Suggestions/7th-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

Inventory Display Options

Timestamp: 05:01, 7 April 2006 (BST)
Type: Improvement
Scope: Inventories
Description: Inventories are cluttered. It'd be nice if multiple items could be condensed like so:

Instead of [GPS Unit] [First Aid Kit] [First Aid Kit] [Pistol 0] [Pistol (3)] [Pistol 1] [Pistol 3] [Fire Axe] [GPS Unit] you could have, listed alphabetically in bulleted form exactly like so:

  • [Fireaxe]
  • [2 First Aid Kit]
  • [2 GPS Unit]
  • [Pistol (0)]
  • [Pistol (1)]
  • [2 Pistol (3)]

Since some people might prefer the current system there could be a "Condense Inventory Display" check box under your edit profile page to let you choose to switch to this layout. And of course once you switch that check box would be replaced with "Expand Inventory Display" to change back if you prefer it this way.

I'd prefer a system like this and making it optional would prevent anyone from being forced to switch. Inventories are a cluttered mess and I frequently find things I didn't even realize I had. It's a nice surprise of course but I'd rather have a short list like the one above. And while I know there's a firefox extension for this, using firefox and downloading additional materials shouldn't be a requirement to have a logical interface in Urban Dead.

  • Note: In response to voter concerns the list could get too long and force them to scroll, it would work just as well if the items were presented in two or three columns, but still bulleted and listed alphabetically.

Votes

  1. Keep Just a small change that improves inventory layout. Doesn't change gameplay mechanics and it's entirely optional. Relatively simple to implement too I'd believe... --Jon Pyre 05:08, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  2. Keep - Keep. Keep. Keep! (Did I mention this was a "Keep!"? --Gene W! - Talk 06:07, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  3. Kill - I think the Firefox extension takes the right route to organization. A bulleted list could get long. Now, make one that imitates the Firefox extension, and I'll keep it. --Pinpoint 06:08, 7 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re I personally don't mind scrolling down an inch of page. What I dislike is having a chaotic mess. I suggest this because this would be pretty simple to code. But yeah, making firefox extensions part of the gameplay itself would be nice if practical. --Jon Pyre 07:08, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  4. Keep - Don't see any reson not to - Jedaz 07:39, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  5. Kill - I do like the alphabetical and quantized grouping of items. I don' like checkboxes and preferences that alter the underlying player db. It blows the simplicity of your suggestion, and adds confusion, learning curve and reduces the ease to implement. --Spraycan Willy MalTel 08:22, 7 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re There's one checkbox. One. It exists on your edit profile page. Check it and save your profile and your display is changed. Uncheck it and you go back. It's quite simple, and simpler than changing your screen resolution or OS color palette. --Jon Pyre 14:10, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  6. Kill - What the other Kill votes said. Plus, it's a dupe ten times over.--The General 09:35, 7 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re Making it optional is the new detail. Most previous suggestions along these lines (none of which I believe is identical anyway) gave no options, and were killed by players who prefer the current system and didn't want to change unwillingly. --Jon Pyre 14:08, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  7. Kill - I'm in total agreement with Pinpoint, the firefox extension works well if an improvement were to be made it should follow that model -- FallenAngel 11:10, 7 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re Just making something simple to code. A 3D holographic interface would be nice, I agree. But I'm trying to suggest something Kevan could make without taking too long. --Jon Pyre 14:16, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  8. Keep - You know it's a good suggestion when most of the kill votes are nitpicks. I'm a bit less demanding. --McArrowni 12:57, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  9. Keep -Great idea, plus it gives you the option. Please dont vote based on " Use a firefox extention" its essencaly a hack of the game to help out and shouldnt have to be used, any features/suggestions should be part of the game and not ignored because there is a firefox extention. some of us dont want to have to use extentions ( BTW i do use firefox, I just think its cheating to use hacks) --Kirk Howell 14:54, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  10. Keep - Ok I change mine to keep as long as its not compulsary to use it, --Killer 23:05, 7 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re What server load? This would store one tiny additional bit of information, which pales compared to inventory, health, skills, infection status. The rest could probably be done with some simple JavaScript. --Jon Pyre 16:08, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  11. Kill - I had a Firefox extension which did the same thing, but I did not like it. I like this more. --Abi79 15:42, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  12. Keep - It's simple, it works. It even adds next to no server load, which really shouldn't be important besause SERVER LOAD IS A POOR REASON TO KILL A SUGGESTION, per the voting guidelines. --Reverend Loki 17:15, 7 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re Yeah, I don't think it would cause any significant server load at all. A JavaScript function could just make buttons appear differently depending on the saved value of the checkbox. That's really nothing. --Jon Pyre 17:40, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  13. kill without the alphabetical order part its a dupe of Inventory_Stacking and the alphabetical order seams abit pointless. server load isnt a valid reason on its own, but this would add a whole new level of processing on every page load.--xbehave 01:21, 8 April 2006 (BST)
  14. Kill - I dislike the bulleted list. I'll keep my FF extension, thanks.--Wifey 03:50, 8 April 2006 (BST)
  15. Keep -It's at least one option of how to handle the inventory. It's not a dupe as it differs, even if in a slight way. So if you have several close but not the same suggestions, what happens when they share the same Peer-Accepted Page? It allows one to choose between several options. Hell, a truly ambitious coder could take a few of his favorite inventory options and put them all in, giving the player a checkbox that allowed a choice between "Inventory Themes" (including the Default No Theme). And if I were truly ambitious, I could work the preceding idea into what could be the Peer Review's first META-Suggestion! But I'm not that ambitious. Oh, and you would probably need several (2 or more) columns to make it work, at least as I see it.--Xavier06 14:37, 8 April 2006 (BST)
  16. Kill - Get firefox. Get an extension. And allow me to back up my point: the game links you to the wiki in order to tell you how to play. The wiki links you to firefox extensions. They are "legal" they are "approved of" they keep all the useless suggestions that would waste coding time which could be used to improve gameplay off of the Peer Reviewed page. If you don't like extensions then you shouldn't use the map of Malton, the Wiki, a pen and paper (or program) to keep notes or the forums as they do exactly the same things. DavidMalfisto 13:37, 9 April 2006 (BST)
  17. Kill - Don't suggest features that would make pointless the work done by extension authors. This is bad for the game, bad for the community, and not very nice at all. --einexile 10:41, 14 April 2006 (BST)
  18. Kill - Firefox and extensions are good enough. --Jack Well 11:45, 20 April 2006 (BST)
  19. Keep - great idea I have such a hard time finding my fak and sringes this would make it easer--Avicm 19:07, 20 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 9 Keep, 10 Kill, 0 Spam 05:31, 21 April 2006 (BST)

