Suggestions/8th-Mar-2007

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

Closed Suggestions

  1. These suggestions are now closed. No more voting or editing is to be done to them.
  2. Suggestions with a rational Vote tally of 2/3 Keeps over total of Keeps, Kills, and Spams will be moved to the Peer Reviewed Suggestions page by a moderator, unless the original author has re-suggested the Suggestion.
  3. Suggestions under the 2/3 proportion but with more or equal Keeps to Kills ration will be moved to the Undecided Suggestions page.
  4. All other Suggestions will be moved to either the Peer Rejected Suggestions page or the Humorous Suggestions page.
  5. Some suggestions may not be moved in a timely manner; moving Suggestions to Peer Reviewed Suggestions page will take higest priority.
  6. Again, DO NOT EDIT THIS PAGE IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM. It will be used as a historical record and will eventually be locked.
Suggestion Navigation
Suggestion Portal
Current Suggestions • Suggestions up for Voting • Clothes Suggestions
Cycling Suggestions • Peer Reviewed • Undecided • Peer Rejected • Humorous
Suggestion Advice • Topics to Avoid and Why • Help, Developing and Editing

Throwing and Advanced Throwing

Timestamp: Valore 00:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Type: New Skill
Scope: Survivors
Description: Basically a new skill set for survivors, placed under civilian skills. What it does is simple. It allows you to throw items at enemies, i.e you lose the item in question in your inventory by chucking it at a target as an attack. This costs 1AP.

The first tier, throwing, allows you a 25% chance to hit with the item you throw.

The second tier allows you a 50% chance.

All and any items, with the exception of axes and knives deal 1 damage if they are thrown and successfully hit the target.

Knives deal 2 damage if they are thrown and hit the target.

Axes deal 3 damage if they are thrown and hit the target.

And yes, this will cause a headshot on a zombie kill.

Possible questions from the audience:

Q: But axes would do 1.5 damage per AP! That's insane!

A: Yes, but you spending about a month's worth of AP in order to stock up on a full inventory of axes is even more insane, there are far more efficient ways currently to kill people.

Q: But that's stupid! How will chucking a newspaper at a zombie do 1 damage???

A: The same way you are able to perform what appears to be a full blown Street Fighter style shourykken reppa punch headshot to a zombie. Maybe you rolled the newspaper up into a cone and the pointy part poked the zed in the eye.

Q: What would this skill serve?

A: Well, you waste less IP dropping stuff for one. It'll allow you to clear inventory space while doing damage at the same time. Plus if you happen to find spare axes and knives while searching for other things in a hardware store, you now have a reason to keep them. Plus, personally, I think its realistic to throw axes and knives at people. If I were stuck in a zombie apocalypse, I wouldn't start chucking random axes and knives away, I'd save em to throw at someone if I was any good at it.

Keep Votes
For Votes here

  1. provisional keep you need to get rid of the potential to injure people with books and other stupid crap but the rest seems fine... just because a lot of people would not want to waste inventory and search time should not stop those of us that do. As for the "you can't throw fireaxes maob" why the hell not? I mean when was the last time anyone in the UK even saw a fire axe for real... I think they use those rams the police have for raiding crack houses! Hatchets on the other hand are still very common.--Honestmistake 17:12, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. Keep - Honestmistake, ur crazy. I would love to toss a rolled up newspaper at your face. Keep the funny items (for sheer humor value)! Mattiator 03:29, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. Keep - Player steps outside, goes to town throwing away crap he doesn't need.. at zombies, get a little XP for it. Simple enough, barely kills zombies anyways... MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 06:19, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  4. Keep - Mr.A said it above. - BzAli 13:53, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Kill Votes
Against Votes here

