Suggestions/6th-Feb-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.

Look Out Windows

Dupe of the Dead-in-the-Water X-Ray Vision-type Suggestions (One Dupe Vote, my own, and three kills) Ignatius Newcastle 13:25 7 Feb 2006

---

Door Lookery

You moved the tombstones but you didn't move the bodies!! -- Amazing 18:06, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)

---

I'll be right back.

Spaminated This suggestion has been spaminated, 8spam/ 2keep/ 10total. --ramby- 13:56, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)

Actually, only one keep. I struck out my vote. --John Taggart 14:07, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)

---

Feed

Timestamp:	10:53, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
Type:	Skill
Scope:	Zombies
Description:	Corpses are everywhere, and so it'd be too simple to let zombies heal by choosing to feed. However, there is a way it might be workable: Tie it to movement. Every time the zombie moves into a square with a corpse, he may nibble at the corpse, healing 1 HP. I'd suggest a 40% chance, to make the AP cost of using it about the same as a first aid kit (About 4 HP for 20 AP of movement without Lurching gait, 8 HP with.] It'd make most sense as a subskill of Digestion. Anyway, I think this is the only way to make the idea work. Whether the idea is good enough that it should work I leave to you.

Votes

1. Keep - I think this is the first "zombies heal by eating corpses" suggestion I've seen that could actually work. --Alcoholic 11:24, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
2. Kill -zombies have a complete restoration with an 1 Ap stand up and the healing effect of bite. why do they need more way to heal? It's not like health actually means something for zombies.--Vista 11:33, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
3. Kill - 4-8Hp per 20 AP is not worth it. Zombies dont really need to heal anyway, they can just stand back up, but if you really want to heal I guess you could use digestion. (I've never used digestion, by the time I log in the next day im either fully dead or at full health, there usually isn't midground)--Uncle Willy 11:36, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
4. Kill - Same as Uncle Willy. Zombies don't have to heal, except in very few situations. --Omega2 14:26, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
5. Kill - Like everyone's said, HP just aren't that important to zombies. That and the fact that there is already a way for zombies to heal themselves = kill vote. --CPQD 17:02, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
6. Kill - They beat me to it. Bentley Foss 19:19, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
7. Kill - It breaks my heart, but these people are right. I kinda liked this suggestion. But it just isn't worth a skill. The only time I can think of zombies needing hp is during a siege, when inside the building. At that point, they rarely move. --McArrowni 19:23, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
8. Kill - I love the flavor, and Alcoholic is right in saying this is the best version of this idea to come along (that I've seen anyways) - but it just isn't needed. Zombies don't fear death (except a little bit from headshot), and digestion suits them just fine for healing. --Blahblahblah 19:44, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
9. Kill - It is well written; But zombies really don't need this. Healing isn't a problem, espcially with the new accuracy boost we have. --MorthBabid 20:11, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
10. Kill - My zombies only look at HP as a measure of how long it is before I need to use ankle grab again. (Apologies for whomever I stole that from) Just not needed. --Mookiemookie 20:58, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
11. Kill - I'm with Mookiemookie, zombies are meant to just get up when they're knocked down. It's not really needed as much as a way for the survivors to heal. --Lord of Dolphins 10:02, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
12. Kill - No free lunches, I can't belive that no one has said that yet - Jedaz 10:42, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
13. Kill - Why spend so many AP healing when a zombie can jump out a window and stand up at full health anyway? Kraxxis 19:40, 8 Feb 2006 (GMT)
    • Tally 1 Keep, 12 Kill, 0 Spam - 19:03, 9 April 2006 (BST)

---

Bloody fangs

Timestamp:	14:40, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
Type:	Skil
Scope:	Zombies
Description:	Since the latest series of upgrades to zombies have set in, it is now possible to kill more humans per day than ever before, with the latest upgrades to claw attacks making zombies more powerful than an axe-wielder by some considerable degree. What I propose is to make it possible for zombies at extremely high levels to become even more lethal in large numbers: If the target human has been hit by others more than once, and he is wounded, and you can tell by either the use of Diagnosis or the Scent skills, then there is a 5% increase in the likelyhood to sucessfully bite your target. This will help hordes more than anything, since single zombies won't be affected. In movies, a large group of zombies or a small fast team of zombies is far more effective than solo zombies, so this way, it will be possible for things like feeding frenzies, adding to both realism and fear. It will also make it easier for mid to high-level zombies to bank XP and save HP and AP in prolonged seiges, allowing for even more efficient attacks. This skill would NOT carry over to humans at all.

