gives the survivors incentive to hold power plants, gives zombies incentive to attack power plants. Sounds like the makings of another Caiger to me, and Caiger was fun! (Plus, with working power plants, we don't have to run around lugging generators and fuel cans - but just imagine the panic if the lights suddenly go out: "Oh, no! They got Krinks/Tolman/(insert power plant here)! Quick, someone grab a generator!") --John Taggart 13:09, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Keep - I like it! Random sieges are one thing to do in Urban Dead, a CTF style electricity grid is a new one, and a very welcome one at it! --Father Gregoriy 16:47, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)

---

Blood Tracker

Timestamp:	07:32, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Type:	Skill
Scope:	Zombies
Description:	New skill under 'Scent Trail'. Instead of passively pursuing survivors a zombie has had contact with, a zombie could enter the outside of a block, note the last 5 survivors to leave that block, and begin following their tracks like a bloodhound. This would be implemented through a new drop down list of the last 5 survivors followed by a button press, spending 1 AP, to give the direction the trail goes off to (north, south, southeast, into building, etc). The zombie loses the trail if, while it's tracking one survivor, it enters a block where that survivor is not on the 'last 5' list. That is, he begins tracking 'Survivor 1' in an empty street square (lightly trafficked). Survivor 1 crosses a block with a hospital on it (heavily trafficked). The zombie would no longer be able to scent Survivor 1's trail and thus lose track though he could scent the last 5 survivors to have crossed the hospital block. If the trail ends with the survivor entering a building the zombie is notified that the player enters the building. Free running wouldn't leave a trail to follow. EDIT: Please note that the AP to 'scent the trail' is seperate from the AP to actually move - so a zombie that's tracking (with Lurching Gait) takes 2 AP to move a block.

Votes

• Kill It's overpowered because just by walking through an area you could get dozens of zombies on your trail, as opposed to just the ones you interact with. Imagine a new suvivor without free running simply walking to a new safehouse, passing through 4 squares each with 30+ zombies and having ALL of them follow him to his new shelter. Multiply it by a billion. This is even more powerful than suggesting glass see-through barricades. It'd also require keeping track of who just passed through an area which is just some server load unniceness as a bonus.--Jon Pyre 07:34, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Re: I don't quite believe the mechanic is overpowered, it just means that in very low-trafficked areas you're more likely to be found out and picked off, like in some of my favorite zombie movies. The fear of having a bunch of zombies tailing you, you have to admit, is great flavor. FireballX301 07:40, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Not needed, and overly powerfull, the only advantage would be for a person who is trying to get revenge. - Jedaz 07:39, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Keep - I like it, and it seems balanced to me. After all, we do need something to make zombies more interesting. And it will more then likely get killed because survivors would get pissed off by being actualy tracked and actualy afried of zombies for once - --ramby 07:59, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Hurrah for adding and continually updating 50,000 new database entries! Hurrah for suggesting a skill that completely negates Lurching Gait! Bad, bad, bad. Bentley Foss 08:00, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Re: - Negates? You don't *have* to track people, you could just move around normally. The skill only gives you the ability to spend an AP to get a direction to move in. FireballX301 08:02, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re: - Yes, negates. What benefits does this confer over Scent Trail, exactly? Aside from some form of X-ray vision, which is so bad that it's against the suggestion guidelines? ("There's a survivor without free running, they must definitely be in this building", etc.) Instead of being able to track the person who attacked you, you now can track five random people who didn't necessarily interact with your zombie at all, and merely ran through your block? What purpose does that serve? (Any further talk on this should be moved to a discussion page, fyi...) Bentley Foss 08:25, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - isn't neccersary since feeding groan let you locate survivors far easier, costs only one AP and it helps cooperation for zombies. With all that, this is near useless.

edit and ramby, you're behind the times. zombie count is still rising fast it's at 38% now and growing. With mall swarm, feeding groan and the headshot nerf zombies are already going strong. Get with the program, zombies are the new black.--Vista 14:07, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)

• Keep - Sounds like this'll make life hard on Survivors and I support that. I still ahven't been killed once.. and I'm in a zombie heavy area. PImbank.. its no riddlybank, but its getting nasty there. Jak Rhee
• Keep - --Kcold 15:37, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Keep - Sounds like a good idea, and only a dedicated zombie could track someone efficiently. Good for ferals, not really important to hordes. --Omega2 16:29, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill We already have two tracking skills, and this one is so AP intensive as to be generally worthless. --Zaruthustra 17:21, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill Eww... Ugly ugly code to overload the server - no good! Not to mention that it's overpowered. (5 (possibly 10) variables per square = another 100000 or 50000 numbers to keep track of, which change every time a survivor moves anywhere outside) --Signal9 19:53, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill The flavor is somewhat nice. But I do think it's a bit much, full tracking of everyone who passed in the same area. Maybe you could be able to scent the direction (and only direction) of the last 5 harman who moved out of your area instead? Though that would be another suggestion. --McArrowni 17:06, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Keep - This sounds silly, but I like it. And it's fairly usefull, too. And McArrowni, that's exactly what he said, isn't it?. --Monstah 20:18, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)

---

Fort Aid

This has been Spaminated. Four uncontested spam votes and this goes to a well deserved deletion.--Grim s 20:38, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT) Edit: This was a crate drop suggestion. --Grim s 20:41, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)

---

Find them thar Rotters!