  1. Kill - Interesting idea, but with the encumberance thing newly put into the game, most people would probably rather chuck a random axe they find for 0 AP and search again for something like a pistal clip or shotgun shell. After all, you even have to go out of your way to find a zed to chuck it at this way. Though it might be a fun way to waste AP, it probably won't be worth the AP and inventory/encamberance space. --Storyteller 01:37, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. Kill or Revise - Maybe if you changed it to include only certain items, the knives should hurt more. For the last time, YOU CANNOT THROW A FIRE AXE LIKE A THROWING AXE!!!! Seriously people, stop suggesting it. --Graaj 01:49, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Re - If I got a professional Olympic hammer thrower to chuck a fire axe at you, I'd bet you fifty bucks that it does a heck of a lot more than 3 damage. And, if I gave you a choice of that Olympic hammer thrower using a knife or an axe, I think I know which you'd choose as well. This isn't meant to be deadeye, knife through a fly style throwing, its just a measure of strength of how hard you can chuck something at someone.--Valore 02:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. Kill -This needs a bit more work. It's not overpowered by any means, and it would give some useless items a minor use. The problem is that it fails the belivability test when you get to things like fuel cans and generators.--Nucleon 02:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Re - I would agree somewhat, except that the believability died a long time ago with me lugging about 3 generators AND free running. I thought about it more in the terms of if you're chucking something as unbalanced and heavy as a generator at someone, your accuracy is likely to go to hell, and at most perhaps you'd wing him with the item. --Valore 02:33, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  4. Gee. Maybe you should toss in ninja stars in the mix. In fact, don't. I'm pretty sure there's a suggestion like this in Rejected... --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 12:54, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  5. Kill - Throwing some items should not do damage. --ZombieSlay3rSig.png 22:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  6. I always liked the idea of being able to throw stuff. Makes some of the useless crap less uesles and it isn't like people HAVE to do it. They can still drop like normal. I just don't think you should throw fire axes.--Pesatyel 02:26, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  7. revise - only knives and axes should be thrown, and knives should have a much higher percentage than axes. and the hits should be higher than if you were to throw them. --EL Zillcho 02:39, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  8. Errr... -- Ohh How much I like this, but it could use some changes, 1. Switch the knife and axe damage, cause knives are better for throwing, 2. disallow throwing of to light of heavy items, like generators or newpapers. Those are my suggestions for it, then it's fine by me --Lord Evans 05:03, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
  9. Kill - Thrown newspapers and crucifixes doing damage? Sorry, I don't think so. And who in their right mind would throw a fire axe? A survivor who even seriously considers the idea deserves to be killed (where's ASS when you need 'em?). And by the way, punch headshots DO make sense, considering that any sort of blunt force trauma to the head can cause significant brain damage if there is enough force and/or is applied to the right places (the nosebone, jaw, and temple are all prime candidates). --Reaper with no name TJ! 18:23, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. Slight dupe- Knife Throw. I kinda like this skill, but I already got a throwing skill into Peer Reviewed. Sorry. Tryce of Thunder 03:25, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Cell Phone Whiz (aka picture phone)

Timestamp: 02:13, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Type: Skill
Scope: survivors with cell phones
Description: This suggestion is inspired by the peer reviewed digital camera, and also by the fact that screen shots (as currently used) can be forged, and by the fact that cell phones are currently almost useless. It improves on that suggestion by not requiring a new item, by making a fairly useless item rather useful, by adding powerful new functionality, by eliminating the need for the server to store and serve the "pictures", and probably in other ways.

A survivor with this skill knows how to use advanced cell phone features, including (but potentially not limited to) the phone's camera. They gain the ability to "film" short clips of scenes they are at, if they have a cell phone, and send it to others, including "people outside the city".

Filming a clip sends a copy of the descriptive text displayed on the current game screen to an email address of the players choice. This is not the full HTML or any forms, just the screen text that describes the scene and any events that have occurred, such as a player killing another player, or people saying things, etc. This email would originate from "character_name@urbandead.com" or some such, making it fairly convincing, though still vulnerable to spoofing. However, the clip's text would also be digitally signed, making such spoofing detectable, and also making it possible to verify forwarded / public posted copies of the e-mail. The signature would use PGP encryption or some such. The public key and such (needed for verification) could be listed on the character's profile page, and both this and the private key (which would never need to be known by anybody but the server, even the player) would be based off the character's id # and password, or some other unique, durable, hidden value associated with the character.

This cell phone feature would function even in areas without cell towers, and is always available. It is assumed that the phone stores the "image" and sends it at some time when service is briefly available, or that this sort of data transfer has a longer range / lower bandwidth requirement than full duplex voice communications.

