View source for Suggestion:20101015 Lower HP by 20

{{Suggestion Navigation}}
{{TOCright}}
==={{PAGENAME}}===
{{User:Spiderzed/Sandbox/Sig}} 12:57, 15 October 2010 (BST)


'''Suggestion type'''<br />
Value change. <br />


'''Suggestion scope'''<br />
Everyone. <br />


'''Suggestion description'''<br />
Let's go crazy and lower all hitpoints by 20. These would be the concrete effects:
*Starting humans and zombies have 30HP.
**[[Bodybuilding]]/[[Flesh Rot]] grants +10HP as usual, giving a total of 40HP.
**Revived humans have 15/20HP (depending on if they have Bodybuilding or not.)
**[[Feeding Drag|drag-eligibility]] still gets triggered at 12HP, putting freshly revived humans without FAKs at great risk
*damage from weapons and infection remains unaltered
*damage from failed [[Freerunning]] into ruins is halved to 2HP, rather than 5HP (17-20% of total possible health for stumbling over rubble would be a bit extreme, wouldn't it?)
*healing still heals 5/10/15HP depending on circumstances and skills, and digestion still grants 4HP per bite
*XP for healing and attacking remain the same
Why go that crazy? Because of these beneficial effects:

'''Zombies'''
*Lone ferals get a far better chance to break in and still have the AP to drag/kill someone, making even lone ferals dangerous.
*Cheap revive costs become far less of an issue in balance, as they are closer to kill costs, without the need to raise the AP costs for reviving to a ridiculous amount
**At the same time, combat revives remain a viable tactic, as they work reliably for exactly 10AP and just use up a single 2% item (unlike melee weapons, which probably use more than the 10AP, and unlike guns, which clog up more than 2% of encumbrance).
*Eating corpses becomes a viable tactic, as the AP costs to do so are close to that of receiving a headshot and rising again with full HP

'''PKers'''
*PKers would need far less HP to kill, allowing further away bolt-holes and epic striketeam mass homicide
*PKers could actually make some impact, as the kill costs are so close to revive costs
*OTOH, the reduced HP would put also PKers at greater risk, as even [[dark]] places aren't darn safe protection from every lone wolf without a genny and fuel. A bodybuilding PKer with a flak jack could be killed with a pistol for 31AP on average (((40HP / 4 damage)/65% hit probability)/50% darkness penalty).
**Carrying genny+fuel for PKer hunting would still be a sensible option, as it allows a.) to "bank" AP in advance that later make it easier to hunt PKers and b.) it allows to collect multiple bounties in dark places swarming with PKers
**This would also give bounty-hunting/retribution kills some sense, as the costs for doing so aren't so much ridicoulously higher than the costs to revive the PKers (although it would still remain somewhat less AP-efficient than ignoring PKers and putting the APs rather into reviving the victims)

'''Survivors'''
*Survivors get a far better chance to break a cade block, as they can kill and dump multiple zeds per individual AP cycle. A survivor loaded with pistols could repel a rotter for 15AP on average, allowing him to kill and dump 3 zeds at once and still cade a bit if he is fully rested. (((40HP / 4 damage)/65% hit probability = 15AP, +1AP for dumping = 16AP per pop)
*Survivors can fill up their inventory mostly with FAKs, syringes, a toolbox and maybe also a genny and/or fuel, and still put enough guns into their spare encumbrance for them to actually have an effect. A single revolver and two spare clips for a total of 8% would be sufficient to repel a single fully healthy rotter.

'''Flavour'''
*3-5 shotgun blasts or 6-8 revolver bullets would be all what it takes to send someone to the boot hill, rather than the ridiculous amount of abuse that folks can take right now before they die

The beneficial effects would probably be slightly more in favour of zombies than survivors (as the imperative of zombies is to attack whenever possible, while survivors usually only fight when things have gone wrong), but it would offer something for both, and it would especially nerf the dreaded cade blocking without removing it entirely.

I'm aware that it's crazy and extreme, but I see a lot of merit in this.