Votes

1. Keep Author vote. MaulMachine 14:40, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
2. Keep - Sure, why not. 5% isn't too much. Not sure about the "hit by others more than once, and he is wounded" part. If he's wounded, then he's surely been hit by others more than once, right? Or did you mean hit recently? --John Ember 14:50, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
   • Re: No, I mean hit by another zombie. It happenes all the time, a zed breaks into a building, ferals see it and come it, the first one attacks but runs out of AP; in my scenario, having seen the human get wounded, gain a minute bonus for seeing the dismemberment firsthand. And since it is automatic, there will be no message spam. MaulMachine 14:54, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
     • Re: - Ah, the 2nd zombie has to be present at the time which the target went from 26+ hp to 25 or below? --John Ember 15:39, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
3. Kill - Um, no. Also, John's comment is a fallacy. - Unsigned comment removed - CthulhuFhtagn 22:08, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)

   Re - If you happen upon a wounded survivor, chances are he's that way because he's been hit by zombies. PKing throws this off but isn't so common as to be relevant to the topic. --John Ember 15:15, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)

4. keep - To spin off something said in talk page "We kill things based off of the excistance of zombie spies for the same reason we kill things for the excistance of santa clause." I suppose that extends to pkers to - --ramby- [Part of my talk page] 15:20, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
5. Kill The skill seems fine as a basic idea; however, it shouldn't stack with the 10% bonus from the grasp ability. If it did, it'd be the same HP/AP as claw (60% for 3 damage compared to 45% for 4 damage - both 1.8HP/AP), while bite would have the added bonus of digestion and infection; typically, a bad thing(tm). Change that, and I won't have a problem with keeping it. --Ampoliros 15:38, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
6. Kill - if we keep buffing both sides in a while we will 2 hit each other...why do zombies need even MORE buffs at higher lvls? its the low ones that have a hard time --dragonboy218 16:18, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
7. Kill - the stength of zombie hordes in the movies comes from their numbers, just like what already happens in the game. zombies already have the upperhand in combat. and highlevel zombies aren't the ones needing a boost anyway. lets not give ourself the boost but the persons who need it.--Vista 16:22, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
   • Re: Zombies have a hideous disadvantage in combat, are you joking? MaulMachine 16:30, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)

   • Their attacks have the best HP/AP of all attacks. zombies stand up after downed. they have secondary effect on all their attacks. by all objective facts zombies have the better statistics in combat. the big advantage survivors have is Ap storage. But measure by measure zombies outperform survivors in combat even with AP storage taken into account.--Vista 19:00, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)

8. Kill Why give a giant horde of zombies a bigger advantage against a survivor that's wounded and about to die? --Jon Pyre 16:42, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
9. Kill It's just not well-justified enough: WHY give them a bonus for that arbitrary reason? - Ignatius Newcastle 17:51, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
10. Kill - Well, that's pretty solid reasoning. "Hey, zombies were made more powerful. Let's make them more powerful again!" Or, wait, no. No. Zombies are quite fine right now, ESPECIALLY compared to their state a month and a half ago, before Feeding Groan, Tangling Grasp, and the big building change. This suggestion violates about a half-dozen of the Suggestions_Dos_and_Do_Nots. Go take a look and figure out which ones. Bentley Foss 19:21, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
11. Kill - Ditto Bentley Foss comment. --Blahblahblah 19:49, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
12. Kill - Go to Caiger Mall. Try to fire off a few times. Watch yourself lose 40 hp in under 15 seconds. They're doin' fine. --MorthBabid 20:13, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
13. Kill - What Vista and Bentley Foss said. --Mikm 21:33, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
14. Kill If you multiplied it by a billion, you'd see that any direct damage/accuracy increase given to zombies allows them to take down anything in a fraction of the amount to time it normally takes. In short, this overpowers hordes. --Volke 23:08, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
15. Kill - Isn't this one of the suggestions don'ts?--Uncle Willy 00:48, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
    • Tally 3 Keep, 11 Kill, 0 Spam - 19:03, 9 April 2006 (BST)