Keep Votes

  1. WTFZOMBIES - good idea. Mattiator 03:25, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. Keep We already have cellphones, makes them less useless.MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 06:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. Author - The game world and RL are already intertwined via metagaming. This could help make that connection less prone to dishonest manipulation. S.Wiers X:00x-mas tree dead pool 22:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
    • It should be noted when the suggestion voting is reviewed that the above is more complex than needed; if the server simply had one public key that could be used to verify a text was in fact sent by urbandead.com, and the text included the sending characters name, that would be plenty good. There is no need for a separate key set for each character.S.Wiers X:00x-mas tree dead pool 18:00, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
  4. Keep - I like this idea, I really do. --Sgt. John TaggartUNIT 11/5 WCDZ TJ! 00:01, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
  5. Keep I need a way to report me being PKed because I don't know how to use a photo hosting site. --Boom12389 01:01, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
  6. Keep - This is just like the PR suggestion (which is very, very good), only even better because it does not require a new item and instead adds function to a practically useless item. --Reaper with no name TJ! 18:25, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Kill Votes

  1. Cell phones are not useless. They are use for private communications with other survivors. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 12:58, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
    There is nothing above that says they are useless. It says "almost useless" and "fairly useless", which a simple poll could easily verify as a widely held opinion, given that thier effect is so easy to duplicate (in a much superior form) via metagaming. Why not to make them more useful? --S.Wiers X:00x-mas tree dead pool 15:13, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. Kill Let's keep the game and RL seperated. - BzAli 13:54, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes
Spam/Dupe Votes here

Zerg-Free Trading

Timestamp: Jon Pyre 06:11, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Type: Improvement, Skill
Scope: Survivors
Description: The encumbrance nerf prevents a survivor from stocking up with everything they could possibly ever need, example: 15 shotguns a generator and 8 FAKS in one inventory. Now that you can't carry everything on your own it makes sense that survivors should be able to exchange items with each other as the need arises.

I suggest introducing a Shopping subskill called Trading. The only problem with trading, as previously imagined, is zerging. One character could make a dozen slave characters to find them items and then have the zergs hand them all over to the real character. To avoid this each item will have a value assigned to it based on its rarity, and you can only receive something from another character by giving them items of equal value that they have requested. Items could be valued in categories like worthless (books, newspapers for instance), common (first-aid), limited (shotgun shell), scare (syringes), and rare (generators). So perhaps you could trade two first aid kits for a shotgun shell, three first-aid kits for a syringe, or 1 first-aid kit and 1 shotgun shell for a syringe, or a syringe for 1 shotgun shell, etc. The value of each item is something that will require thought but it should balance between the AP cost of finding it and the demand for it. For instance an axe is harder to find AP wise than a first-aid kit but since axes are infinite use and nobody needs more than one perhaps they'd share the same value. Some items could be more or less valuable depending on circumstance, for instance pistol (0) might be common, pistol (5) could be limited. To avoid confusion it might be best to bar trading of partially loaded guns.

I'm not sure if you're familiar with the old trading screen in Oregon Trail. A similar mechanic might work here. You'd have a new link next to wiki and profile links: "Trading". It would bring up your trading preference screen. On the left would have a list of every item in the game coupled with a checkbox for each. You would check off the items you are willing to receive. In the middle would be a listing every item you have, individually with a checkbox, so you could choose what you would be willing to part with. On the right side there would be a drop down menu "Trade for", also listing every item in the game. Clicking "trade for" would bring up the first person in the room with that item willing to trade it. You'd see the desire item on the right, and all your items that person is willing to accept each with a checkbox. Check off the items you want. As long as the value is equal the trade will go through. There'd also be "Trade away" which would bring up a random offer for the item of yours you put away. You could then choose whether or not to accept it.

Upon logging back in the person who was traded with while they were away would see a message like this:

MaltonGuy traded 3 first-aid kits to you in exchange for a revivification syringe (4 hours ago).

Trading would cost the person initiating the trade 1AP. The person traded with suffers no cost since it'd all occur while they're logged away.

So this should prevent zergers from gaining by this system. Sure a zerger could give one character the other's guns in exchange for the other's first-aid, but they don't gain anything more than if they just used the characters without swapping inventories to heal and defend the other. The zerg flag would of course prevent characters from trading items just in case, even though it wouldn't be worth a zerger's time and AP.

