Talk:Suggestions/1st-Nov-2006

Protect Equipment

Timestamp:	Smore 23:16, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Type:	Skill.
Scope:	Survivors
Description:	When Zombies are attacking a certain target, power-shortage comes because of many spies destroy portable generators and communication becomes difficult because spies those destroy radio transmitters too. In many ways, these spies do not have any risk while they performing the task, even there are hundreds people around the generator. The price is also low, one spy can destroy all generators in a mall without costing lots of APs, and then escape to another suburb and hide. My suggestion is, add a new skill to protect the specified equipment. Any survior with this skill, can choose 1 equipment to protect. The protection will be valid till the player makes any other movement. The action should cost 2 APs. When an equipment is under surviors' protection, it becomes more difficult to be destroyed. Each survior's protection will increase GKer/RKer's miss rate by 1%. Which means the portable generators/radio transmitters in Caiger Mall will become very difficult to be destroyed. (If the survivors are willing to work together and use their APs) Modified the percentage part. Miss rate rise 1% for each survivor to protect, and there is a 85% cap on miss rate no mater how many survivors protect it. --Smore 23:58, 1 November 2006 (UTC) A message should be added to indicate the protection level. For example: There are 12 surivors protecting the generator, and 7 survivors protecting the radio transmitter. Some more explaination and a little math: --Smore 02:35, 2 November 2006 (UTC) In real world you will put guardians and some fence or something to protect the equipments if they are important to you. In UD, we can do nothing. GKers can come into Caiger Mall and destroy EVERY generators once or twice EVERYDAY. Survivors have to spend 33 APs to find a generator (3% in factory), another 20 APs to find a fuel can (5% in Auto Repair shops), times 4, that's how much survivors have to pay when a GKer destroys all the generators in a mall. That's 212 APs. Only for the generators and not including the moving cost between the mall and the factories/AR shops. Let's say a GKer hide in somewhere 10 moves away from a mall => Cost 10 APs to enter the mall. It takes him 3 APs to destroy a generator and leave => Cost 12 APs to destroys all generators. It's time to get back the place he hides. => Cost 10~12 APs to go back. In general, it cost a GKers 32~34 APs per day to destroy every generators in a mall. Which means he can even search in the mall to get some FAKs and ammos before destroying the generators. Or he can choose to spend another 8 APs to destroy all the radio transmitters. Still fewer than 48 APs Now, if every generator has highest protection, let's say it's 85% miss rate now. (Survivors cost at least 70APs for this.) It still cost 10 APs to enter the mall. It takes him 8 APs to destroy a generator and leave => Cost 32 APs to destroy all generators. It still cost 10~12 APs to return where he hides. It's 52~54 APs now. The GKer either can't destory all the generators in a mall, or he has to hide not that far away from the mall. And also reduces the chances that he crashes all the radios at the same time. It still remains the possibilities for a GKer to destroy 4 generators per day. Raises his cost and some minor risk. The survivors still need another 200 APs to find 4 generators, 4 fuel cans and install them. That's all my explaination for this idea. Thanks.

Keep Votes

1. keep - finally, something to slow down the equipment bashing scum. also, you may want to post an author keep, you're allowed to do that. --Kaminobob 23:21, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
2. keep - Author keep. I want to specify that this skill will not secure all the generators. Most of the time the generators are still fragile. Even in the most highly secure area like Caiger Mall, there might be still chances for GKers to catch.--Smore 23:51, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
3. Keep - 5% success and another 10% chance to give the GKER 10 HP damage on each time he tring destory the generator (more survior in the building will increase the success chance and the damage incrase ) Maybe another 30% will the generator become a bomb and give the GKER a HEADSHOT --Wkwtb 00:43, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
4. Keep but I believe you should make it harder than 1% maybe for a zombie 5% and Human traitor 10%
   