---

Simple Horde List

Timestamp:	14:52, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
Type:	Interface
Scope:	Everyone
Description:	You see the little tag that says "74 zombies" on the map. If you like, you click on the tag and you are taken to another page with a very simple list of the hordes comprised in that group of zeds. The list resembles the Stats page, with links to wiki pages where appropriate. At the bottom is a "Back to the city" button that takes you back to the main interface. That's all. Easy. [See example]

Votes

1. Kill -- I like it, but it overcomplicates things, and really, most of the time you will just see ( none none none none RRF ) etc MaulMachine 14:54, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
   • Re: -- no, it wouldn't list individual zombies. One listing per group, followed by the number standing there. Added an image to make this more clear. --John Ember 15:08, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
2. Keep - Might inspire more people to die to join hordes. or run --ramby- [Part of my talk page] 15:25, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
3. Kill - where was the Undying Scourge on that example eh?!!? Haha... Anyway, i agree with keeping it as a faceless horde which is surely the point of the game! --Blue Wild Angel 16:25 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
   • Re: - So why allow zombies to set their groups at all? If it shows up on the Stats page, why not this? And the interface would still only show "xx zombies." At the same time, I'm hoping this would place less emphasis on metagaming, as players wouldn't have to leave the game to learn about nearby hordes. --John Ember 16:32, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
4. Keep- I like it --Kirk Howell 16:27, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
5. Keep - It would help ferals to go along organized hordes. --PokiPedYup 16:33, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
6. Keep - Author vote. Why is this entry getting cut off? --John Ember 16:35, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
7. Kill Gives the faceless horde levels of orginisation that humans oughtn't to see. - Ignatius Newcastle 17:55, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
8. Keep - Seems fair enough. Note: The issue with comments being clipped off seems to have resolved itself... looks fine now. If it happens again, it may be that the page is getting long, and some items need to be moved to a "Previous Day's Suggestions" page. --Reverend Loki 18:07, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
9. Keep - I hate having to go metagaming to check where hordes are going to be/going. Also this makes it easier to distinguish hordes from just large groups of ferals. --Bonham 19:42, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
10. Kill - Anonymity is the price you pay for being zombies. Deal with it. Bentley Foss 19:25, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
11. Kill - While I like the zombie hordes, I don't believe metagaming should take front row and center in lieu off the faceless horde. The faceless horde is the single most important piece of flavor in the game. It's sets the mood. when you die, you are stripped of your identity, whatever you were in life now you are single minded killing machines whose only purpose is to eat the flesh of the living, with the other died, united by your savage instinct. Having that replaced by a the many RRF etc zombie gives an identity and alteriour purpose they just don't have in canon or flavor. they are united againts all that lives, they aren't supposed to have factions in-game. a RRF zombie or a the grey zombie simply doesn't hold the same mystique. There are enough ways somebody can become part of a horde without breaking the single most important piece of the game. namely the simple, fear inspiring, a Zombie --Vista 19:47, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
    • Re: -- Like it or not zombie players use metagaming to organize their attacks on humans. If you look at a zombies current profile they most of them have a group. If we are supposed to be faceless why let zombies even have the option to group? This new skill (interface? whatever it is) would actually cut down on metagaming and let more people just shamble along with large groups. Also it should be noted that a lot of the bigger zombie groups have distinctive battle cries they death rattle when smashing cades, the zombie identity is out of the bottle.

    • What is wrong with meta gaming? When did I ever say something bad about meta gaming? metagaming is good. meta gaming is fun, matagaming still works with the faceless horde. you don't see groups listing unless you've got the profile. the battle cries are distinctive, but would you know without metagaming? ferals can already run with big hordes through groans easier and more in flavor. this does nothing but make zombies more distingishable in game. I like the big hordes. Hell I was never more impressed with the game that the time the many started up. In flavor terms hordes are simply large gathering of zombies, through instinct or random chance, and as locust are able to swarm so are zombies appereantly . Your suggestion breaks all that flavor. I can understand some people will find it somewhat easier to use, but I for one don't like to think of zombies as simply pale survivors lookalikes in gang colours.--Vista 18:59, 8 Feb 2006 (GMT)

