View source for Developing Suggestions

{{Developing Suggestions Intro}}
==Suggestions==

<!--Put your new suggestion directly under this line-->
===Suggestions to help encourage Survivor cooperation===
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' {{User:Vapor/sig}} 21:53, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
|-
|'''Type:''' Multiple
|-
|'''Scope:''' Survivors
|-
|'''Description:'''Since my [[Suggestion:20101103 Shout|Shout]] suggestion hasn't gone over very well (understandably) I'm trying to piece together some other ideas that I hope will encourage more survivor cooperation. I don't mean the kind of cooperation that broods groups of people to amass in a single location and defend that and nothing but that location. I'd like to see changes to the game that lead survivors to get out of their safehouse, do something to help contribute to their society.
#Shout 2.0
#Upload NecroNet Scan
#''Possibly more to come''

'''Shout 2.0'''

Same as [[Suggestion:20101103 Shout|Shout]] except that zombies can hear the shouting when at the same location. Shouts can also be heard from adjacent buildings.

'''Upload NecroNet Scan'''

This new skill would allow players with NecroNet Access to upload their maps to the NecroNet network. These scans would be available to other powered NecroTech buildings by other players with NecroNet Access. The uploaded scan would be available only to NT buildings within 5 blocks of the location. There would be an additional button added after NecroNet is accessed {{Button|Upload NecroNet Scan}}. Players with NecroNet Access at other NT buildings would get a notification similar to a cell phone message: 

{{udspan|'''A new NecroNet scan''' was uploaded from the '''The Sugg Building''' (''3 hours and 5 minutes ago'')<br>'''A new NecroNet scan''' was uploaded from the '''The Latrobe Building''' (''1 hour and 33 minutes ago'')}}
|}
====Discussion (Suggestions to help encourage Survivor cooperation)====
I like the Necronet one. As far as the shout one, is this like survivor feeding groan and is outside only, or would it work inside as well? -[[MHS|<span style="color: Black">'''MHS'''</span>]][[User_Talk:MHSstaff|<span style="color: DarkBlue">'''staff'''</span>]] 21:58, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

The Necronet one is a [[Necrowatch|Dupe ;)]] --{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 22:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
:Very funny. I actually did some research using the NecroWatch page before suggesting. Think of it as an in-game NecroWatch...sorta. {{User:Vapor/sig}} 22:12, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

----

===Finally, a simple headshot nerf that benefits everyone who's dead===
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 21:13, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
|-
|'''Type:''' Change to headshot functionality
|-
|'''Scope:''' All zombies
|-
|'''Description:''' Basically, Headshot would work as normal initially - adding 5 AP to the stand up cost. However, with each AP tick that the affected zombie gains, this 5 AP penalty is reduced by 1, so that in one hour, the additional cost it 3 AP, and by two-and-a-half hours, it's negated entirely.

What would this do? It'd mean that casual players who log in once or twice a day will be much less likely to waste 5 AP just to be able to play for the day. It'd also mean that in sieges, ?rise is still taking the same penalty to work as it does now. In a nutshell, it helps slower, more casual or newer players without harming real-time combat or sieges in any real way. Still gives headshot a lot of use, as it will still slow zombies down - the 5 AP now becomes a real-time bonus, where the attacking survivor can spend 5 AP now and gain it back in those 2 1/2 hours that the zombie player must wait to ignore the headshot; and if they chose to stand earlier, they still suffer the AP penalty. The AP tick was chosen as it's regular and simple, and flavoursome - as the zombie recoups its energies, it also shakes off the pain and shock of the injury.
|}
====Discussion (Finally, a simple headshot nerf that benefits everyone who's dead)====
I can't help but feel this encourages players to ''not'' play the game.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature3‎}} 21:32, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
:The same way having less AP does? You're just trading time before standing for time after, really. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 21:34, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
::But time when you're invincible is undoubtedly better.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature3‎}} 21:36, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
:::The trade-off being delayed play and the inability to ?rise with it. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 21:41, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
::::Exactly, the positive encourages people to have "delayed play" - to sit there not playing the game, when we should be encouraging more people to play the game.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature3‎}} 21:42, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::I fail to see how playing slightly later is any worse than not being able to play as much, though. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 21:47, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
::::::Most people log on once a day, especially the "casual players" you claim to be championing. This would take a whole day out of their play cycle, by encouraging them not to log on just after you've been headshot.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature3‎}} 21:51, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::::No it wouldn't. If they've taken a headshot right before logging in, it's no different to how it is now if they stand up right away. For that kind of player, it's only upside or no change. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 22:04, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
::::::::You seem to have misunderstood what I'm trying to say.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature3‎}} 22:48, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::::::Apparently so. You said it'd take a whole day out of their play cycle - but no one would ever waste 50AP to save 5AP, those people would simply just play at that time normally and take the full 5AP headshot penalty rather than not play at all for that day. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 20:17, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
::::::::To get around the one-a-day casual player getting headshot right before they login, maybe have it not take affect if a headshot player's AP = 50?-[[MHS|<span style="color: Black">'''MHS'''</span>]][[User_Talk:MHSstaff|<span style="color: DarkBlue">'''staff'''</span>]] 01:56, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I actually like it. I might lengthen the time a bit (one off per hour), but it seems reasonable to me. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 22:13, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Improved Relentless, I like it. [[User:Whitehouse]] 01:11, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
:I don't like it, headshot is pathetic already given that it's supposedly the one way to put a zombie down for good.--{{User:Mallrat/sig}} 03:25, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
----

===Self Harm mk 2===
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 21:13, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
|-
|'''Type:''' New skill
|-
|'''Scope:''' Mostly death cultists
|-
|'''Description:''' Text is copied from an old suggestion of mine, changes marked in red.

There's been a few suggestions that would aid death culting and parachuting in general, such as self-infecting or gunshot suicides, but mostly it's an issue of power, being shot down due to the idea of easier parachuting circumventing barricades, and therefore saving huge amounts of AP. Well, in order to circumvent the AP imbalance, how about allowing a character to {{C|#990000|purchase a new Civilian skill, Self Harm, for the usual 100xp. This allows them to attack themselves with their bare hands, dealing an automatic 1 damage for 1 AP; or if armed with a knife, for 2 damage for 1 AP with a 75% success rate. That way, without an infection, a new-revived cultist with a knife can spend around 18-20 AP trying to kill themselves, or 30 AP without a knife - the former of which is, admittedly, a saving on infection - the crucial difference being that an infected parachutist can spend the AP barricading for a pinata, searching for items, or attacking characters or generators, whilst a self-harming character spends the AP with the sole aim of reducing their health. Unarmed attacks are incredibly AP-inefficient, but are also very reliable if in a tight patch}}. This would be a much weaker way of doing it, but is more reliable in that it can't be FAKed away. The imperfect accuracy balances out the knife's higher damage, and flavour-wise can be explained by using {{udspan|You attempt to slash yourself with your knife, but can't bring yourself to do it.}} as the miss text. Successful hit text would be {{udspan|You slash yourself with your knife for 2 damage.}} {{C|#990000|Unarmed, the automatic hit would produce }}{{Udspan|Clawing at yourself in agitation, you injure yourself for 1 damage.}} {{C|#990000|Obviously this would give no experience to the player using it.}}
|}
====Discussion (Self Harm mk 2)====
Would the effect stack with a standard infection? -{{User:Luke Leimer/sig}} 22:50, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
:I see no reason why not, adding further exemptions to infection seems unintuitive to me. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 20:20, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Meh, something in the flavour of "learning to hurt yourself" seems too wrong to me. I think the most logical thing is what the game implements already: jumping off windows. Of course, it helps none in parachuting... {{User:Monstah/Sig}} 00:50, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
:You could also argue that "learning to be more rotted" or "learning to get hired" also make little sense - skills seem more like the by-product of experiencing the events that gave you XP rather than consciously sitting down and teaching yourself something. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 20:20, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
----

===Rifle===
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' {{User:Luke Leimer/sig}} 04:28, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
|-
|'''Type:''' Weapon & Skill, and Skill set
|-
|'''Scope:''' Survivors
|-
|'''Description:''' Creates a weapon "Rifle", and an ammo item "Bullet", each capable of being found in fort armouries, gun stores, and polices stations. Rifles take up 5% encumbrance. Each round takes up 1% encumbrance. Rifles are unwieldy at close ranges, and start with a base accuracy of 2.5%. Adds similar skill tree with other firearms. Basic Firearms Training adds 7.5%, Basic Rifle Training adds an additional 10%, and Advanced Rifle Training adds a further 10%. 
Rifles deal 5 damage (4 with flesh rot or a flak jacket), and hold up to five rounds. Rounds are found and loaded individually. 