Timestamp:	18:25, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Type:	Change
Scope:	Survivors, Zombies in a respect
Description:	Sucessfully extracting DNA from a Brain-Rotted zombie puts that zombie into a new class of enemy in all drop-downs under the name "Brain-rotted zombie". This works just like the "a zombie" pool does now. This makes it easier for people to target a rotter hiding among a horde. The effect only lasts as long as a tag normally lasts. Question: Should a Brain-Rotted zombie only be seen this way by the person who tagged it? Question: Should a Brain-Rotted zombie become 'a zombie' again after dying?

Votes

• Kill - Re-Editted again Thelabrat is right, those suggestions are better and less open to abuse. O, well can't stay sharp every suggestion --Vista 15:34, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT) Re-Editted you're right Bentley Foss just having that kind of a day I guess --Vista 19:56, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Yeah, let's f**k with the only winning strategy the zombies are capable of using. That'll work great for the future of Urban PKers. CthulhuFhtagn 18:34, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - All this is designed to do is shield a survivor player construct within the game screw up zombies only method of stopping humans from getting revived, which is vital for us to win in any kind of conflict. Live with it and adjust the contruct instead of whining about zombies countering your contruct. EDIT in response to vistas EDIT: Wah!!! Zombies countered my tactic!!! Griefers!!! Cheaters!!! I want my mummy!!!. GROW THE F**K UP. --Grim s 18:50, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Re: The only whining being done here was in your original vote text. In actuality, this suggestion does little against zombie-kind. You must have a DNA extractor, tag a zombie, and only then can the zombie be attacked seperately. -- Amazing 19:02, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - I don't think making it easier to hit a rotter is a good thing. --Daxx 19:26, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Everybody on this page needs to stop whining and bickering today. Bentley Foss 19:47, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - The person that suggested this is a dipshit. Zombies arn't NPCs dude, remember that before posting again - phungus420 1957, 3JAN06 (GMT)
  • Re: - Got to Hell, you peonic piece of trash. -- Amazing 23:17, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Brain rotted zombies are the only thing stopping a team of survivors with Lab Experience and an arsenal of Revivification Needles from eradicating a horde, singling rotters out renders all the other zombies revived (assuming that the survivors are adequately prepared) --Signal9 20:03, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Does it seem to anyone else that the majority of people who make suggestions don't like the idea of the game holding, oh I dont know, CHALLENGE for survivors? I'm ASHAMED to call myself a Survivor. --Jak Rhee 19:26, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Spam - Too vaguely worded. how long does a tag normally last? Except for skills (a permanent tag), currently every tag lasts until an item is used to cure the effect. Rhialto 23:08, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT) Edit: So, for 24 hours, you get a perfect tracking device on a zombie? You're extracting dna, not planting bugging devices. That changes my vote from kill to spam for breaking fundamental laws of physics. Rhialto 01:07, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  • Re: - The DNA extraction tag, of course. -- Amazing 23:17, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - A simple no. The only thing this board is missing from exploding into a four alarm flame war is someone comparing someone else to Hitler. Oh yes, I said it...prove me wrong! --krupintupple 20:23, 3 Jan 2006 (EST)
• Kill I am SO tempted to compare someone to Hitler because of that last vote... But ignoring that, the reasons to kill have already been stated. --Volke 01:37, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Do you know who else liked to be able to identify brain rotted zombies? Mussolini! Oh I went there. --Sindai 02:10, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - George Bush is a brain-rotted zombie. --Daednabru 05:35, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - Because it's ridiculous. Instantly identifying a brainrotter for a 24 hour period? I won't comment on the author's attidude because it's irrevelant. - KingRaptor
• Kill - I like [1] and[2] better. --Thelabrat 07:55, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Kill - I second what Jack Rhee said. --Difference Engine 19:41, 4 Jan 2006 (AEST)
• Kill - Survivors don't need any more help. Also, can everyone stop swearing!--The General 15:39, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
• Author Comment: I made a suggestion to keep Rotters anonymous. I made a suggestion to make Rotters easier to find. To other suggestors - From here on out I guess people want Brain Rot identification kept just the way it is now. -- Amazing 18:32, 5 Jan 2006 (GMT)