====Voting Section====
{{SugVoteBox}}


'''Keep Votes'''
#'''Author Vote''' I know no shame. --{{User:Spiderzed/Sandbox/Sig}} 13:03, 15 October 2010 (BST)
#I was so against this a few weeks ago, but seriously, why not? I'm up for this! -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/l}} 13:43, 15 October 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - this product is a product I endorse. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 15:02, 15 October 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep''' - Love the idea. I think it'd really help make the game more fun on all sides by making everything a little more volatile. Survivors could clear buildings faster to repair them, PKers and zeds could empty them faster to claim/ruin them. Street treats are more delectable, newbies (on both sides) have an easier time getting kill XP, and, as was pointed out, beachhead tactics take a slight nerf (which they are in need of). It's good for everyone, basically. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 16:31, 15 October 2010 (BST)
#'''Weak Keep/Weaker Change''' - It can't hurt to make the game a little more fluid. Helps make things harder to predict, helps to present you with a new situation before you bore of the old. I like it. - Change: Ruin-running should still do 5 damage. Because you're not ''stumbling over rubble'', you're falling from the top of a building in your attempts to leap between rooftops. --{{User:TripleU/Sig}} 01:12, 16 October 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep/Minor Change''' Like stated above leave the free running damage the same. Lowering the HP in a way would benefit everyone equally like my gun toting survivor, implement this and I got enough bullets to kill a small horde but that same small horde could eat a nice fortress when the cades fall. Seems extreme but i think it would benefit the game.{{User:Mazu/sig}} 02:08, 17 October 2010 (BST)  
#'''Keep''' - The rationale being wherein a city which makes death a hobby, either everyone got really good at killing each other, or they just don't give a damn anymore about their life or death status. The fact that Dual Nature is the largest group nowadays shows that the latter is the present userbase's sentiment. --[[User:Aeon17x|Aeon17x]] 02:34, 17 October 2010 (BST)
#'''Keep/Minor Change''' - Although I would love the idea of killing more things everyday, I think that dieing as a survivor would be much more inconvenient than as a zed like Rosslessness mentioned below. I think that you should raise the survivor HP up to 40 or 35 (ignoring bodybuilding) because as zombies are now slowly starting to outnumber the living, and thus as before you mentioned,this whole thing was leaning a bit more toward the zombies in the first place. Besides, it would take a little more for Pkers to kill you. --[[User:Stickmaster1782]] 11:39, 16 October 2010 (EST)  

'''Kill Votes'''
#'''Kill''' I really don't like it for a bundle of reasons. Weakening newbs and buffing zergs are two of the bigger reasons.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 14:13, 15 October 2010 (BST)
#'''No''' Because being dead for a survivor is more of a hassle than being dead as a zombah. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 17:33, 15 October 2010 (BST)
#'''Kill''' - As basically laid out in the suggestion, the biggest boon would be to PKers, further removing the importance of zed/harman conflict from the game.--{{User:Giles Sednik/sig}} 19:34, 15 October 2010 (BST)
#As Giles. [[User:Whitehouse]] 12:03, 16 October 2010 (BST)
#As most of the major reasons above. --{{User:Axe Hack/Sig}} 16:58, 16 October 2010 (BST)
#'''Kill''' While I love the idea, it's too late for it.  This would upset the game's entire balance, for one thing.  Basically resetting it.  Kevan said something about the AP limit not being raised for a variety of reasons, one of them being the amount of damage that could be done by a single player.  So...yeah. Maybe in another (permanent?) city for UD Hardcore, but not in Malton. [[User:RinKou|RinKou]] 00:15, 18 October 2010 (BST)
#'''Kill''' I like the idea, but this needs to be accompanied by a zombie nerf or survivor boost. [[User:Saposhiente|Saposhiente]] 23:23, 19 October 2010 (BST)
#'''Kill''' Like zombies need yet ANOTHER boost. They're already over powered. --[[User:Zamins|Zamins]] 13:26, 22 October 2010 (BST)
#'''Kill''' HELL no. Throne almighty, Zeds already are OP enough being able to just stand right back up again, and keep fighting. Survivors are already debuffed enough, because people already have pay out the behind just to rez them. PKers are already capable of briefing us to hell, and THEY sure as hell don't need a buff. As for flavour? Let's call it a weak as piss .38 FMJ and a 20 gauge. While the later would kill an unarmoured target pretty quickly, the former isn't going to do a lot to anyone. --{{User:Medico/sig}} 10:07, 23 October 2010 (BST)
#'''Kill''' I like it, it would make the game more exciting. But, it would ruin the pacing.--[[User:Keepster33|keepster33]] 03:47, 24 October 2010 (BST)
#'''KILL!''' - Very good for griefers, PKers and Zombies, but horrible for Normal Survivors {{User:Dezonus/sig}} 23:56, 24 October 2010 (BST)
'''Spam/Dupe Votes'''


<!-- Vote **ABOVE** THIS LINE -->
<br clear=both>
----
<noinclude>
{{SugVoteRules}}


[[Category:Current Suggestions]]

</noinclude>