Barricade Modification

Timestamp: 10:30, 7 April 2006 (BST)
Type: Barricade Modification
Scope: Survivors and Zombies
Description: Ok, I suggested something very very similar to this yesterday and it got shot down. I went and took what people said into consideration and modified it so it hopefully will be more accepted. So if this fails as well then I'll give up on this idea because otherwise it obviously won't be accepted ever.

So basically this idea gives more depth and strategy into barricades and how they are used. What I suggest is that there are two kinds of barricades, ones on the inside and ones on the outside. However you can only have one set on the building at a time. Now I'm not going to suggest a new button to make either one, what I'm suggesting is that the type of barricade is based off wether the doors are open or not. If they are open then you are going to build them on the outside because it's more secure. However if the doors are closed then you can't get outside so you build them on the inside.

So you are probably asking at the moment, what’s the difference between this system and the current one which is easier to understand? Well other than flavour text of "The barricades have been built on the outside/inside and appear to be (barricade strength)", when the barricades are built on the inside attackers have a 5% more chance to damaged the barricades. So if a Zombie has a 20% chance to destroy the barricades then it goes up to 25% chance to destroy them.

This will primarily help newbie zombies because most people would then make barricades on the outside for security and therefore have the doors open. So when the newbie comes along and finally destroys the barricades they will be able to enter the building. This will mean that newbies won’t have to rely on the older players to gain levels. This will also not effect the older zombie players at they will have already gained the skill memories of life and would be able to enter the building regardless.

If this is implemented then all barricades should be considered to be built on the inside as the doors would already be closed. Also this would only increase the database by 1 8-bit (1-bit if Kevan wanted) variable for each building. So it would total less then 1 Mega byte, which is less then the size of most MP3s.

