Talk:Suggestions/23rd-Feb-2007
Items wear out, version 1
| Timestamp: | Asheets 21:15, 23 February 2007 (UTC) |
| Type: | searches and weapons |
| Scope: | Everyone. |
| Description: | I just realized that my oldest character still has the same fire axe that he started out with and has used every day since them. You'd think that after a year of impaling it into zombie's heads, it would start to show some signs of age by now.
Bottome line is, once you have your axe, crowbar, pistol, and shotgun, you really don't care about search odds for weapons anymore (ammo and non-weapon items are a different story). To make them a factor again for higher-level characters, I suggest that all weapons have a 1% chance of breaking on impact with an enemy. It would go something like this -- a firefighter shows up to clear out a building with his trusty axe. He's almost done when his axe breaks, leaving him with just fists and a zed with too many AP to take care of that way. The hero, depending on where he is, can try the fists, run like a coward, or do a couple of searches to see if he can find a useful-enough weapon to finish the job. Special cases to note:
|
Discussion
No to the fists and guns part. 1% chance of taking 1hp seems so negligible that it would be a pointless annoyance. If it doesn't serve a purpose why keep it. The same is true of breaking guns -- while it does add some realism, guns are found so often during searches for ammo, that again there just wouldn't be any point. Whereas, breaking crowbars and flak jackets wouldn't be negligible, nor would it be unbelievable. I would certainly expect my flak jacket to wear out over time! But you might want to check for dupes, because I find it hard to believe this hasn't been suggested before. I'd lose the part about breaking a crowbar during an attack -- That'd one hard-headed zombie! But a crowbar damaged by a stubborn barricade, that I could swallow. --Matt Scott 9 21:37, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Realism =! Fun. Learn that rule, and remember it. I've said this far too many times recently. --Saluton 01:32, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- Getting eaten by a zed isn't any fun either. Do you want to eliminate that element from the game, too? Asheets 20:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
- No; that is a core element of the game, and the risk of that is one of the things that makes it fun. However, if you are careful, you never have to be killed - my main character has never been killed, by either Survivors or PKers (and yes, that's a challenge. I've been saving up XP for when that character dies, so I'm actually looking forward to it). Anyways, back to the subject at hand: realism =! fun doesn't mean that death shouldn't be possible. It does mean that things that make the game less fun, by forcing survivors to spend their time pressing a button to find an item over and over are bad. --Saluton 03:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Getting eaten by a zed isn't any fun either. Do you want to eliminate that element from the game, too? Asheets 20:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
No. This is one of the things that really pisses me off in games. I don't want to spend weeks searching for items that are going to disappear before I decide I don't need them any more. That very example of the fire axe breaking mid-fight is a NIGHTMARE. --Grace RR - PKer 03:36, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
The only part I agree with, is that Flak Jackets should wear out after a while. For some reason I find it strange a Flak Jacket worn by a Zed would still be completely intact after several hundred shotgun blasts to the chest. --Jay Clarke 10:16, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
I would vote keep for this if you got rid of the potential damage... things break and a little bit of uncertainty would not hurt--Honestmistake 22:32, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