Kill Votes

1. weak kill - I don't know. There are valid reasons to destroy a generator - and people can already see who did it. (Can people see who destroys the radio? Or can you not target the radio? You can tell I don't bash these things.) The protection thing is getting close to some kind of auto-thingamy. I'm swithering here... --Funt Solo 23:26, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
2. Overpowered, for example, in the situation you posed, they would miss an extra 25%. Say it was 50/50 chance, now it would be 75/25 chance. And a lot more people than you think would be prepared to protect the genny. I certainly would, 2AP now is a lot better than AP searching for a new genny & fuel tomorrow. Say 35 people protect, suddenly someone's going to have 0% chance of doing damage to the generator. Don't nerf their way of playing the game. --BBM 23:45, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
   • Re - I would like to see if this skill is implemented and also there is a highest miss rate set to maybe 85%. I don't know if I should put this on the main article now to avoid extra mis-understanding. --Smore 23:50, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
3. Kill in present form. First, I think it needs a cap. Halving damage to a generator and giving the other half to the protector would be interesting, though - it would simulate infighting between survivors stuck in a cramped space, as many a zombie movie does. --RSquared 23:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
   • Re - I added a cap and also modified the percentage added per survivor. How do you think it now. --Smore 00:01, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
4. Interested Kill I wouldn't have a problem with survivors preventing survivors to a small degree from wrecking equipment. But if a zombie is going after them.. survivors might get out of the way (better the radio than me.. gah!) MrAushvitz 00:15, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
5. Kill - This would make it almost impossible to destroy a generator or a radio. Also, although realism should never be an argument in favor or against a suggestion, how realistic is it for a person to sacrifice themselves to protect a generator? --Wikidead 00:23, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
   • Re - There is at least 15% hit rate. Some pitchers in MLB can hit better than that. --Smore 00:33, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
6. Change - The cap should be lower, say 65%. --Officer Johnieo 01:08, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
7. I don't see why the game needs a feature to stop generator and radio killers. I don't think your reality argument makes sense for a start, it's pretty easy to kill a generator or radio if you can get close to it, just pull out some wires or bash it around a bit. Also, it's pretty clear to me that GKers and RKers already have it pretty tough, what with the fact that everyone will see them do it, and some people even run sites listing them for execution. So I think no. --ExplodingFerret 01:10, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
   • Re - I made some calculations and explaination above. How do you feel now. --Smore 02:41, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
     

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Ahem? Your suggestions make it IMPOSSIBLE to destroy gennys and radios. There should be a risk to having them...no?--ShadowScope 23:32, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I was a little worried moving this thing (didn't wanna break the Wiki or anything). As for the suggestion. One of the main problems I see is that it amounts to free actions by the "guards." I could spend the 2 AP to activate this before I log off and the generator (or whatever) would have a permanent guard for the next 24 hours (give or take). Instead, I think that the guards should have to allocate AP to defense. Say, for example, I want to guard the generator. I allocate 5 AP to do so (from my current day's amount). Then, whenever the generator is attacked I can defend it (as per the suggestion). However, if the generator is attacked more than 5 times, the 6th and subsequent attacks are NOT affected by my presence (since I only allocated 5 AP). In addition, generators and radios are, by definition, portable, which means small. I can't imagine lots of people being able to defend it at the same time. Maybe limit it to not more than 4 people at a time. The other main problem is, how does this affect ZOMBIES?--Pesatyel 04:21, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Re - I don't think a permanent protection is really a problem. According to my calculation, even with the setting I suggested, survivors are still cost much more APs than the GKer. However, considering to the Zombies, I would say that when a building brokes by Zombies, i.e, the door is opened, the defending effects on the equipments should disappear. Apperently, when a zombies horde breaking into a building, protecting equipments are not anyone's first priority anymore. --Smore 05:08, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand how. Basically, as I understand the suggestion, each person guarding the genny (or radio) reduces the GKer's chance to hit by 1% (easy way to understand it), so that if 20 people are "guarding" then the attacker is -20% to hit. It only costs 2 AP for each person and finding a generator or finding fuel or whatever searching has NOTHING to do with it. What I'm saying is, for 2 AP (each), 20 people can "guard" a generator at the end of their game, then for the next 23.5 hours ANYONE attempting to attack the generator is at -20% to hit. In fact, this would be so easily zergible it isn't funny. And a cap of 85% to miss? If you go by the way *I* did it and make it a penalty to hit, the max hit % for a weapon is only 65%. The only other way would be that I roll to hit with a 65% chance and then AGAIN with a 15% chance? And, as for the zombies, I don't see why you CAN'T defend items from them...just not THIS way.--Pesatyel 07:01, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Re - Even in zerg case, the GKer still has enough APs to break the 4 generators in a mall and leave without trace. And since the generator is gone, the players will not automatically protect the next generator unless they logon and do the same thing. In the most extrem case, the player's protection will stay for only 1 minute, not 23.5 hours. Second, talking about zergible, GKer can also zerg too. I dont think there's any advantages for protectors because attackers are always being initiative. Third, when I said 85%, what I meant is his hit rate equals 15%, not 65% * 15%. Sorry for the confusion. Last, I don't mind the protection kept when zombies broke the door. In my original design, the player will not keep protecting the equipment when he does anything cost 1 AP. I think the protection should be gone, but both would be fine for me. --Smore 07:38, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