So in summary, this is suggesting for there to be two types of barricades. One on the outside with a normal hit rate and one on the inside with a +5% hit rate on the barricades. They cannot exist at the same time though. This would only increase the database size by less then 1MB if Kevan uses 8-bit variables.

Votes

  1. Kill - Nice idea but in order to make work in a balanced way you've had to detatch it from logic, why would a more accessible barricade on the outside be more difficult to destroy?? I'm well aware of the frustration of smashing down a barricade just to come up against a closed door, but I think other suggestions have come up with better ways of dealing with this, including attackable doors, zombies classes allowing the zed to start with a skill of their choice, i.e if they chose not to take Memories of life their fault. -- FallenAngel 11:18, 7 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Um, my logic was that if you hit something thats strait against a wall then it's not going to move as easily then if there was nothing behind it. - Jedaz 11:31, 7 April 2006 (BST) Edit - (Just realized how that sounded) To clarafy, the ones on the inside would have nothing supporting them from behind, where as the ones on the outside would have the door frame to support them. - Jedaz 11:44, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  2. Keep - I can't recall the exact mechanic, but how easy is it for a survivor to open the door from the inside? Is there a button for that, do they have to leave and come back, etc.? Anyway, I like the tradeoff you've got going here. Either make your building more accessible to low-level zeds, or make it easier for high-level zeds to break into. Makes for interesting strategic considerations. --John Ember 15:27, 7 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Yep, thats right, theres a button to open/close doors. But no one opens the doors because theres no point at the moment - Jedaz 03:48, 8 April 2006 (BST)
  3. Kill K.I.S.S. I don't think this needs to be made more complex. Also Memories Of Life gives zombies something to work for, I earned it without too much difficulty by preying on the foolish wandering survivors and by following groans. --Jon Pyre 16:22, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  4. Kill Isn't it rather non-intuitive that barricades built on the inside - behind stone walls and the like - are easier to destroy? Ignatius Newcastle 16:23, 7 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Well we are presuming that the Zombies can notice a doorway. I mean if they are going to attack stone walls then they arn't going to get in no matter what. - Jedaz 03:50, 8 April 2006 (BST)
  5. Keep - Doesn't bother me, cuz it makes sense. --MrAushvitz 10:27, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  6. Kill Following groans is a good work around to not having MoL. I levelled 3 zombies that way. It's relatively painless, in fact. --Mookiemookie 18:31, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  7. Kill - a needlessly complicated unneeded workaround.--Vista W! 20:31, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  8. Kill - Doesn't hitting the barricade button AUTOMATICALLY close the doors anyway? Why would inside barricades suddenly be easier to dislodge? --Pesatyel 05:20, 8 April 2006 (BST)
    • Re - And wasn't there also the rule of no free lunches? This stops the doors from being close automatically. Why shouldn't they be easier to dislodge? - Jedaz 06:56, 8 April 2006 (BST)
  9. Kill - KISS. Just suggest barracading doesn't automatically close doors. DavidMalfisto 13:40, 9 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 2 Keep, 7 Kill, 0 Spam 05:31, 21 April 2006 (BST)

Modifcation to Diagnose skill

Suggestion considered to be a dupe of Prognosis with 1 Keep, 2 Kill, and 4 Dupe votes. For those of you playing the home game, a dupe vote is for suggestions that are exactly the same, or similar enough to, previous suggestions and only a mod can declare a vote invalid. Velkrin 18:18, 7 April 2006 (BST)

Untreated Infection

Timestamp: 11:49, 7 April 2006 (BST)
Type: Flavour, change
Scope: survivors
Description: Not sure if this has been suggestion - have scoped out all suggestions, and this hasn't seem to have come up. If it has, please let me know.

If a survivor has been infected, and the infection goes untreated for 72 hours, the survivor automatically becomes a zombie, regardless of the survivors HP.

At the 72nd hour, the survivor "dies" and must stand up in the normal way. When they "die" the survivors body could be dumped outside like any other dead body.

I think this could be very insteresting, in terms of realism, gameplay and also adds a flavour element. At the moment, survivors can wait around for a medi kit to cure their ailment, but if that treatment wasn't forthcoming, they would have no choice but to succumb to infection, or seek out a hospital. It would thus make movement of the player critical for survival, in that the survivor would possibly need to move from an area with no hospitals. This gives added tension to the fact that the infected survivor would be losing 1HP per AP used.