---

Rocket Launcher

Timestamp:	18:31, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Type:	Weapon
Scope:	Zombies, helicopters.
Description:	Basically i propose that Zombies be given rocket launchers to shoot down helicopters. Why? Because if idiots are going to keep suggesting air drop suggestions then i better bloody well suggest a counter. Rocket launchers and Rockets are found in Forts using a new button called "scavenge" for zombies, and can only be used to attack Helicopters. A Zombie has a base of 5% accuracy with it, but this is increased with Basic Rocket Launcher Proficency skill, to 30%, and by another 20% with Advanced Rocket Launcher Proficiency, and another 15% by Expert Rocket Launcher Proficiency. A Zombie would gain 50exp for taking out a helicopter, which would happen after two hits. Basically the targetting would work like this: If a helicopter is heard overhead, a drop would be triggered an hour later. In that time a zombie has the opportunity to shoot the helicopter down, and this is accessed through the drop down menu if the zombie has a rocket launcher.

Votes
Various extended "discussions" moved to Talk Page.

1. Keep - Author vote, because i am fucking tired of imbeciles suggesting crate drop suggestions. --Grim s 18:31, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
   • Moderator: Removed blatantly trolling vote. Defend on talk page. --LibrarianBrent 01:12, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
2. Spam -But I agree with you. goodie packs are evil--Vista 18:35, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
3. Keep - Ok, I'm kidding... my real vote is Spam. Good idea, though. --ALIENwolve 18:35, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
4. Keep - What? Pile of ShitRot gets to stay. This is far less retarded. - CthulhuFhtagn 18:39, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
5. Spam Wah wah wah. --Jon Pyre 18:41, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
6. Spam Quit complaining about "but this got to stay so I think this should too". That kind of whining just stops anything from getting dealt with. And yes, this is an awful idea. --Zaruthustra 18:42, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
7. Spam - Stop your whining. Just kill the air drop suggestions, and provide a good reason for others to do the same. --Daxx 18:43, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
8. Spam Zombies cant even use GUNS, much less a rocket launcher. Why are people stupid? Maybe we should have an IQ test before lettign people post suggestions. I want to apologise to Grim. My words were unfair and meanspirited and entirely in appropriate. I've attempted to make my feelings clear about my problems with this suggestion in Discussion, in a nonadversarial way. I should never have lowered myself to base insults - in doing so I not only insulted Grim, but myself and this community. Again, I apologise. --Jak Rhee
9. Kill - I'm not sure zombies have the right to barhah armz. Har har. --Shaolinzombie 19:51, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
10. Kill - Everybody on this page needs to stop whining and bickering today. Bentley Foss 19:47, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
11. Kill - I'd prefer the plegm-thrower. Petrosjko 19:53, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
12. Kill - Unless the rockets, when they miss, come down in other suburbs, exploding in a random location and killing everyone on that block. --Elderdan 19:55, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
13. Kill - This is almost as bad as flying zombie skulls, almost - phungus420 1955, 3JAN06 (GMT)
14. KILL - REALLY? DarthMortis Jan 3rd 3:00 pm EST EDIT I count like 8 spam votes, why is this still here? 3:25 pm EST
15. Keep - Well, that certainly makes sense! Oh to anyone complaining that it's "out of genre", think again. Go play Resident Evil 3. Remember that Nemesis, and how he weilded a rocket launcher and shot down a helicopter? ;) --Marluxia 19:59, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
16. Keep - This is my kind of suggestion. --Qwako 19:59, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
17. Spam - Are there even any more crate drops? And Grim, a point to mention: most of those drops suggestions die a horrible, miserable death. The crates aren't really that overpowered. You get a few items out of them after a massive amount of searching around blocks. I've never even seen one in game. And before you start dishing out "Zombie Hater!" again, look at the zombie suggestions that have passed with little or no kill votes. Most zombie suggestions that die are just more of the same, and don't really make the game more interesting, or completely upset the balance. Besides, it's not like the all of the game-breaking ideas will be implemented by Kevan. This is just a public forum for what we might like in the game. --TheTeeHeeMonster 20:00, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
18. Kill - We definitely need rocket launchers to go with our rocket skates, though. --Centerfire 20:16, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
19. Spam - The crate drops are almost worthless to survivors, so the idea of there having to be a counter for them would be laughable even if the notion of zombies using rocket launchers wasn't patently ludicrous. -CWD 20:19, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