If a character has basic rifle training and uses binoculars in a cardinal direction (only N, S, E, or W) in a tall building, a button appears that reads "steady rifle". When clicked, the one AP is used, the six blocks not adjacent to the character disappear, and the attack menu only lists characters outside on those three blocks (no x-ray vision). Should there be zombies on multiple blocks, they are listed as "a zombie (block name)". You cannot recognize zombie contacts. Shots have 30% to hit (45% with advanced rifle training), and deal 5 damage (4 damage with flak jacket or flesh rot). After steadying the rifle, there appears an action "pack-up rifle", which takes no AP, and returns the character to their state prior to steadying their rifle, except that the blocks visible from the binoculars are not displayed. If the character uses any action other than attacking (reload, search), the binoculars must be re-used, and the rifle re-steadied. Should there be no individuals, flavour text describes why you did not steady your rifle, and 1AP is used. If you attempt to steady your rifle while not looking in a cardinal direction, flavour text describes why you did not steady your rifle, and 1AP is used. In neither case does the binocular display of the 9 blocks disappear. Should your shot land true, their HP is not displayed. Headshot only occurs only 20% of all zombie kills.

'''Actions:'''<br>
Flavour Text:<br>
Steadying your rifle:<br>
*{{udspan|Glancing at targets below, you steady your aim and your breathing as you look through the sights.}}
*{{udspan|You pull the rifle to your shoulder and take aim at those who walk the streets below.}}
*{{udspan|Steadying your weapon on a window ledge, you lay down and sight in your rifle.}}
*{{udspan|Aiming your rifle at the adjacent blocks, you steady yourself in anticipation of the recoil.}}
*{{udspan|You steady your rifle on the edge of your sniper hide, prepared to kill those who move below.}}
Packing up your rifle:<br>
*{{udspan|You pick up your rifle and return back to the depths of the building.}}
*{{udspan|You sling your weapon over your shoulder as you walk away from your makeshift nest.}}
*{{udspan|You grab your rifle and leave your hide, glancing once more over the streets as you walk away.}}
*{{udspan|You grab your weapon and binoculars and climb back down the roof access hatch.}}
*{{udspan|You take the binoculars and your rifle with you as you descend the building's stairwell.}}
Trying to Steady your rifle when no one is there:<br>
*{{udspan|You lay down, prepared to fire, when you realize that the streets are empty.}}
*{{udspan|You look down the sights of the rifle, but are unable to find any targets below.}}
*{{udspan|Pulling the rifle to your shoulder, you notice no signs of activity on the adjacent blocks.}}
*{{udspan|Looking up and down the streets through the rifle's sight, you fail to see anything of worth to shoot at.}}
*{{udspan|As you steady your rifle on a broken window's ledge, no sounds of life or death emanate from the adjacent blocks.}}
Trying to Steady your rifle when not facing a cardinal direction:<br>
*{{udspan|You go to prepare your weapon, but your targets are outside of your range.}}
*{{udspan|Steadying your weapon, you realise you cannot hit them at this range.}}
*{{udspan|You spy an individual, but you can barely see them, let alone hit them from here.}}
*{{udspan|Despite your training, you do not feel comfortable in your skills to shoot at such a range.}}
*{{udspan|You lay down to take your shot, but you lose sight of your target at this range.}}
Shooting (hit):
*{{udspan|You squeeze off a shot. Your target shudders visibly as it is struck.}}
*{{udspan|You exhale and pull the trigger. The target pirouettes in place from the impact.}}
*{{udspan|The rifle's report rings in your ears. Through your sights, you see your target's blood splatter across the pavement.}}
*{{udspan|The recoil kicks into your shoulder. Your target reacts visibly as your round hits home.}}
*{{udspan|You absorb the shock of the rifle's recoil. Your target cries out loudly as they are struck by the bullet.}}
Shooting (miss):
*{{udspan|The rifle's recoil drills your shoulder. You hear a pinging as your round strikes near your target.}}
*{{udspan|You pull the trigger all the way back. The round sails harmlessly over the targets head.}}
*{{udspan|The weapon quivers as the bullet exits the muzzle. Your target doesn't react, a miss.}}
*{{udspan|You fire your weapon. The bullet whizzes harmlessly past your target.}}
*{{udspan|The rifle jolts backwards. The target is unaffected and uninjured by your shot.}}
Being shot at (hit):
*{{udspan|Pain explodes throughout your body, as a report echoes from a nearby building. You have been shot by a sniper for 5 damage.}}
*{{udspan|Blood splatters on the pavement; it is your own. You have been shot by a sniper for 5 damage.}}
*{{udspan|You twitch slightly, as the bullet enters and exits your body. You have been shot by a sniper for 5 damage.}}
Being shot at (hit, flack jacket/rotten flesh):
*{{udspan|The dampened impact of a sniper's bullet hits chest. You have been shot by a sniper for 5 damage. Your (flak jacket/rotten flesh) absorbs 1 point of damage.}}
*{{udspan|A bullet hits you in the middle of your torso, as a report echoes from a nearby building. You have been shot by a sniper for 5 damage. Your (flak jacket/rotten flesh) absorbs 1 point of damage.}}
*{{udspan|A bullet strikes you squarely in the chest with a dull thud. You have been shot by a sniper for 5 damage. Your (flak jacket/rotten flesh) absorb 1 point of damage.}}
Being shot at (miss):
*{{udspan|A bullet whizzes by your head, striking the ground behind you. Somewhere, a sniper is gunning for you.}}
*{{udspan|A bullet ricochets on the ground nearby. Somewhere, a sniper is gunning for you.}}
Reloading:
*{{udspan|You load the bullet into your weapon with a satisfying clack.}}
*{{udspan|The bullet slides into rifle with hardly a sound.}}
*{{udspan|The bullet disappears into the chamber of the weapon.}}
*{{udspan|The bullet slides smoothly into the rifle.}}
*{{udspan|The bullet enters the weapon with a small click.}}