12. Kill - I've listed my personal reasons for voting kill on these kinds of ideas on the other versions of it. Aside from that reason: Zombie = anonymous. It works to the zombie populous advantage, as well as against it - and it's really the most fun that way. --Blahblahblah 19:54, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
13. Kill - Anonymity is a power you gain being a zombie. Run with it. --MorthBabid 20:19, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
    • Tally - 6 Keep, 7 Kill --Reverend Loki 20:20, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
14. Kill - I like anonymity when I play a zombie--Mookiemookie 20:45, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
15. Kill I find it ironic that zombies are supposed to be faceless and semi-silent killers, yet all the zombie groups wish to announce on high whenever they do something! --Volke 23:06, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
16. Kill - Anonymity thy name is Zombie --Jak Rhee 23:59, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
17. Kill - Pretty useless. I'd vote spam, but you did seem to have logic behind it and weren't just being an idiot.--Uncle Willy 00:50, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
18. Kill - If I see 74 zombies, I'm going to run away, not stand around to see what memberships they have. I just don't see what use it would be. --Dickie Fux 03:34, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
19. Kill - You can't just ask a zombie "Hi ummm I am going to kill you in a second, but can I ask for you name" and expect her to say, "Yea my name is Shirly" or something like that". See zombies like to take it fast and give you a love hicky right when you meet them. Sure between the aching, the bleeding, and the severe infection from it, it was still worth it to some desperate guys. --Shadow213 03:18, 8 Feb 2006 (GMT) Ohhhhh! This is still a kill, but I thought you ment like individual zombies! K ok... I still don't like it though it's unnessesary. --Shadow213 04:02, 8 Feb 2006 (GMT)
20. Comment - All this talk about zombie anonymity misses the point of the suggestion IMO. Individual zomies are still faceless members of hordes under this approach; but now you can see the horde names in-game the same way you can already see them on the Stats page. The point is not to make zombies more personal to humans, but to give ferals some help in finding and following organized zombie groups. Cause they can't, y'know, talk with any reasonable clarity. But hey, I guess every one of those faceless players should just suppress their innate tendencies to associate and strategize together, and get on with the drooling and grunting while at the computer -- cause they're zombies, right? --John Ember 01:37, 9 Feb 2006 (GMT)
    • Tally 13 Keep, 6 Kill, 0 Spam - 19:02, 9 April 2006 (BST)

---

Door Lookery 2.0

Oh, well. -- Amazing 00:18, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)

---

Scroll Bars When Attacking

Timestamp:	22:28, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
Type:	improvement
Scope:	everyone
Description:	when im trying to attack i always have to scroll though all the names on that attack scroll menu. sometimes i mistake a name for someone elses and attack a friendly. sometimes i want to attack someone and in the heat of the moment while im franticly searching for what i want to attack i loose key moments where the other guy is whacking on me. i promote that there be two different scrool menus. one meny might be green and list all the names of the people at that block of city that are you allies and the other would be red and list all of the things that are your enemy that you can attack. for survivors barricades and generators will be listed in the "allie" scroll window while they will be listed in the "enemy" scroll menu for the zombies. each scroll menu will have a default "no target" option so if accidently clicking occurs there will be no AP lose. once your character attacks a specific target that name will be locked in the option and ready to be clicked again once the page refreshes once the previous attack is complete. NOTE - BOTH SCROLL BARS ARE UP AT ALL TIMES. this is not a matter of PKing, those that do it will do it no matter what. its a matter of sorting out who is friendly and who is foe. as of now everything is piled into one scroll bar and its easy to miss read. im tired of looking through the names to find the right target. i know they are "seperated" but its still confusing. there are so many names, some completely different some very similar. i just want those that are enemies and those that are allies to be in two different collums so i know FOR SURE im attacking the right side. if the two collums were always there i could easily in a heated battle just click, quick scroll to any name and then click attack. quick and painless. Edit - you guys act like if this happens its going to unlock some secert and people will prefer Pking than normal killing. anyways, instead of 2 scroll bars maybe just color the names on the list. like humans in blue, zombies in read, objects in yellow. so nothing is being changed, just the fact certain players names a represented in status color. so you would click, spot the color, land on a name you want to attackin a flash and attack. woo what happened to the votes?