Evidently, this would also aid zombie spies, and would make the quick disposal of bodies (something that I believe is already done religiously) even more important.

A message would also be displayed when the survivor dies:

The infection takes hold of your body, spreading through each and every cell, up into your brain. Convulsing and foaming at the mouth, everything goes black. You have joined the world of the undead.

Votes

  1. Keep Author Vote Don D Crummitt 11:49, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  2. Kill - This is pointless, in most cases the survivor will either die from the infection or get healed within 24 hours. - Jedaz 11:56, 7 April 2006 (BST)
    • RE Healed within 24 hours? Is there a stat for this anywhere? I've stood around waiting for heals for days. That's when the idea sprung to mind. Don D Crummitt 12:04, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  3. Kill - Leave my sleepy characters alone. --McArrowni 13:00, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  4. Kill - Why punish infected inactive players for being both infected and inactive? (Or worse, infected while inactive). --Grim s 13:05, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  5. Kill - Because the suggestion made mention of the McCarthy-esque "zombie spies." Also, what grim said.--Mookiemookie 14:24, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  6. Kill - First off, you even said zombie spies would use it. typicaly these people don't point out the real purpose behind the suggestion, kudos for that...Plus i dont know where YOU hang out, but everywhere i go i can get and FAK in a couple hours of sitting around with friends. And this is awful because it hurts idle players. --Kirk Howell 14:59, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  7. Kill - Punishing inactive players would make other people not want to join this game at all. Why play UD if, when you are on a vacation, you will die in 3 days if you get infected? --Abi79 15:34, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  8. Kill This is counterintuitive as the game actually protects people who go idle by making them invulnerable. With this they would be dead in 3 days but untouchable in 5. It defeats the purpose. --Jon Pyre
  9. Keep - Very good idea, suprised noone thought of it before. Prevents people from being in "infection limbo" when they log off indefinately. Despite what others have said, logging out while infected and not accessing a character for a long time why wouldn't they die? Jon makes a good point about 5 day invulnerability, but still if you're infected, doesn't make a lot of sense. --MrAushvitz 10:27, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  10. Kill The server would need to timestamp every infection to start, more server work. And remember that time != AP. This suggestion just screws anybody who doesn't check all their characters daily. --Zaruthustra-Mod 17:08, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  11. Kill - 3 days after bitten and not logging in, become a zed. 4th day, you "disappear". Seems to unfairly penalize idlers. --Reverend Loki 17:24, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  12. Kill -for reasons given--Vista W! 20:28, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  13. Kill - Y do u wanna kill my Spray Can Scout!--Killer 23:10, 7 April 2006 (BST)
  14. Kill - Some people can only play on weekends, and shouldn't be punished for that. With this if they were infected early in the week they are screwed. I don't like punishing people for things that aren't really their fault. So no.--Hamster Ninja 1:10, 8 April 2006 (BST)
  15. Kill If survivors could tell by sight if a survivor is infected, this MAYBE could get a keep. But even a survivor at full HP (minus the bite damage) is bound to get a heal before then (or, heaven forbid, LOOK for one HIMSELF) or die of the infection.--Pesatyel 05:24, 8 April 2006 (BST)
  16. Kill - All the reasons above. DavidMalfisto 13:47, 9 April 2006 (BST)
  17. Kill - You need to stop pretending that this is real life and stop pretending that time out of the game equals that much time passed in game (for the characters). If this is akin to real life, why would I lug around several of the same guns when one would suffice? If time passes in-game at the same rate it passes outside the game, then why would my character take out several zombies, find a safehouse, and then sleep for 24 hours? All this aside, its not a suggestion, its anarchy in suggestion form. It won't make the game better or more fun. Survivors will hate it (obviously), but so will the Zed Spies who you claim would benefit, since it effectively make every survivor a walking, talking ZS. Hey, even Zed Spies are bound to dislike that much competition...--Xavier06 16:41, 9 April 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 2 Keep, 15 Kill, 0 Spam 05:27, 21 April 2006 (BST)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Suggestions/7th-Apr-2006&oldid=208652"