'''Searches:'''<br>
Search Percentages (slashes '/' denote bargain hunting rates): <br>
Rifle: Police Department: 1%; Gun Stores: 2%/3%; Fort Armouries: 5%, <br>
Rifle Bullet: Police Station: 3%; Gun Stores: 4%/6%; Fort Armouries: 7% <br>
<br>
Flavour Text:<br>
Rifle:<br>
Police Department: 
*{{udspan|Searching through the station, you locate a large, unscoped rifle.}}
*{{udspan|As you look through the gun lockers, you find a rifle that has been left behind.}}
*{{udspan|You look throughout the department and manage to locate a rifle.}}
Gun Store:
*{{udspan|You grab one of the hunting rifles left on the display counter.}}
*{{udspan|You retrieve one of the hunting rifles mounted on the wall of the store.}}
*{{udspan|Looking behind the counter, you discover a rifle hidden under the cash register.}}
Fort Armouries:
*{{udspan|Searching through the armoury, you find a single-shot rifle.}}
*{{udspan|You rifle through the armoury, and find exactly that.}}
*{{udspan|As you search the armoury, you discover a rifle in the corner.}}
Bullet:<br>
Police Department:
*{{udspan|Searching through the drawers of the station's desks, you discover an unused rifle bullet.}}
*{{udspan|As your search through the department, you notice a rifle bullet in the corner of one of the rooms.}}
*{{udspan|Running through the station, you step on, and nearly fall because of, an unused rifle bullet.}}
Gun Store:
*{{udspan|Searching through the discarded rifle ammo cases, you discover one with a bullet left in it.}}
*{{udspan|As you search, a small glint catches your eye. An unused bullet glimmers in the light.}}
*{{udspan|Searching throughout the store, you find a rifle bullet behind one of the discarded ammo boxes.}}
Fort Armouries:
*{{udspan|Among the numerous spent casings, you noticed one of them has not been used.}}
*{{udspan|You find an unused rifle round amongst the clutter of the armoury.}}
*{{udspan|Searching through the armoury, you find a bullet in one of the empty weapon lockers.}}
<br>
<br>
I realise that numerous people have advocated for a rifle in the game, and numerous more have advocated for it's absence. I personally believe that the lack of a rifle is not for the better, there are numerous balance issues revolving around the way to handle it. The damage per AP with maximum training at close range is 1.5HP. With your target having a flak jacket, that ends up at 1.2HP per AP. When sniping and max training, the rate improves to 50% to hit, increasing damage/AP inflicted without a flak jacket to 2.5HP. Halve everything if you have to load the rounds, plus the two AP to use your binoculars and steady your rifle. So with ideal conditions and a full rifle, that ends up being about 1.79 damage per HP, AT BEST. If you have to load the rounds, 1.04dmg/AP. Ideal conditions for a fully loaded shotgun, 6.5dmg/AP, and 3.25dmg/AP if you have to load the shells, and 2.6 if a flak jacket or rotten flesh is involved. Pistols: 3.25d/AP, 2.78d/AP if you have to reload, and 2.22 with relevant protection added. So the ideal Damage per Action point for the rifle's max accuracy, with all bullets loaded, is only higher than the pistol with equivalent training, a flak jacket and having to reload it. So I hope the nerfing of the rifle is sufficient to pass community review.
--{{User:Luke Leimer/sig}} 
|}
====Discussion (Rifle)====
* I don't see anything about zombies (or players, for that matter), being able to tell where the shot came from.  This is a ranged shot, it could come from a number of directions and a number of squares away.  I suggest modifying it so that the target and possibly players in neighboring squares get an idea where the shot came from, kind of as if it were a flare.
:Despite it being a ranged shot, you can only attack blocks '''right next to your building''', and as a matter of fact, not even outside your building. Plus, gun reports would probably result in more dupes than this would get anyway. -{{User:Luke Leimer/sig}} 17:29, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
:Also, with the numerous buildings about the report would echo from everywhere, bouncing off buildings hither and thither, if any implementation it would either be in all three target squares, or merely the surrounding eight squares, maybe have a different message if you are outside on the same block as the sniper. -{{User:Luke Leimer/sig}} 17:35, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
::*{{udspan|You hear a rifle report echo throughout the streets}}
::*{{udspan|You hear a rifle report from one of the top floors of the building}}
* It's good that you can't recognize zombie contacts, but I also find it questionable whether you should be able to identify survivor contacts, and no matter what your Diagnosis ability should be disabled... no reading HPs, spotting infections or whatever when picking targets in remote squares.  
:I agree, with a single coin flip scenario, what about survivors with scent fear? The asterisk just shows that they are injured, nothing more. -{{User:Luke Leimer/sig}} 17:29, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
:Also, I think survivor contacts should be recognisable, as you can see their name from the map, and from using your binoculars, and a well dressed person stands out more than if they were one of the many shambling rotting corpses. What you don't know who they are? Well, You can't see their description, but if you were able to go 'the one with the top hat, or the one with the overcoat' in real life, shouldn't you be able to choose who you shoot? -{{User:Luke Leimer/sig}} 18:10, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Those are just a couple of issues I see with this so far.  I didn't bother reading it closely enough to see how dangerous this weapon is yet, maybe I will later, but not if it gets shot down first.  Too tired.  Crashing.  G'night.   --[[User:Necrofeelinya|Necrofeelinya]] 06:55, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
:Thanks for the feedback! -{{User:Luke Leimer/sig}} 17:29, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
:Why would you want to shoot zombies outside? --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 09:36, 7 November 2010 (UTC) 
::I can guarantee that there will be people, plus some people may use this to slowly gain XP. -{{User:Luke Leimer/sig}} 17:29, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
:::I meant from a tactical sense. Its self defeating to kill zombies outside. Plus it adds confusion. How do you know that the zombie you're aiming at isn't at a Revive Point? What's to stop people killing me at a revive point safe in the knowledge I can't identify them? Also in terms of levelling no one would use this to level. Basic accuracy of 2.5%? Its useless without basic firearms training, at which point its much easier to level with pistol training.--{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 17:15, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
::::1) Tactical sense? First off if a zed busts down your 'cades with half its HP, that's better than a healthy (?) corpse. A couple of shots can allow you to put the hurt on an individual from relative safety. Just like in war, they must asses where snipers are, and act accordingly. Good for PKers, or your pro-survivors. As an actual technique to fight against the undead, it holds a small niche there, as well.  The major way for survivors to win against the zed is to do one thing: make them want to move. You can't ''make'' them move, or move them yourself, but rather put them in a circumstance where they are unwilling to stay. After they chew up a town, they move on. If they're overwhelmed, they move on. If they aren't having fun, they move on. If you got a few ferals constantly being sniped, they may find it annoying and not fun, and move on. Survivors win.
::::2) How do you know the zombie you aim at isn't in a rev point? Use the wiki. And if long-range cow tipping is that bad of a problem, move to a different RP. Forcing you to move in just that demonstrates the tactical sense a sniper can have. Snipers can only attack squares '''directly adjacent to their building''' and only from tall ones at that; just don't stand in an RP next to a tall building.
::::3) Leveling up? No one uses pistols w/o basic firearms training. If you complain that it's too little, I'd like to think I could hit a zombie that's '''just standing there''' with a pistol and no firearms training, but I can't. I said I'd be willing tweak the numbers if needed, so what do you suggest? And as for sniping, the action doesn't become available until you purchase 'Basic Rifle Training', child skill of basic firearms. It's pretty much supposed to be ''weaker'' than a shotgun or pistol, in damage and reloading respectively, but gain that advantage of being able to attack one square adjacent, if (and only if) you have basic/adv. rifle training, a pair of binocs, and are in a tall building. 
Conclusion) The idea is that it doesn't fit the niche as a pistol or shotgun clone, and gives an ability that neither firearms possess. With some values tweaking it can be analogous in certain ways, but not identical. It can serve a purpose as an instrument of opportunity, or XP gathering. It is on par with other firearms, and can create a psychological impact, potentially to where zeds are ware of standing near tall buildings. It behaves believably, is not overpowered (zed's can just stand up/the accuracy and damage), requires AP (binocs and rifle steadying), helps PKers as well, is not a stopgap, and adds something that people may be looking for. Just saying. I just don't know how to pitch this without getting spammed/duped for having the word 'rifle' in it. --{{User:Luke Leimer/sig}} 06:10, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::Thanks for the replies. Firstly, if i'ma hostile zombie being sniped from a building next door, my natural reaction would be to move to that building. Not really the kind of option you'd want if you're trying to stop zombies. Secondly, its a lot better to spend your AP on cades then to allow half injured zombies inside. These skills would only reinforce that shooting zombies outside is a good thing. (Which it really isn't comparing ap usage and remembering digestion)  Thirdly "Use the wiki" and "Don't stand there" aren't sensible justifications for the griefing of revive points. Fourthly, my levelling explanation meant that you wouldn't try levelling using the rifle tree, it would me much more efficient to use the pistol skill tree. Also, you haven't explained what you see if there is a survivor at their block, or how you would get around yons ammo dilution question directly below. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 14:59, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

