Suggestion:20070611 Ransacked Buildings Change Change

	Closed
	This suggestion has finished voting and has been moved to Peer Rejected.

--Secruss 04:36, 11 June 2007 (BST)

Suggestion type
Game mechanic change.

Suggestion scope
Ransack enhancement/downgrade

Suggestion description
Okay, here’s my second try at a ransacked building change. I bring this up because in any given area, you are able to free-run through bombed out, zombied up, horde infested territory and into a safehouse in the middle of it.

Survivors would not be able to free run out of ransacked buildings. Ransacked buildings represent zombie infested areas. In all zombie movies, moving through zombie infested area is dangerous. Therefore, running through them would pose a hazard. Currently, it does not.

Remember, for a building to be ransacked, it must have no survivors and minimum of one zombie. Assuming there are no zombies in the building, it can be repaired by any human. Therefore, the building wouldn’t really be a hazard.

Also, this would help against mall camping as more people might sleep in entry points to keep them occupied. It would also make devastating the area around a mall more viable and a mall siege more visceral. I believe this suggestion would also make it more encouraging for zombies to hold ground.

Now, to slightly nerf this improvement; perhaps a skill could be bought/game change made that allows one (zombies and humans) to see on their map whether or not a building in ransacked from the inside and outside of other buildings. Currently, the only way to see this is whether or not a generator is in the building, which can be deceiving both ways. If the change is an automatic change requiring no skill, then you flick a “Free run into ransacked buildings” Yes/No/On Command option in “Settings”. Heck, why not be able to do it with the skill too?

Maybe we could add some flavor text of indication of ransacking too on the outside of buildings for those looking for an entry point but not wanting to waste AP going in and out in and out in and out of buildings only to find they are ransacked. The text could correlate to the number of zombies inside.

• “This building looks deserted.” Not ransacked, but empty of either survivors or zombies.
• ”This building looks trashed.” Ransacked, but empty.
• ”This building looks overrun.” Ransacked, inhabited by less than ten zombies.
• ”This building looks infested” Ransacked, more than ten zombies.

Not being able to free run out does not mean you are forced to click “leave building”. Clicking outside of the building would simply land you outside the targeted building. Running around outside of ransacked buildings on the streets would not change.

The basic idea of this change is that zombie infested territory would be inherently dangerous to cross over and that inherently dangerous areas could be easily spotted.

Did I miss anything?

EDIT: Once again, STOP VOTING. My suggestion died AGAIN. I repeat, stop voting. All votes after this are evidence that voter didn't even read my suggestion through. (See previous version of this suggestion where voting continued for a week after I conceded the idea was dead.)

Voting Section

Voting Rules

Votes must be numbered, justified, signed, and timestamped. # justification ~~~~ Votes that do not conform to the above may be struck by any user.

The only valid votes are Keep, Kill, Spam or Dupe. If you wish to abstain from voting, do not vote.

Keep Votes

1. i know this would make the game harder for survivors....but so what? harder=fun--'BP^Tmz 04:45, 11 June 2007 (BST)

Kill Votes

1. Kill Survivors should be able to free run in or out of any building. IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE NERFED. --User:Axe27/Sig 05:30, 11 June 2007 (BST)
2. Kill - I think someone needs to re-read the The_REAL_Suggestion_Guidelines. Which in rule 24. clearly states:"If it tweaks Free Running, it will not be accepted". dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 05:49, 11 June 2007 (BST)
3. Kill - It's a game, not everything needs to make sense. And even though I like a better ransack, this is way too powerful, survivors depend on numbers and this would make it way to easy for one person to completely screw everyone else over. --karek 08:43, 11 June 2007 (BST)
4. Kill - What those guys above me wrote --Duke Garland_T^{LCD SSZ} 10:32, 11 June 2007 (BST)
5. Kill See above--Seventythree 13:19, 11 June 2007 (BST)
6. Kill - Damnit! Everyone has stolen my points! --Charley C. 15:33, 11 June 2007 (BST)
7. Super Kill This suggestion is really bad for two main reasons. Ransacking is damaging the inside of a building. Free Running is jumping from rooftop to rooftop. I see no way that a zombie can effectively damage a concrete or shingled rooftop so that somebody can't jump out of it. And if they can do that survivors shouldn't be able to free run into the building, and they would be left outside. This suggestion also nerfs scouts, and leaves one more skill essential to newbies that needs to be bought so they can see if the building is ransacked or not.--Casthewiz-- 15:38, 11 June 2007 (BST)
8. Kill - Just a bad suggestion. In many ways. armareum 22:00, 11 June 2007 (BST)
9. Kill - I don't like this suggestion at all, think of something else please. I know that Free Running is maybe the most overpowered skill a survivor can have, but it's already installed in UD, so don't toy with it. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^YRC☺T☺+1 22:15, 11 June 2007 (BST)
10. Kill — Bad suggestion. Like a broken pencil — pointless. Anotherpongo 18:36, 15 June 2007 (BST)
11. Kill - Quote: "EDIT: Once again, STOP VOTING... All votes after this are evidence that voter didn't even read my suggestion through...". I read it, I think it's bad, and I'm voting kill despite reading your suggestion ALL THE WAY THROUGH. This deserves a kill vote simply for your inability to accept criticism, and your attempt to limit the community on the rules that define the suggestion area as a whole.

Spam/Dupe Votes