---

Body Building

Timestamp:	Euphoriakill, November 1st, 2006
Type:	Skill improvement
Scope:	humans and zeds.
Description:	body building in relation to body dumping. in the light of the recent changes to the dumping of bodies this activity now actively requires more ap without any exp gain, this has made it much harder to maintain and defend buildings. my suggestion is that those with body building be able to dump two bodies at a time or for that to be developed as an offshoot skill once body building is purchased if this is viewed as to imbalancing then on the zed side body building or the offshoot skill could offer 1 point of increased damage with hands or my less favorable alternative which could create some imbalances that body dumping be treated as strength training and an appropriate exp award (ie 1 exp per body) given, this can be implemented as an offshoot skill of body building as the previously mentioned readdress of the issue

Discussion

I think it is a little too early to start countering the change. Does dumping bodies still give XP? If it does, then I don't really think a buff like this is necessary. If not, well, we should see how things play out for a few days.--Pesatyel 03:54, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

---

Rats

Timestamp:	IthacaMike 13:00 EDT
Type:	Building change
Scope:	Both Humans and Zombies
Description:	Where RATs come from: Empty buildings without RATs have a small chance per day of spontaneously generating a RAT. (perhaps 2% per day) RATs won't move into an occupied building so continuous occupation will prevent RAT infestations. If you use 2%, on average it will be about 35 days before the first RAT appears in an empty building. Buildings with RATs, occupied or not, have a chance per day of generating another RAT. (perhaps 5% per existing RAT per day) Think of it as breeding like RATs. At 5%, on average, it will take about 65 days for the RAT population in a building to increase from 1 to 20. There is an upper limit on the number of RATs in a building. (perhaps 20) Using these numbers (2% -- 5% -- 20) it will take about 105 days before half the empty buildings are at max RAT. What RATs do: Any sleeping character (human or zombie) has a small chance of being bitten (-1 HP) while sleeping in a RAT infested building. (perhaps 1% * number of RATS) This makes the RATs an uncontroled, building-wide, area effect, nusance weapon. When searching a RAT infested building you may find a RAT rather than something else. Searching would be a two stage process. Stage 1, do you find a RAT? (perhaps 5% * number of RATS) If not proceed to stage 2, the normal search. It becomes difficult to find anything valuable in a RAT infested building without dealing with the RATs. How to get rid of RATs When you find a RAT while searching you may attack it. If you expend APs for something other than attacking the RAT, the RAT gets away. If you do attack the RAT it remains visible until it dies or APs are used for something else. It takes 2 damage to kill a RAT making the pipe or baseball bat the ideal human anti-RAT weapon. Zombies will probably use their claws. While nothing exceeds like excess using a flare gun to kill a RAT seems like over-kill. Killing a RAT reduces the number of RATs in the building by 1. A Zombie gets 1 XP and 1 HP for killing a RAT. Think of RATs as self heated Zombie MREs. Humans read books, Zombies kill RATs. Implications: Long abandoned buildings become RAT ranches, less valuable to humans and more valuable to Zombies. The process of "search for RAT - kill the RAT" has a heavy AP cost and you may never know if you have killed _all_ the RATs in a building. Zombies breaking into a heavly barracaded but empty building may find snacks. This is a way for freshly risen Zombies to gain XP and wounded Zombies to heal themselves.

Discussion

Oh great, now i have to worry about buildings being infested with Rats as well as Zombies. This idea is relatively ridiculous. Zombies heal far more and gain far more XP per AP from humans then Rats, so this is kinda redundant for zombies (except for the desperate ones, but even then its not really worth the trouble) And besides, this game is based around survivors and zombies and nothing else. I'd prefer to keep it that way thank you.--Mr yawn 22:50, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

One of the complaints that low level zombies have is that it is hard for them to gain XP. One sugestion that passed was to have zombies gain XP for attacks on barricades! (This also breaks the human -vs- zombie paradigm.) This sugestion would present low level zombies with additional XP for killing RATs after breaking into long abandoned buildings, although that may be redundent. --IthacaMike 1600, 6 Novembet (GMT)

This has got to be one of the weirdest suggestions I've seen for a while. Excluding Spaminated suggestions, that is. -- Ashnazg 0711, 3 November 2006 (GMT)

It was born mostly from the RP asspects of this game. A city full of corpses without rats? There has also been a suggestion (that passed) for crows to be added. --IthacaMike 1600, 6 Novembet (GMT)

Back in December, I posted this suggestion (back when I was still new to the wiki). It didn't go over well, but I'm thinking of trying it out again. And which Peer Reviewed suggestion had crows?--Pesatyel 04:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

This is the one I was thinking about Scavenger_Birds.--IthacaMike 11:40, 7 Novemeber 2006 (EST)

Wow, THAT made it into Peer Review? Thanks for the link.--Pesatyel 06:10, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

---