[[User:Grim s/Sandbox/GunSuggestVote|Read this]].--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature3‎}} 10:11, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
:Duly noted Yon, I didn't want this to start this with too much accuracy/damage or have ammo in magazines, and have people bitch about how it's too strong, but if you tweak the firearm percentages to match the base (no skill) and tier 1 (basic firearms) it would just be similar to other firearms. There are a few things I'd be willing to toy with: if you upgrade the damage to 10 it'd just be essentially a five-round shotgun with separate ammo (why bother except for the sniping ability?), play with the percentages as before (though a rifle inside a building with no/little training is unwieldy to use compared to a pistol/shotgun), perhaps have sniping rounds do half the damage (unrealistic, but then again, so are zombies), add a magazine to make it like a sniping pistol (again, why bother except for the sniping ability?) or any myriad of ideas you come up with. It just seems strange to me that there are absolutely '''no rifles''' in the city. -{{User:Luke Leimer/sig}} 17:29, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
----

===Dr Strangesuggestion, or, how I learnt to love the headshot===
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' {{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature3‎}} 23:18, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
|-
|'''Type:''' Headshot nerf
|-
|'''Scope:''' Brain rot, Headshot
|-
|'''Description:''' <br>''There once was a man with Brain Rot,<br>Who suffered a terrible head shot,<br>It hurt twice as much,<br>The man was a putz,<br>But the relief on newbies was a lot.''

Basically, Headshot would deal 3AP as standard, and 5AP if the target had brainrot. 

'''Flavour''': Less structure in the head: More damage

'''Benefits''': Newbies take less AP damage, older players unaffected.

'''Tactical''': Zombies need to pick if they want guns or needles to be a more effective means of killing them.

Discuss.
|}
====Discussion (Dr Strangesuggestion, or, how I learnt to love the headshot)====

I like it, especially since it benefits newbies. [[User:Whitehouse]] 23:29, 6 November 2010 (UTC)<br>
As Whitehouse. -{{User:Luke Leimer/sig}} 04:28, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Most zombies don't even buy brain rot... I know I don't on my zombie alt. Incase I wanna death cultist and stuff. Change it to ankle grab and add a little more AP on it and I like it. --[[User:Zamins|Zamins]] 06:53, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
:Approximately 9% of players have brain rot. Ankle grab would make no sense tactically.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature3‎}} 10:09, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
::So 91% gets a boost regardless whether they are level 1 or level 41? No. Why on earth discourage brainrot like this? --[[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]][[User:MisterGame|<span style= "color: maroon; background-color: white">'''''Thadeous Oakley''''']][[Image:Umbrella-White.png|14px]]</span> 10:19, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
:::Brainrot stays exactly as it is now. It's just that newbies get a boost, as they should.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature3‎}} 10:52, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
::From what I can tell, based on the stats page, approximately (and this is just a rough approximation) 34% of max level players have Brain Rot. More if we count those zombies that stop at level 21 or 22 and go no further with their levels. And that includes survivor characters as well, so you can roughly double that to get an idea of how many max level zombies have Brain Rot. Anyway, you shouldn't retroactively punish players (and it would be a punishment, since they would be unable to take the other choice) for a decision they made previously which they are unable to reverse now. Simple as that. That said, if there were a new city, I think that this might be a great idea. It'd certainly make sieges much more interesting, I should think.{{User:Aichon/Signature}} 16:12, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
:::Uh, don't you need the brain rot skill to be the max level? And it wouldn't make sieges more interesting, it would just speed up what would normally happen. Zombies eventually win, survivors eventually come back after a few days. No strategy invovled. --[[User:Zamins|Zamins]] 16:54, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
::::I considered max level to be people that stop at levels 43, 44, or 45. 43 is the max level for anyone that doesn't grab Brain Rot. For anyone that grabs Brain Rot, then either 44 or 45 is their max level. I took all of that into consideration with my calculations. As for sieges, I didn't say that it would switch the way things are now in terms of who wins. I said it would make them more interesting. To me, making survivors more capable of ousting zombies with syringes without the need for a lit NT is more interesting. And as the recent Blackmore Battle showed, there is strategy involved, and it would've made a difference there. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 22:08, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
I agree with Aichon. That said, couldn't you just scale headshot so that it does 1AP for a Level 1 zombie, 2AP for Level 2... and so on up to 5AP for Level 5+, and get a similar effect for new zombies? -[[MHS|<span style="color: Black">'''MHS'''</span>]][[User_Talk:MHSstaff|<span style="color: DarkBlue">'''staff'''</span>]] 18:50, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
:Sure, that would work.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature3‎}} 18:56, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
----

===Weakened Survivors===
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' [[User:General Havok|General Havok]] 17:46, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
|-
|'''Type:''' TYPE HERE
|-
|'''Scope:''' SCOPE HERE
|-
|'''Description:''' Survivors that are injured have less ability to defend themselves. A Survivor that is WOUNDED has any Survivor or Zombie that attacks them get a +5% bonus to attack. A Survivor that is DYING has any Survivor or Zombie that attacks them get a +10% bonus to attack.
|}
====Discussion (Weakened Survivors)====
Kudos for using DS. However, this skill isn't needed at this point. Zombies can already kill quite well without any extra help. With this active, it makes zombies hit at a 70-80% rate when a survivor is dying. That's the same as a gun, and a gun has the down side of having to find and load ammo. This would effectively allow zombie players to hit almost non-stop without any draw-backs. As a zombie player, I love this. But the survivor part of me thinks this would knock things far too out of whack to be feasible. {{User:Shadok/sig}} 22:23, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

----

===Brain damage===
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' [[User:Zamins|Zamins]] 17:54, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
|-
|'''Type:''' Skill
|-
|'''Scope:''' Survivors
|-
|'''Description:''' Consider this, when someone in real life gets shot in the head, they either have brain damage or die. Mostly the latter. But zombies are different, their bodies regenerate. Zombies should have brain damage, but just untill their brain regenerates.

This skill would be in the skill tree of headshot, making it the second skill in the zombie hunter class.

This skill could cause some of 5 different effects to happen.

-Nulling the effect of ankle grab (paying the full price of dying)
-Loss of motor skills (not able to move, etc)
-Mental retardation (Messed up speech, sometimes doing the wrong thing)
-Aggression (When trying to do something else, they could attack any breathing thing there. Zombie or survivor.)
-Confabulations (Seeing things that aren't there, such as reading barricade levels wrong.)

All of these effects would last for 5 ap, one after the other.

