User talk:Gage/Nerf
...
I have always counted you as one of the clear headed individuals on the wiki. As such, you vote on my latest suggestion confounds me. I'm trying to suggest things here for zombies, not "flood the archives" in any way. I'm trying to hit on some skill or something that could break the strike. I think we both know that "surivors can't barricade when zombies are inside" and "they can barricade when zombies are inside, but have to wait 10 minutes" are totally different suggestions. These suggestions are only similar in name. Would you please reconsider your vote? You've got me all wrong.--Gage 23:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- Moved from my talk page: We can talk here. I'll add this page to my watchlist.
- May as well use this one I guess, in reply to your post on my talk page, I considered a keep, but 10 minutes is a long time for a horde. A damn long time. And what happens if you get it up a couple of levels, and it gets opened up again? Another 10 minutes of wide open doors, another 20 zombies get in. And you're fucked. It would be a great addition if the time the doors remain open was somehow linked to the zombie numbers in the area. 10 minutes is probably not enough time in Pescodside normally, but a lifetime when a horde comes to town. And the response to your last suggestion has me totally disillusioned with the suggestions process. If it had of failed, as it should have (IMO), then I probably would have tried to make a workable solution for weakening barricades so that a balance could be reached. But no, that one is getting jammed through to peer reviewed. Why the hell should anyone be willing to even consider a balanced barricade nerf now? You've got your zombie rocket launcher in already -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 00:02, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- I have seriously considered removing that suggestion. Would it help you to take me seriously if I did so?
- Could you elaborate on what you think the mechanics would be for linking zombie numbers to time remaining open? Would they be open longer or a shorter amount of time when more zombies are in the room? What is the max time the barricades should be open? What about the minimum? I'm a math major, and I think I could whip up a fairly simply equation if you would tell me what you think.--Gage 00:54, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, it would help.
- I was thinking that there should be less time, the more zombies there are about, simply because you want to allow zombie players more time to get in with usable AP to do actual damage, but you don't want to open the place up so that it automatically falls within a day. Where's the accomplishment in sacking a mall just by turning up, and coordinating your attacks in two or three 10 minute windows, thereby getting everybody inside at once? It's a problematic suggestion, and it's going to mean a lot of frustration for a lot of people who will continually hit either barricade or refresh, for no result, until they can get some barricades happening (but I guess survivors deserve their fair share of frustration too).
- A few ideas on mechanics?
- Allow survivors to barricade straight away, but allow zombies to squeeze through the barricade for a (#) minute period.
- Limit the maximum number of zombies that can squeeze through in one opening (max of 5 or 10 per opening?).
- The gaps in the barricade (that they squeeze through) remain open for longer if there's no urgency (ie if there are less zombies outside). If there's >100 it may only stay open 5 minute, if <5 open for 30 minutes).
- I may move this to another, separate page, but I'll leave a link if I do -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 01:28, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Ok, the ideas that Boxy is bringing are good. My question from looking at this is how does the feeding drag factor in? That is really the main thing I have been discussing with Gage. The ideas here seem great and like they would provide a fair ground for both sides especially with a cap and time limit. Since the gap would nerf having a laying horde using the 10 minute gap a small horde could create. I am still taking an honest look at holes that can be made in this nerf, and am not really coming up with much. I have also been blowing some other holes in the physics aspect of the game with Gage, but since it is just a game I'll let that slide. I think if we give it a few days amongst a smaller group of peers who play for both sides, it will allow for a good sounding board of ideas that we have not considered up to this point(also will save Gage some hassle of "spammer"). The idea at this point seems fair. As far as physics, there is no way to implement more realism without making the game totally in favor of the zombies.I'll see if I can think of anything more. --MRL1984 07:01, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- At the moment, I'd say no, feeding drag doesn't work unless the doors are open. Perhaps a compromise would be if the 'cades are VS or less? It'd be simpler if we forgot feeding drag. It could be an add-on if it gets implemented -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 10:20, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Time open vs Zombie Numbers
I've no idea about the math you guys are using. Perhaps if you gave some examples of what it meant for differing numbers of zombies? -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 10:20, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- Basically, I am setting up a hyperbola. It looks like the graph to the right. As you can see, with zombies outside on the x axis and time on the y axis when there are very few zombies, the doors would stay open a long time, and when there are alot of zombies they would stay open a very short time. The constant at the end, "y" is the minimum amount of time that the doors would stay open, even if there were 3,000 zombies outside. What do you guys think that number should be?
Number of Zombies Entering
My 5-10 zombies per opening was just a first thought on it. We can up the number if necessary. Or we could have it dependent upon the survivors inside. Such a system would be pretty much arbitrary, but it would minimise the effect on the outer suburbs, yet allow for maximum penetration into malls/strongholds. I have a thing about protecting the low population areas... I mean it's not like they don't already cop a hammering, if the zombies can even be bothered... -- boxy T L ZS Nuts2U DA 10:20, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
idea
- Idea 1: +1AP Needed to Barricade for every X Zombies Inside
- Say, for every 5~10 zombies inside a building, it needs +1 AP to barricade it.
- Idea 2: Tearing cades from whitin.
- Since the survivors are trying to block the entrances from whitin, it should be easier to find the weak spots of a barricade from whitin. This doubles the chances to tear the cades from whitin for any zombie (zombie only). If there is no harman inside the building, every hit from whitin is a sucessful hit (this is a dupe suggestion).
- Idea 3: Emergency Cades
- The zombies teared the barricade and are entering the building. The harmans are trying to build a new barricade, but they fear they might be eaten during this period, so their work is not well done. Until the building is VSB, zombies can still enter the building at +1AP per barricade level. A new title should then be created to display these barricade levels, but once they reach the VSB they would work just as they do today.
- Barricades closed due to aids! --People's Commissar Hagnat [cloned] [mod] 15:32, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
the point of it all?
I have a feeling that zombies players expect too much from themselves. With the game rules as they are now, they could cut swathes through survivor populations, totally destroying any that are outside of 4 or 5 blocks from a survivor stronghold, and even take down the great majority of the malls in Malton with a day or two... if they wanted to...
... but they seem to be bored with terrorising the suburbs, and all that they are concerned about is sacking malls, and specifically Caiger, with medium sized groups...
That's like survivors expecting lone groups to take Ridleybank from the zombies. What's with all the crying about how hard it is to sack Caiger... it's bloody well supposed to be, it has been the survivor stronghold so far.
I know that zombie numbers have dropped off to buggery, but making the game easier, is that going to get them back?
Now don't get too pissed off with anything I said above... it is a survivor viewpoint. If you make malls too weak, take away any survivor strongholds, you risk totally unbalancing the game the other way... define how far you want to go.
So... what result are we aiming at here?
- An increase in zombie numbers.
- A decrease in survivor numbers.
- Easier mall sieges.
- Larger areas of zombie dominance.
- Greater instability.