Votes

1. Kill - Maybe even spam - you basically want a slightly more complicated interfece so that pking will be easier (because if you're a survivor, attacking a zombie is the default, and if you're a zombie, attacking a survivor is the default). --Signal9 22:43, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
2. Keep - authors note, i have a group called the Clerics of malton and we are 100% against pk. this is a way to make sure i DONT hit my own kind. no signature, remove strike out when you added your signature --Vista 23:02, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
3. Kill -I don't get it, this is what I can make of it; you either are a survivor that wants to hit other targets then zombies leaving nothing but survivors (or added zombies, rare but it happens) and are against pk'ing, or you are a zombie and don't want to hit certain people because they are allies. both are activities we don't want to forbid, but also don't want to promote. I don't have a feeling that is what you want, but untill you make clearer what it is you want I can't vote anything but kill on this one.--Vista 22:56, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
4. Kill - see above kill votes --CPQD 23:00, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
5. Kill - Attacking default for survivors is attacking zombies. --TheTeeHeeMonster 23:02, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
6. Kill - You need to explain it a little better, or maybe resubmit with a change. A simple "No target" default dropdown would have gotten a keep vote. -- Nicks 23:03, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
7. Keep - opps, sorry about that. authors note. this isnt about PKing its about organizing the names and knowing who is your allie and who is your foe. as it is, you have to click, search for the name, then attack which wastes time. if they are organized you wouldnt have to be searching through the names of who you want to attack in a heated battle. EvermanX

   the problem is in a battle you either; have only have one target, namely the zombie on top of the stack, and first choice in the attack drop list AS ZOMBIES DON'T HAVE NAMES!(survivors) or you have plenty of targets but no allies in the drop down attack list. (zombies). you have either one or the other. In both cases you don't need to sort the list on allies. so why do you need two different drop down when nobody will come up in one of them?--Vista 00:02, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)

8. Keep - When the last zombie drops and you didn't notice, your shotgun is actualy pointing at the first survivor by default. It's rare, but it happened to me. Annoying when you have little AP/shells for what you want to do, and have to use up a FAK to heal someone to boot. Oh, and Mr Author, please use four little wave things to make your vote's sig, or the second button from the right over the "edit box" (for lack of a better word). Just a nitpick--McArrowni 00:06, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
9. Keep -- Actualy its not always the default on a zombie, if you use a FAK on a person the attack menu resets to the person you used it on. Can I pose a question to you retards? How will this make PKing 'Easier' Its a Low Tech RPG, OMG now the PKer can easily differenciate between friend and'foe'. There is no easier way of PKing, you either do it or you dont, he still has to click the right buttons, OMG this will make a PKer be able to see who he is attacking 1 second faster. this wont change the fact that the person is still PKing, hes gonna do it or not do it regardless of if he has 2 dropdowns or have to click 5 buttons before doing it or have to sign out a form saying " i'm attacking __this_dude__ with my__:shotgun__ so i can__Ruin his day__" this jsut makes it easier for everyone to play the game how they chose, it will cause less accidental friendly fire, and make sure you know your shooting the right target. --Kirk Howell 03:48, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
10. Kill - The current system is just fine. Bentley Foss 04:35, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
11. Kill - This idea is bad for the reasons stated as above - Jedaz 09:23, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
12. Kill - Poor way to deal with the problem. Think about it a bit more Ignatius Newcastle 20:04 7 Feb 2006
    • Tally 3 Keep, 8 Kill, 0 Spam - 19:01, 9 April 2006 (BST)

---

weapon lock in

Timestamp:	22:33, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
Type:	improvement
Scope:	everyone
Description:	i have been noticing that my prefured weapon of choice keeps changing after every or every other attack on both sides. ill be using my axe one second and the next it will change to fists. as a result, instead of using my 40% - 3 damage axe im using my 25% - 1 damage fists. i propose a weapon use lock in. which means when you use an axe for an attack that weapon will still be the weapon of choice the next turn.