Now before you think this is over powered, it is not 100% that any of these effects will happen. However, the zombie wouldn't know if it was effected or not. And would be given a choice to spend 10 AP to null all effects (excluding the ankle grab one)

The chances that effects will happen:

-1 effect happening = 95%
-2 effects happening = 50%
-3 effects happening = 25%
-4 effects happening = 2%
-5 effects happening = 1%
|}
====Discussion (Brain damage)====
I believe that this suggestion may be a little over powered with the nulling ankle grab one. Perhaps I should change it to adding on 5 ap to death. --[[User:Zamins|Zamins]] 17:55, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

This goes against plenty in the [[Suggestions_Dos_and_Do_Nots#Other_Players|Suggestions Dos and Do Nots]]. --{{User:Axe Hack/Sig}} 18:08, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Such as? I kept those dos and do nots in mind when I made this suggestion. --[[User:Zamins|Zamins]] 19:13, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

FUCK YEAR ZOMBIES R TOTES OVAPOWERD DUDE DEY SO NEED DA NERFIN. {{tiny|Fuck off. Adding anything to the already-punishing array of AP-sponging survivors can dish out to zombies is just spastic. Sorry this doesn't sound constructive, but that would be because it's not.}} {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 01:08, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Exactly. Despite how much of a parody that could be. --[[User:Zamins|Zamins]] 01:41, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh, reading the small part of that I see brain damage is already in the game. It takes well over 20 AP to revive a survivor after death. For a zombie? 6 AP. So even WITH this, it would be 16 AP (excluding the ankle grab). Well, that's why I said in my first comment that this is a little overpowered. --[[User:Zamins|Zamins]] 01:45, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
:Actually it takes 10 AP to revive a survivor, and the reviver gains experience for doing so. That same 10 AP revive is also a one-shot-kill versus zombies too, so there's no arguing that it's a niche item. Headshot is already a skill that hurts new players to a spastic degree, essentially saying "Oh hey, you're a new zombie player. That's great and all, but we're going to go ahead and only give you 7/10s of the play experience that new survivors get. Enjoy!" Enhancing the effects of headshot by increasing the stand-up cost, or anything else detrimental to normal, regular zombie play, hits the most fragile demographic in this game - a game which, might I add, is losing player numbers quickly. Of course this doesn't matter to you, you don't give a fuck about reaching new players or increasing player base or even allowing zombie players to enjoy the game, because I'm obviously in the wrong. You're not just making a stupid suggestion, you're making one that would impact the game decidedly negatively. Dick. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 01:56, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I play both a zombie character and a human one, and I can say that on the zombie account, there is no repelling us. There are only people spending 40+ AP getting us to waste 6 ap. --[[User:Zamins|Zamins]] 01:47, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Are you counting the AP to stand up, go to a RP, another survivor to go to a NT building, find a syringe, and then go to the RP? And about the one shot kill, get brain rot. 6 ap is not a spastic degree. I agree on the experience thing though. Oh and, stop being a jackass, mmkay? --[[User:Zamins|Zamins]] 01:59, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
:No, I'm not counting that. Because that's fucking stupid. I shouldn't factor in another player's AP expenditure as my own. And the only jackass here is the fucking retard trying to make this game more one-sided and significantly more difficult to pick up for the first time. Suggestions need to be applied to ''everyone'', and that includes Paddy-New-Guy with no skills purchased and no gaming experience who will just ragequit UD entirely the first time your suggestion causes him to lose 40% of his gaming time to some retard idea. Also I don't think you understand for a second that ''there are players who don't have certain skills because they are fucking new''. Brain Rot is not an option for someone who's just started, who already faces a 15 AP standing cost (which is a lot more than 6, in case you need it pointed out for you). Stop being a fucking idiot thinking only of established players and actually empathise with the little guy who this would fucking cripple. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 02:05, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Stop with the swears, mmkay? Aren't you like, a wikimod or something? It just makes you look aggravated , which you probably are. Which is silly to get over the internet. You must have a poor temper. It is not stupid to count another person's AP. It's still AP from the survivor side. How will it make it one sided? Trying to have zombies do something other then camp out in a tent outside a building? If they get revived, then they do what a survivor has to do, get back to the right side. And the new zombies would just have to cooperate with older ones to get in and chow down.
May I ask how you think zombies are not over powered? They will eventually ALWAYS break into a building. I'll try it on my zombie account right now. Stand outside of a popular building for a couple days, eventually I will break in. Oh wow, alot of fun for both sides. One side knows they're getting broken into, and the other has no challange. No need for cooperation. --[[User:Zamins|Zamins]] 02:13, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
:Why are zombies not overpowered? They rely entirely on teamwork to achieve anything. One zombie can do almost fucking nothing alone - and ''as I keep trying to fucking convey to you'', new players are the crux of this problem. They most often play alone, having not gotten into the game fully yet. They will drift from one building to another, maybe following groans if they're clever enough, finding scraps sometimes, and generally struggling to use their vastly-reduced AP total to achieve anything. Please tell me why, in no uncertain terms, you have this serious hard-on for ass-fucking new players. You have at no point addressed the fact that this is only going to hurt them, and it's obvious to anyone that they're both the most vulnerable and the most vital resource we have in this game. Why do you want to hurt new players? Why do you want to drive people away from starting this game? Why can't you comprehend the order of letters and punctuation on your screen and actually address a point being hammered home multiple times? {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 02:21, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Please don't reproduce, I don't want you beating your kids. That's the point, they can't do anything on their own. Zombies need other zombies. And this idea reinforces that. I realize they start off alone, and that's why I posted it here. To find flaws in it and fix it. And for what I hope to be the last time, please, please, stop with the swears? It just makes me think you're throwing a temper tantrum and I can't take you seriously. I'm trying to have a relaxed, cooled off, debate. And you going "RAGERAGEQQQQ!@!@!@@" every five seconds... --[[User:Zamins|Zamins]] 02:29, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
:I might maybe curse less if you would learn to fucking indent. And I feel no reason to beat anyone unless they're your level of stupid. Can you seriously not fathom that new players without any connections in-game or any desire to/experience with metagaming are basically boned under this idea? You can't just enforce rigid play styles that are incredibly unrealistic to adhere to just because you're stupid. No one signs up to UD for the first time and instantly joins an organised horde to be fed. So stop fucking saying that's how they "should" play and own up to the fact that you just don't give a shit about new players. Seriously. You're a selfish fuck who is entirely unconcerned with anyone else's enjoyment of this game if you can't admit that making the game more difficult for new players is a bad thing. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 02:34, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
What Mis says. Headshot is already bad enough as it is, especially for babahs without Ankle Grab. It would rather need to be ''nerfed'' than to be even more ''empowered''. As for "always breaking in", try to tackle an EHB building as a feral. You won't have even the APs to bring it down to Lightly on your own 8 out of 10 days - just look at the math. By the time you have regenerated, the trenchie inside has rebuild the cades for a quarter of your costs to bring them down and has still the spare APs to go outside and go all "BOOM HAEDSHOT LOL" on you. --{{User:Spiderzed/Sandbox/Sig}} 02:35, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Misanthropy is correct in his claim that headshot does not require a boost. He is incorrect in his claim that Zamins is some asshole here to destroy the game. But getting a ''little'' bit more on topic, there is some quality ideas here that can be salvaged. First off: No boost to headshot. That said, I love the idea of a random debilitation. What if, perhaps, every time a survivor sees another survivor die, they have a small (~1%) chance of temporary insanity. There would be a variety of types (5-10), and mostly serve as an unexpected distraction, nothing like automatic suicide. All are curable by death. Here's some ideas, mostly taken from Call of Cthulhu:
*Character has a screaming fit. Basically, everyone outside has a scent trail style thing, but spanning two blocks rather than six. If you log on, and someone with a screaming fit is within two blocks, {{Udspan|You hear screaming coming from <direction>.}} Screaming fit lasts until 60AP is spent / the server resets. Not sure which.
*Character believes themselves to be a zombie. Can only speak in death rattle, and cannot use firearms.  Lasts until 20AP is spent / the server resets.
*Character gripped by intense necrophobia, and any action taken while a zombie is in sight is replaced with running in the general away direction.  Lasts until 30AP is spent / the server resets.
*Character becomes homicidal. When other survivors are present, all actions are preceded by punching a random survivor (for 0AP), much like, when infected, actions are preceded by damage. Lasts until 40AP is spent / the server resets.
*Character gripped with echopraxia. Whenever character hears something via speech, radio, etc., they character automatically repeat it (for no AP). They are informed in the ''Since your last turn''.  Lasts until 100AP is spent.
*Character gripped with strange eating desire. Gains the ability to feed on corpses. Lasts until death.
*Character has necrophilia. <small>That one was a joke.</small>
*Deafness. Cannot hear speech, radio, groan, etc. Lasts until 60AP is spent / the server resets.
*Character has uncontrollable tics or tremors. All attack accuracies are halved. Lasts until 40AP is spent / the server resets.
*Character loses ability to communicate. Lasts until 40AP is spent / the server resets.
*Character temporarily loses a random 20% of their skills. They cannot buy them, but get them back for free afterwords. On their profile, the skills show up as present. Lasts until 40AP is spent / the server resets.
*Alcohol abuse. Basically, every action costs 2AP. Drinking beer or wine cures this.
Pretty raw idea(s), but worth discussing. So... discuss. --{{User:TripleU/Sig}} 05:02, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