20. Dupe and Spam - Dupe of this (Yes, I know, the dynamics are different, but the idea and the motivation are a carbon copy). Spam because Costly Does Not Equal Balanced and Rare Does Not Equal Balanced, given the number of zombies, in less then a month, any helicopter flying overhead will have a 99.9999% chance to get shot down. NO. --Signal9 20:26, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re: - Are you retarded? What similarity exists between giving zombies rocket launchers and removing zombies entirely? It seems to me that the latter directly undermines the former making them contradictory. Dupe accusation = Squashed --Grim s 20:31, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT) Comment restored after deletion by Signal9, as the Author i am perfectly entitled to Re a vote, and i did so with yours. Disliking the abrasive tone is not justification for removing it. --Grim s 21:10, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
      • Re: - Well, apparently, you are the retarded kid - I didn't delete anything, I moved it to the talk page, but it's too hard for you to click a link so I guess I should move my response back too: The dupe vote was a joke, but you have to admit that the suggestions are similar - both are bitter complaints about other people and "broken" game dynamics. The spam vote is still valid. --Signal9 21:15, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
21. Spam - Is this a joke? Which bit of No military weaponary don't you understand?--The General 21:27, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re Its apparently intended as a sarcastic sugestion to prove a point. Now I dont think its an appropraite use of these forums (Ive outlined this in discussion), but would like to apologize to Grim again for my harshness above (in case he didnt read the edit up there) -Jak Rhee
      • Re - It therefore deserves to be removed as it's not a proper suggestion.--The General 16:07, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
22. Spam - Hahah! If you want to be sarcastic, be stylish, too! Nice spam! Who thought it was serious? --Omega2 22:33, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
23. Kill 1. Zombies can't use a pistol, how do you expect them to use a rocket launcher? 2. Crate drops are scarce enough as they are. --Mikm 22:36, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
24. Spam - Unless I can triangulate the rocket onto the helicopter with laser-beams that fire from my nipples, I'm not voting for this.--WibbleBRAINS 22:45, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
25. Kill/Spam, are you insane? This is the absolute worst suggestion yet. --LibrarianBrent 23:08, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
26. Spam - I know its difficult, but try not to get any of that stupid on you when you spam their bad suggestions. It's no excuse to descend to that level. Rhialto 23:10, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
27. Spam - Instead of coming up with a ridiculous counter-suggestion, how about just suggesting that the air drops stop? X1M43 23:23, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
28. Spam - All of you, of course, do realize that this is not a real suggestion, right? Grim is making a point. Of course he doesn't want them to fire rocket launchers and howl "STAAAARS" and so on. He just hates airdrop suggestions, I guess. --Snikers 00:14, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
29. Kill - Durr, Zeds would simply evolve necrotic wings and fly upwards and kill the helis...turning them into zombie helis. But for real, no. --krupintupple 20:29, 3 Jan 2006 (EST)
30. Spam - wow. the hate on todays suggestion page is almost palpable. can't we all just get along (campfire guitar strumming in background)... --Firemanstan 02:01, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Re - If I had to guess, I'd say "no". :/ Bentley Foss 02:12, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
31. Kill - dude, this suggestion could work if a special class of zombie is added later but now, its completly impossible. mAYBE, if they add a zombie class who look like nemesis from resident evil ( and if they do this, they will need to do something to balance the whole thing) but its not for nom. --spetznaz21 3:00, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
32. Spam - While I the parady and protest given by this suggestion is appreciated, this is for real suggestions, not stupid paradies. I wish it could be deleted, but the rules say it stays. --Catwhowalksbyhimself 18:47, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
    • Suggestion restored after illegal deletion by Deathnut. There are non author keeps. It stays for the two weeks. --Grim s 07:29, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
      • Re: Yes, so that all may see its the foolishness of it and its sucktastickness. -CWD 07:42, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)
33. Kill - Zombies declaring Jihad on survivors - I like it! --Father Gregoriy 16:55, 4 Jan 2005 (GMT)
34. Keep - Grim's suggestions rule bar none! --DarkShines
35. Kill - Grim_s i hate you&i hope you die of a painful death. You are a horrible person, how do you dare writing these suggestions YARRRRRRRR----Denzel Washington 02:34, 5 Jan 2006 (GMT)
36. Keep This game needs zombies with rocket launchers! --CarryTheRedFlag 14:14, 6 Jan 2006 (GMT)
37. Kill - I vote kill but if you run it through again and humans get rocket launchers also and can shoot them into a horde of zombies trying to break into a mall and kill everyone of them then fine. If not then kill because zombies can not even hold pistols. --TheBigT 00:39, 8 Jan 2006 (GMT)
38. Kill - Well I was wrong to delete it but I still can kill it. --RAF LT. General Deathnut 05:21, 9 Jan 2006 (GMT)

---

Sneaking Skill

Spaminated for being yet another ninja-zombie skill that violates the no hiding rule. --Mikm 22:29, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)

---