Keep Votes

  1. Author The problem with trading as originally imagined is that it was actually gifting. By requiring an equal value in return it removes all incentive for a zerger to use this, while still allowing survivors to split up and collect what their safehouse needs seperately. A zerger can use all their character's items when they want. Having one character with nothing but shotguns and one with nothing but first-aid kits doesn't limit them. Individuals however need a bit of diversity, but making a trip to the mall just to grab the one or two FAKs your inventory can hold doesn't make sense anymore. Now characters could make runs, stock up on more than they need, and trade the surplus. "Merchants assemble!" "I'll go to the hospital!" "I'll swing by the PD and get ammo." "I'll visit the NT, see you soon." "Let's roll"--Jon Pyre 06:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. Keep - I think this might work! And in response to Funt's very good point, you don't have to metagame for this to work. Just hang out in populated areas when you want to do some trading. Which is pretty much what you would do anyway. --Uncle Bill 13:00, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. Keep - I suppose, it'd be better with some sort of money system. I wish that the zerging safeguards were just stronger. It's not really needed though --Graaj 03/08/07 14:08 (UTC)
  4. Keep - I didn't think I would ever see a decent trade suggestion, but I actually like this one and it is relatively simple. You just list the items you don't want and what you do want. Then you log in the next day and somebody may have traded with you. IMO, the trade value should be based on the search % for that item (max percentage in the best powered building) and not the usefulness. @ Funt, there is value in trading even if items are of equal value, if you have 20 FAK and need a pistol clip, and another guy has 20 pistol clips and is infected and needs a FAK, then... It seems like it will just help with getting useful items. May be unbalancing (could possibly just reduce search rates to counter). Still open to minor zerging, but if you just don't allow trading between characters with the same IP that would eliminate all but the most ardent zergers. --Gm0n3y 18:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  5. Keep - I think this would be a great addition; the points system, once fully knocked out, is a good way to prevent Zerging. One thing, though- what about if one trades and the trade makes their encombrance too high? Chives 20:35, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Re I suppose the trading sytem could not present trades if they would cause either one to overburden themselves. --Jon Pyre 07:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  6. Keep - I like it. Haven't got a FAK? Swap for one! Bit of a concern as Chives though. --Preasure 20:51, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  7. Keep - this would make the game more interesting i think.--Blood Panther 23:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  8. Keep - Hmmm, I still see some holes in this suggestion, but its the best item-trading suggestion i've seen so far. Mattiator 03:24, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  9. keep - I will trade you 5 beers and this poster of pamela anderson for a medikit! --Ev933n / Talk PPGC 16:38, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  10. Keep - I have not enough ammo and too many fuel cans, and whatever remedies this... --Cap'n Silly T/W/P/CAussieflag.JPG 20:42, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  11. Mmm, tasty - This has to be the best trading suggestion I've seen in a while. --Sgt. John TaggartUNIT 11/5 WCDZ TJ! 00:05, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
  12. Keep - You could also put all the trading interface bellow all the normal stuff. This would save an IP hit to open a new window. --Greataxe
  13. Keep - And more plausible than a never-ending supply of items, too. --Forlorad 18:09, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Kill Votes

  1. Kill - If you get the balance right, and everything is of equal value (regarding the cost to find), then there's no point in trading. Otherwise, this isn't zerg-free at all. Plus, the complexity of implementation means that only meta-gamers can trade efficiently. Otherwise, how do you deal with making an offer and the other person leaving and so on. I don't know - seems like a lot of bother to go to for not much positive (or fun) result. --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 08:47, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Re There's one thing you're forgetting: travel time! Imagine if the nearest unransacked PD is eight spaces away and the nearest hospital eight in the other direction. Before you could take one trip and stock up on enough ammo/faks to last you for a while. There was less need to travel to resource buildings. Before we were shopping at Costco and taking our SUV to drive stuff back. Now we're going to the grocery and walking back with a small bag. Since the amount of trips needed is vastly higher is makes more sense for survivors to cooperate by splitting up and getting items to exchange with their allies. Travelling 8 spaces to pick up the one FAK you can carry doesn't make sense. --Jon Pyre 07:07, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
    • re - Which brings us back to the zerg problem again. (You see, I had factored in the travel time.) --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 12:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. As Funt. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 13:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. Kill - As Funt Solo. --ZombieSlay3rSig.png 22:16, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  4. Kill - Kill --Aeneid 01:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  5. Kill - Funt's got it right. And there are still holes open for zerging. --Ducis DuxSlothTalk 02:10, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  6. Kill - Its to confusing, and what if its a allie trying give you some extra ammo free of charge? -- Blackzilla1 09:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Re They would not be permitted to give you something without receiving something in return. Sure in the real world you can give things freely but games sometimes need arbitrary limitations. For instance you can't burn zombies to permanently kill them even though that would theoretically work. Why not? Because it's a game and that would break it. --Jon Pyre 13:54, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes
Spam/Dupe Votes here

Allow Survivors to Choose what they want to keep when they search

Timestamp: =Sipex 10:28, 8 March 2007 (EST)
Type: Search Modification
Scope: Survivors
Description: This would be a simple add-on, just something like a preferences page where you select check-boxes (and save) to indicate what your character will automatically keep if they find it. By default all the check-boxes will be checked, allowing the game to act like it does now: You find something, if you can carry it you keep it.