----

===Hunting Rifle===
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' [[User:Toshiro Aki|Toshiro Aki]]  5 November 2010 
|-
|'''Type:''' New Weapon, Game Mechanic
|-
|'''Scope:''' Humans, Civilians, Malls, Skills
|-
|'''Description:''' 

The Every-mans gun, do all civilians need to be in the military to know how to shoot? no, we hunt! 
<br />
the basic idea here is a civilian skill tree weapon, we may find pistols and shotguns, but we have to save massive XP to make them Useful, so if civilians/police had hunting rifles, we could be more effective at a lower LV,
<br />
zombies can overrun easily in a mall invasion, with ankle grab and hand to hand skills, this allows civilians at a lower lv to be an asset and not a liability....
 

Ammo Capacity, 5 rounds (Rifle Cartridge)
<br />
Damage, 5-8 (pistol is 6 rounds for 5dam each, so if we make a rifle, 5 rounds for 8dam has a similar AP per use/reload)
<br />
Weapon and Ammo only found in malls... (ammo found in groups of 5, gun found with 2-5 rounds loaded, or 0 you found it in a mall)

( in military as is no change )

* Basic Firearms Training (Player gets +25% to hit with all firearms attacks.)


:o Pistol Training (An extra +25% to hit with a pistol.)
:: Advanced Pistol Training (An extra +10% to hit.) 


skills, in civilian tree (basic firearms skill applies to rifles)


o Sportsman (An extra +15% to hit with a rifle.)
:+ Trophy hunter (An extra +10% to hit with a rifle.)
::+ Militia Member (An extra +10% to hit with a rifle.)

(notice instead of 25,10 --- we did a 15,10,10 so a civillian requires more EXP to fight effectivly 
<br />
(as a civilian 75+75+75+/-100[fire arms train]) or buy military skill (100+100+/-100 to get pistol+basic train[/-unless a police officer])

====Discussion (Hunting rifle)====
Auto-dupe/Auto-spam on my watch.  Please view the [[Frequently_Suggested#Military_Weaponry|Frequently Suggested page]]. --{{User:Axe Hack/Sig}} 15:42, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
:Um. Starting accuracy is what? Also how is this more effective than having a pistol? Also ammo consider ammo dilution. (someone remind me where grims template is?) --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 16:16, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
::Starting accuracy needs to be given, but assuming it is the same as a pistol, the rifle is going to be a little bit better. Consider 30 pistol vs rifle shots. So for the pistol, it takes 30AP to fire, and 5AP to reload 5 clips (6/clip 30shots). For the rifle, it takes 30AP to fire, and 6AP to reload 6 clips (5/clip 30shots). So you are looking at a possible 150 Damage * 0.65 / 35AP = 2.78 Dmg/AP for the pistol and 240 Damage*0.45 / 36AP = 3.00 Dmg/AP for the rifle. I *think* .-[[MHS|<span style="color: Black">'''MHS'''</span>]][[User_Talk:MHSstaff|<span style="color: DarkBlue">'''staff'''</span>]] 16:29, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
:::It is also better if you have only one gun skill (pistol or zombie safari rifle). None of this really changes the fact that this is kinda "meh"-[[MHS|<span style="color: Black">'''MHS'''</span>]][[User_Talk:MHSstaff|<span style="color: DarkBlue">'''staff'''</span>]] 16:31, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
::::Also, the crux of the idea is that it's available for civilian characters more quickly than the pistol, but civilians need 100XP for ''all'' human skills. This would be a scientist gun.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature3‎}} 17:04, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
----

===Lighthouse===
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' [[User:Necrofeelinya|Necrofeelinya]] 06:10, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
|-
|'''Type:''' New Building
|-
|'''Scope:''' Everybody, the map
|-
|'''Description:''' I'm putting forward this suggestion for a couple of reasons.  First, the hardcore city design I've been rarely working on as a hobby is scheduled for completion some time around February of 2073.  I thought certain features of it might be worth introducing in case other, speedier individuals wanted to make use of them in their own map designs, if such designs exist, and to give people an opportunity to encourage Kevan to use it in any future city plans he may have if such plans come about before the next 60+ years have passed.  I happen to like this idea, and would like to see it included in a future city if any plans happen to be in the works for another "hardcore" map.  

Second, though clearly the basic idea is pretty well hacked out here, I figured I could use some slight assistance tweaking it in terms of external messages, suggestions about the range at which such messages are visible, whether it's even possible to install two gennies in a building and if not what sort of substitute might be made, and what items should be available in a lighthouse, as well as suggestions of % chance of finding each of them.  As with my previous suggestion, buffnerfbuffnerfbuffnerfbuffnerfbuffnerf, and references to ritual animal slaughter are also welcome.  

{{Locationblock|
suburb=Lighthouse|
coordinates=0,0|
location_type=Lighthouse|
NW_location=beach|NW_color=beach|
N_location=field|N_color=field50|
NE_location=field|NE_color=field50|
W_location=beach|W_color=beach|
This_location=Lighthouse|location_color=Lighthouse|
E_location=road|E_color=road|
SW_location=beach|SW_color=beach|
S_location=field|S_color=field50|
SE_location=field|SE_color=field50}}


A Lighthouse is tall structure with a powerful light at the top, designed to warn ships at sea of coastal dangers.  It has little value as a Tactical Resource Point, but is unique in another fashion.  When a player installs a generator in a lighthouse, it functions as normal... the building becomes lit, but the signal light does not turn on.  Players have the option of installing a second generator to turn on the signal light, in which case the signal light becomes visible to all players on the map, and gives a vague indication of distance and a precise direction to the lighthouse.  A lighthouse has no specific interior description, other than to say "You are standing in a lighthouse", but is subject to [[Ruin]] and [[Decay]], along with the accompanying interior and exterior descriptions.  When the main light is powered by a second generator the following descriptions are added to all players' screens, depending upon distance from the lighthouse and with (direction) being the most direct route to the lighthouse out of a choice of the 8 possible movement directions on the mini-map:

*1-10 squares away:  "Nearby to the (direction) you see the bright beacon of a lighthouse"
*11-25 squares away:  "To the (direction) you can make out a lighthouse signal"
*26-50 squares away:  "A light appears off in the distance to the (direction)"
*51-75 squares away:  "Far to the (direction) you can see a light shining"
*76-99 squares away:  "To the (direction) you can barely detect a light flickering very far away"

If [[fog]] is implemented in-game again, the lighthouse will still be visible when powered, but only to a limited degree.  Then the following messages will be seen by players:

*1-5 squares away:  "To the (direction) a bright light cuts through the fog"
*6-15 squares away:  "A light can be seen signaling through the fog to the (direction)"

From 16 or more squares away the lighthouse cannot be seen through fog, and the light does not allow players to better see their surroundings, it only indicates the direction of the lighthouse.  Both generators must be fueled for the signal light to work, if either one runs out of fuel, the signal light goes out. 
  