Votes

1. Kill - The weapon you used on your last turn is already set as the option. Yes, it swithes back to "fist" if you do something other than attack, but how many times do you suddenly do something other than attack in the middle of a fight? (now, if you suggested sorting the weapons by DPA, i'd vote keep) --Signal9 22:47, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
2. Keep - Let's see, you talk to fellow team mates, you heal other people, you revive a zombie after killing the first zombie with brain rot, you heal yourself, etc. --Shadow213 22:49, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
3. Keep - authors note, exactly what shadow said, why in the word should i take time in reselecting the weapon. you might say because you were doing those other things. you better believe i would have in my hands my weapon of choice as soon as i was done doing what i was doing. no signature. remove strike out when you added your signature --Vista 23:01, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
4. Keep -small, inoffencive, logical. but if somebody can give me a good reason why your selected weapon shouldn't stay selected after talking, healing, etc. I'm willing to listen., because somehow I can't believe its this simple if nobody thought of it before--Vista 23:01, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
5. Kill - I kinda think this falls under the "Just pay attention" clause of the game. -- Nicks 23:05, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
6. Keep - Logical. Nicks - what "just pay attention" clause would that be? --Mikm 23:08, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
   • Re: -- it's a little known clause..it says that If you use "Weapon X", then "Weapon X" is preselected for your next attack. If you do something else (speak, DNA sample, etc) before you attack again, you lose that preselection and should be paying attention before attacking. I think it's hidden next to the "Why Zombies love headshot" clause. -- Nicks 02:25, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
     • Re: - It is reasonable to expect that your weapon selection is persistent. Just because UD CURRENTLY behaves that way doesn't mean it SHOULD/always will.--Mikm 03:15, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
7. Keep - Oops, I forgot. But I agree with shadow. No matter what you do you should always have your trusty side arm or axe always ready EvermanX
8. Keep - There simply is not reason to vote kill.--TheBigT 23:48, 6 Feb 2006 (GMT)
9. Keep - A small change that makes things that extra bit easier. Ignatius Newcastle 00:08, 7 Feb 2006
10. Keep --Lord Evans 00:30, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT) Vote not justified --Grim s 05:26, 8 Feb 2006 (GMT)
11. Keep - I've also had this happen to me. There doesn't seem to be any good reason to vote kill on this. --Kage23 01:12, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
12. Keep - I've accidentally punched a few zombies in my day. --CPQD 03:31, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
13. Keep - good idea. Also someone needs to sugest a way of locking the Attack dropdown to a hostile player, I hate if i heal someone after shooting at a zed, the drop down resets to a human player and i shoot him by accident! --Kirk Howell 03:39, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
    • Re: - look skyward my man. already suggested it. it does need some work. EvermanX
14. Kill - The current system only switches when you do something aside from attack. I'm an advocate of just dealing with it instead of writing code to help with a sporadic lapse in diligence. Bentley Foss 04:38, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
15. Kill - Extra coding effort for little to nill reward. If you do something else other than attacking you should just change it back, it only takes half a second to change it. - Jedaz 09:31, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
16. Kill - I'm with Jedaz. You're just being lazy, clicking the mouse a few times is not so hard, and the weapon select is right next to the attack button. The extra coding could be used on something more useful than this. --Toast Boy 10:09, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
17. Kill - For christ sake; Don't be lazy. What little time you lose changing it shouldn't be a problem, even in a mob battle. --10:49, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT) -- Timestamp only, no signature. --Omega2 13:47, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
18. Keep - If it works for zombies too, when I break into a building and want to bite (infect) as many survivors as possible - every time I change target it defaults to claw, so I have to reselect bite as well as changing targets, which means that the survivors kill me quicker and I get less bites in. --tarzom 11:32, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
19. Keep - It sounds good, nothing against balance, just some improvement in handling the game. Someone says no because the game's good now? Everyone knows that little things make the game better, and more enjoyable. And the suggestion is just about this. --NT 17:27, 7 Feb 2006 (GMT)
20. Keep Anything that makes the typical luxurious North American life easier deserves a keep. AllStarZ 02:50, 8 Feb 2006 (GMT)
21. Keep - "*Bang*, *bang*, *bang*, *bang*, *bang*, *bang*, *reloading noise*, *thud*, bollocks, *bang*, etc." --Bert Krutters 20.21, 9 Feb 2006 (GMT)
    • Tally 13 Keep, 5 Kill, 0 Spam - 19:00, 9 April 2006 (BST)

---