I didn't see this already suggested anywhere (although it might have been a long while ago) and I figured with the new encumberance change that it would be a useful add-on.

A quick overview of what would happen is, let's say I go to the gun store to restock, but I've already got more guns than I could ever want, so I just want ammo. I change my preferences and unclick the "Keep All Pistols I Find" and "Keep All Shotguns I Find" check boxes, save my preferences and start searching.

This would not change search rates, but simply what your character would do if they found the item, so if my character picked up a pistol or shotgun instead of keeping it a message something like the following would be displayed. "You find a pistol and decide against keeping it, placing it back where you found it." along with a link to the preferences page afterwards. The main goal of this is to reduce IP hits, instead of having my character pick up an item I don't want and then wasting an IP hit to drop it, it's all done at one time.

implemented 20th April 2007

Keep Votes

  1. Keep - Close, but I think this is different enough from other suggestions to not be a dupe. I like it, simple and complete. --Gm0n3y 18:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. Keep - I guess it really doesn't make a difference to the game, since dropping an item cost 0 AP anyway, but this does get rid of the need to drop an unwanted item whenever we find one. Changed to outright keep. Good Idea! --Storyteller 23:35, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. Keep - The only thing I don't like about this suggestion is that it would give you a list of all the items in the game. --Toejam 20:26, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  4. Keep - Nice idea. --Abi79 AB 21:00, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  5. Keep - Having to drop unwanted items is always a pain. --ZombieSlay3rSig.png 22:27, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  6. Keep Yes, yes and yes. FriedFish.ca 23:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  7. Keep As anyone who plays 3 alts, I would love to see this one inplemented--♠ Che ♠-T GC X 23:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  8. Keep - You find a newspaper, and decide to set the useless piece of crap on fire and dance on its ashes. --Valore 01:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  9. Keep - Yup. Always wanted something like this. --Ducis DuxSlothTalk 02:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  10. Keep- I like the idea. I cant think of anything to say against it. Cant wait for it to come out into play.--User:drumzero666 02:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  11. Keep - I've always thought the game needed something like this. You don't know how many GPS units I've had to drop in just the last two weeks. --Uncle Bill 02:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  12. KEEEP!!! especially if Valore's idea would be implemented for all items. You pick up a piece of pipe and toss it out the window. It hits (somebody outside), causing them to rant at you. Mattiator 03:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  13. Keep Every suggestion that cuts down on the annoying elements, is a good suggestion. MrAushvitz Canadianflag-sm.jpg 06:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  14. Anyone sane would want this --Jon Pyre 07:12, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  15. Keep - Eh, not bad. Would save me a bit of time over dropping things I don't want individually (and on 56k that actually takes awhile). --Mold 08:02, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  16. keep nice an useful Skkp 08:39, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  17. Keep - God yes please. No more wirecutters. MoyesT RPM 08:41, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  18. Keep - I love it! I always wanted to search for shotgun shells and shells only. Blackzilla1 09:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  19. Love it...but change one thing here...I have enough Pistols and Shotguns, but I keep those that have ammo in it if I find another. I want to drop the empty firearm, instead of dropping a firearm that may have ammo in it. Do something about that part, please! --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 13:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  20. Keep! Excellent idea!! - BzAli 13:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  21. Keep - Autodrop useless would NOT nullify your suggestion. *support* --Forlorad 18:12, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Kill Votes

  1. Sort-of dupe -If the autodrop useless items suggestion was implemented this would be useless. --AlexanderRM 4:59 PM, 10 March 2007 (EST)

Note: there appears to be some sort of glitch that prevents me from putting this in the spam/dupe section. if you know how please feel free to move it there.
Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. Dupe-Also not a good idea, because it essentially removes useless items from the game. --Reaper with no name TJ! 18:44, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Wait

Timestamp: Canuhearmenow Hunt! 21:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Type: New button.
Scope: allows more pain-free active searching.
Description: This would add a new button, which would be called "Wait" to all players menu's, the use? It behaves like the refresh button, except it does not cost an AP (It costs an IP, though) So you don't have to slowly whittle away your AP waiting for a response or a sudden lowering of Barricades.