Items found in lighthouses are: 

*newspaper
*flare gun
*radio
|}
====Discussion (Lighthouse)====
Question: Where would this lighthouse be?--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature3‎}} 11:44, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I love it! Malton basing it is a problem. But its still a fantastic idea. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 12:07, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I like it a lot as well. You could do something similar with stadiums and stadium lights to make the general concept a little more Malton-friendly. Lighted stadiums are easy to see from a distance. -[[MHS|<span style="color: Black">'''MHS'''</span>]][[User_Talk:MHSstaff|<span style="color: DarkBlue">'''staff'''</span>]] 16:47, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
:The idea isn't meant to be implemented in any current map, it's for any future city Kevan may be considering if he plans to ever create another.  Being a lighthouse, it would require coastal areas, and no current city has those.  For Malton, a similar idea with lighted stadiums isn't a bad concept, but since I don't play Malton I don't really think about Malton mods much.  It's also in case anyone else is designing a map proposal, just as I <i>very, very slowly</i> am, and might want to incorporate it.  Apart from that, I was just hoping for a few refinement suggestions.  If this suggestion went to Peer Review, it would just basically be saying "Hey Kevan, we like this idea and would like to see it in some form, somehow".  He could figure out what he wanted to do with it, if anything, himself.--[[User:Necrofeelinya|Necrofeelinya]] 08:18, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
----

===Gun noise===
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' {{User:Monstah/Sig}} 02:51, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
|-
|'''Type:''' game mechanic
|-
|'''Scope:''' firearms fired in streets
|-
|'''Description:''' I think this has been discussed before in the old days, but what's the opinion on firearms being heard from nearby blocks, at least when fired from the street?
|}
====Discussion (Gun noise)====
For one, I'm a supporter of the idea. Specially nowadays, since the server is a lot emptier than it used to be and there are many ghost towns around, I like ideas that draw players to action (like [[Suggestion:20101103_Shout|this]], if it could be hear by zombies too) {{User:Monstah/Sig}} 02:54, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

[[Suggestions/RejectedApril2006#Echoes_of_Gunfire|Rejected]]! --{{User:Axe Hack/Sig}} 03:12, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
:Yeah, I though I'd seen it before. Nevermind then. {{User:Monstah/Sig}} 19:52, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
::Rejected in April 2006.... well that's recent :) --[[User:Honestmistake|Honestmistake]] 22:02, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
----



===Shout===
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' {{User:Vapor/sig}} 17:29, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
|-
|'''Type:''' Survivor Skill
|-
|'''Scope:''' Survivors
|-
|'''Description:''' 
Shout is the survivor equivalent to the Zombie skill Feeding Groan. When a building's barricade level reaches Lightly or below, survivors are able to shout into the streets, beckoning survivors up to 4 blocks in any direction to aid with building defense.

'''Skill Tree and Cost:''' Shout is a subset of the Civilian skill Construction and costs 100XP for all survivors.

'''Flavor''':

To those shouting:

*{{udspan|You have no reason to shout. (There there is no immediate threat to this building.)}} (Barricades above Lightly Barricaded)
*{{udspan|You shout in astonishment.}} (Lightly Barricaded) - 2 block radius
*{{udspan|You shout loudly into the streets.}} (Loosely Barricaded) - 3 block radius
*{{udspan|You shout alarmingly into the streets.}} (Doors secured or wide open) - 4 block radius

Shouting as heard by others:


*{{udspan|You heard a loud commotion from inside the building.}} (If the shout comes from your current location)
*{{udspan|You heard loud shouting X blocks to the <direction>.}}
|}

====Discussion (Shout)====
Another variation of Shout would be more similar to feeding groan and is available only when faced with a horde of zombies. I looked through suggestion portal and didn't find this one but pardon if it is a dupe. I think this would help with some of the survivor disorganization issues. It's a non-meta way of getting specific information to other survivors and unlike firing flares, shout leaves no guessing as to what's going on in the surrounding area. Flares can be used in ANY situation and does not deliver specific (or even valuable IMO) information {{User:Vapor/sig}} 17:29, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
:Won't the zombie hear this as well? --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 17:31, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
::I had thought about that and it makes sense that a zombie would here and audible cue like shouting. However, a human would likewise be able to hear zombie groans. In-game they cannot. I think to keep it consistent with feeding groan, it should be audible only to survivors or possibly to survivors and zombies at that location. I suppose one could argue that zombies are driven by feeding instincts and the scent of death and their auditory senses are limited only to Death Rattle. {{User:Vapor/sig}} 18:13, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
:::Survivors CAN hear feeding groans- if they are outside when the noise is being made.  Nobody (survivor or zombie) can hear any feeding groans if they are inside.  Also, zombies can understand human speech just fine, so it also not true that "their auditory senses are limited only to Death Rattle."  {{User:Swiers/Sig}} 22:18, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
:Actually, I think it's fine like this. Shouting in the face of a horde of enemies is for orcs, not humans. Yelling like a girl because the 'cades are down, that's more like it. {{User:Monstah/Sig}} 21:32, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
----

===Fireman's Carry===
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' [[User:Wayson|Wayson]] 00:09, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
|-
|'''Type:''' Survivor Skill
|-
|'''Scope:''' Move people outside of buildings inside them
|-
|'''Description:''' Currently, zombies can drag people out of buildings into the street, where babah zambahz can chow down on fresh bra!nz.  That's excellent, but as a survivor it <s>always</s> sometimes sucks to see one of your mates dragged out as an appetizer.  At present, all you can do is slap a FAK on him and hope that he logs in before it's too late.  But in a real zombie apocalypse, would you be content with putting a bandage on your friend and then leaving him in the middle of a shamblin' crowd of cannibals?  Of course not!  That would be plain mean.  

Getting serious, what I propose is a mechanic whereby survivors can carry, pull, drag, or otherwise move unconscious survivors into buildings.  The mechanic would only be available if the individual in question was standing directly outside the building.  (Presumably he was dragged out, but maybe he's just stupid or doesn't have free running.)  This would involve a more-than-usual AP cost, such as 5 or 10 AP.  

There is an issue that I can think of immediately, and that's the problem of this skill being used to circumvent free running.  On the one hand, any problems could be avoided through the simple expedient of having cades greater than VSB++ negate the use of this skill.  But on the other hand, it could be also be avoided by having the carrying player 'toss' the unconscious survivor over the barricade, while he himself remains outside and needs to negotiate his own way back to safety.  Needless to say, I favor the second suggestion.  

At present a mechanic similar to this suggestion already exists; in Forts, survivors have the option to dump bodies outside of the gatehouse, in effect 'dragging' corpses over multiple blocks.  Obviously doing the same thing for survivors (dragging over multiple blocks) would be a case of Pied Piper Skills, which would be bad.  Reiterating, the Fireman's Carry would only function if the target was directly outside the building.  

Other names for this could be 'Helping Hand' and so on.  I envision it falling under the Civilian skill-set, with Bodybuilding as a prerequisite.  (People are heavy!  You think some shrimpy survivor is going to carry someone to safety?  Nu-uh.)  

In closing, it should be obvious to everyone that the greatest weapons survivors have are coordination and teamwork.  We need to heal and revive our people, we need to hide behind barricades and repair ruined buildings, and we need to communicate and watch each others backs.  This skill would flow directly from those principles.  

Thoughts?
|}
====Discussion (Fireman's Carry)====
Feeding Drag is one of the skills that should never, under any circumstances, be neutured. Its greatest use is for feeding babahz, and that's a difficult task to accomplish. Hurting it only hurts new players. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 00:17, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

[[PR_Skill_New:_Survivor:_Civilian#Fireman.27s_Carry_.28Bring_12HP_Survivor_Indoors.29|Peer Reviewed]] already. --{{User:Axe Hack/Sig}} 00:19, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

:Didn't see that (and I did look), but no wonder!  It was last peer reviewed in 2006.  I'd say that four years entitles me to another review? --[[User:Wayson|Wayson]] 00:23, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
::Nope.  It'll be used as a dupe link until you make noticeable changes in your suggestion to make it "different" than the given dupe. --{{User:Axe Hack/Sig}} 00:32, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
:::That is silly and mindlessly bureaucratic.  But this this <i>is</i> the UD wiki so I'm not sure what else I was expecting.  The suggestion will stand unaltered, as I believe that it has merit and that four years is sufficient time to raise the point again.  In response to Misanthropy, I don't believe that it substantially neuters Feeding Drag.  It's a race between survivors to save one of their own, and zombies to eat that same individual.  The babahz still have the opportunity to feast... they just need to be prompt about it.  --[[User:Wayson|Wayson]] 00:47, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
::::Organisation isn't often the forte of new players. You're essentially comparing "need to gain a foothold in the game" with "need to not die and mrh for a revive", when one is a greatly more pressing concern. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 00:50, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
::::You can leave it unaltered, but I'm telling you now, the dupe vote will stand, regardless of how long ago it was. --{{User:Axe Hack/Sig}} 00:51, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
:::::Misanthropy: I agree, but the two aren't mutually exclusive.  When writing this, I had in mind situations where every survivor counts and needles are scarce, for example during smaller sieges (the only kind where survivors have a chance) or when rebuilding destroyed suburbs.  <br>Axe: what sort of noticeable changes would you recommend?  In the end, this suggestion boils down to 'move unconscious survivor into building'.  I don't really know how else to put that.  --[[User:Wayson|Wayson]] 01:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

IMO, the peer reviewed (and this) version both have a huge flaw in terms of flavor; the guy who got dragged out can't simply be carried back in, because zombies would be swarming all over him.  This is true in EVERY zombie movie.  I'd say each zombie outside has a 50% chance of blocking the use of fireman's carry; two zombies would thus block for a net 75%, three for 87.5%, four for 93.75%, 5 for 96.875%, etc.  Basically, any sizable swarm would make such rescue very unlikely (or at least very effort intensive) due to its costing an unpredictable but large number of AP to do so.  Remember, zombies can NOT just drag survivors outside for 1 AP; first they have to bring down the barricades and than take that survivor below 12 HP.  {{User:Swiers/Sig}} 01:36, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
:I kind of like this idea as a parachuter's buff. Imagine you have 10 players outside an EHB building. 9 survivors and one zombie. Zombie infects all survivors and lowers their health. One survivor spends all their AP dumping bodies over the cades. 8 infected players die inside, stand for 1AP each, kill everything and ransack. It would be great. {{User:Vapor/sig}} 14:50, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
::Don't forget the devious suicide repair team, enters the building on 13hp, repairs, get dragged by a friendly zombie who then ruins the building, only for another survivor to bring them back inside. Perfect for the permadeath cities. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 17:39, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
----

===Zombies get small XP bonus for witness survivor slayings===
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' -- {{User:DanceDanceRevolution/l}} 08:42, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
|-
|'''Type:''' Zombies
|-
|'''Scope:''' helping newb zeds, hordes
|-
|'''Description:''' When a zombie witnesses a death of a harman, why should the last hit get the XP? 

I'm thinking a small XP payoff should be given to zombies in the vicinity of survivor that dies. So far, I'm thinking of three versions of this suggestions:

#2 or 3 XP payoff for all zombies who witness the death of a survivor, regardless of whether they attacked the survivor or what skills they have.
#5XP bonus for survivors who you manage to hit '''before they die''' (you'd only need to land one decent hit for it to register, and the survivor would need to have not done any action between when you hit him and when he dies)
#5XP bonus for a zombie who has [[Scent Fear]] (maybe [[Scent Trail]]?) and witnesses a death. Flavour could be that the zombies now take a keen interest in wounded/dying survivors and now take notice of the deaths and the way they are dying, remembering a bit more with each death they witness.

being a zombie is cool, but it's a bitch and a half to get that XP as a newb. This also re-inforces awesome horde tactics. Let's bring em back, boys.

Thoughts?
|}
====Discussion (Zombies get small XP bonus for witness survivor slayings)====
I like 2 and 3. 2 because it would stop peeping toms just going around and watching deaths to level up. (e.g. Major seige - 100 survivors die, 5 skill levels gained by standing there). 3 I like less, for the reason mentioned above, but it makes more sense with flavour.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature3‎}} 08:51, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
:Go with #1 and keep it down to 1XP, to avoid zambahz jumping up several levels in a night just by being a mall siege. #2 is a beast to keep track of, while #3 helps mostly zambahz who have already some levels under their belt. --{{User:Spiderzed/Sandbox/Sig}} 12:26, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Reduce the gain of nr 1 or drop it entirely, don't give stuff away for free. Reduce nr 2 to the last survivor the zombie hit, current version encourages attacking multiple targets instead of focusing on a single target. Reduce the gain of nr 3. - [[User:Whitehouse]] 12:38, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

<nowiki>#</nowiki>2 undermines another skill (Tangling Grasp), by encouraging people to break other's grasps. Plus, it'd make for some new tactics that I find to be a bad idea (zombies getting resurrected and healing each other repeatedly for the sole purpose of feeding as baby zeds as possible). #3 is overpowered, I'd say. #1 doesn't seem ''too'' bad, but I still can't get past the fact that it makes strike teams even further and away the best source for XP for a newbie zed. Newbie zeds should have new feral options to level, not new horde options, since the horde options are already strong enough. And, as others have pointed out, the idea of gaining an entire level by doing nothing but standing indoors during a mall siege is not a good thing. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 13:02, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

I'd perhaps give it a limit to when it stops taking effect - perhaps Memories of Life becomes the "off switch" that stops zombies gaining this XP. That stops it being an endless source of XP so you can keep the payout decent. {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 17:04, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

I think a simpler solution would be to allow zombies who do not have digestion to gain XP by feeding on dead bodies.  1 XP per feeding would work.  If you witness a survivor being killed... well, there's a fresh body to eat, right?  But this is better, since you don't have to actually be there.<br>Helps feral newbies a lot more than simply getting xp for seeing a survivor die would, and gives those non-vigor-mortis zombies a way of earning XP semi-reliably by "cleaning up" after combats, comparable to unskilled survivors getting XP for dumping dead bodies or healing people.  Hell, I'll probably take that direct to suggestions.  Only problem I can see is it would decrease the pool of edible bodies avaialble for zombies whop do have digestion, as dead survivors are likely to chow down.  Then again, almost anything that encourages survivors to try an earn XP as zombies seems a good thing in my book. {{User:Swiers/Sig}} 01:44, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
:I'm with others above. # 2. That's the direction I would go when suggesting.

:{{@|swiers}} That suggestion would need a bit more work before it would pass I think. It sounds good but there are a couple of problems and I don't want to spam DDR's DS. {{User:Vapor/sig}} 04:39, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
----



==Suggestions up for voting==
===XP for Feeding===
Moved to [[Suggestion talk:20101105 All Zombies Feed on Corpses; Feeding Grants 1 XP]] --{{User:Axe Hack/Sig}} 18:15, 5 November 2010 (UTC)