Keep Votes

  1. Keep - Author Vote, basing this off of the fact that when I press my refresh button it consumes an AP.--Canuhearmenow Hunt! 21:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. I'd use this to heal a survivor zombies are attacking while I'm on. -Certified=Insane☭Québécois 04:08, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. Keep - In opposition to those below: Not everyone is quite that internet savy (yeah, I know, amazing, isn't it?) and I'm sure even those that are would like a shortcut. As for Gm0n3y's comment, they're going to waste their IP hits with or without this button. --SirensT RR 05:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  4. Rather useful when having a short chat with someone who's also active. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 13:37, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Kill Votes

  1. Kill - Not needed. Type "www.urbandead.com/map.cgi" into your browser bar and hit enter- it will not cost an AP, and hitting refresh after that will also not cost any AP. If it does, this is a bug fix issue (maybe specific to your browser / internet service) and not something that calls for new functions. S.Wiers X:00x-mas tree dead pool 23:21, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. Kill - Swiers hit the nail on the head. You can do that or just log in / out, click contacts, then back to main, etc. --Gm0n3y 23:28, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. Kill - As above... Mattiator 03:20, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  4. Kill - As above, and I can just see poor newbs wasting all their IP hits on this.--Priz 05:42, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  5. Kill - I think that you have the missconception that reloading your screen wastes an AP (and therefore this suggestion would be useful) because what reloading your page normally does is performing the last action you did again. An example: you search and then hit your broeser's reload button, so it wont reload http://www.urbandead.com/map.cgi as it should but http://www.urbandead.com/map.cgi?search and wastes another AP in searching. Try to reload http://www.urbandead.com/map.cgi instead and you won't have that problem again. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC☺T☺+1 07:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  6. Kill - While reloading your screen often does cost an AP (if you're last action was a barricade, or a search, or using something)... if you want to update the screen, learn to work the system, it's pretty simple -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 14:41, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  7. Kill - I think that boxy put it best above. It is just as easy to refresh the page by clicking on the contacts button and then clicking the back to the city button. --ZombieSlay3rSig.png 21:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes
Spam/Dupe Votes here

"As a zombie" message

Timestamp: Slicer 23:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Type: Message
Scope: The whole game
Description: This game still has the problem where zombie attacks will get listed as survivor names, if the attacking player was revived after that time (but before the victim's login). Attacks ought to be flagged as either survivor or zombie. Example: "Slicer, while a zombie, hit you for 3 damage" instead of "Slicer hit you for 3 damage" which makes people think I'm PKing them.

(This isn't already fixed, is it?)

Keep Votes
For Votes here
Kill Votes

  1. Kill - I'm pretty sure this doesn't happen. At least I haven't had it happen to me in at least a year, probably longer. --Gm0n3y 23:29, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. Kill - I've been getting readouts lately of what I was hit with (pistol, shotgun, etc) when I was hit. That alone should make it obvious - zombies don't shoot and PKs don't claw. Death cultists do some of both, but everyone hates us anyway. :D --Mold 04:01, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. Kill - Gm0n3y's wrong, as I've seen this kind of thing happen. If what Mold said is true, than this really isn't nessesary. Still...there ARE idiots out there. I would much rather see a system where the name doesn't change, though. I.E., it STAYS "A zombie" even after the zombie gets revived. --SirensT RR 05:55, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  4. Kill - I'm pretty sure it stays as "a zombie". --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC☺T☺+1 07:02, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  5. Kill - This was fixed a year or so ago. If there are some weird exceptions, report them as a bug. --Kevan 09:24, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  6. There's no arguing with Kevan. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 13:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  7. Kevan voted on this one. :) - BzAli 14:00, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  8. Who am I to argue with the great one? -- Dance Emot.gifTheDavibob LLLDance Emot.gif 16:54, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  9. As Kevan. (omg, how often do you get to use that line?) --Ev933n / Talk PPGC 16:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
  10. Kill - This seems to be more of a bug than current game mechanics. --ZombieSlay3rSig.png 21:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Spam/Dupe Votes

  1. Dupe - of current game mechanics -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 14:35, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Suggestions/8th-Mar-2007&oldid=1879767"