Talk:Suggestions/13th-Feb-2007

Attack Building With Mob

Timestamp:	S.Wiers X:00 00:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Type:	action / scene description
Scope:	mostly just zombies attacking barricades
Description:	In most zombie movies, you see some zombies standing around in the streets, fairly inactive, and some pressed into mobs against building barricades. Currently the game makes no differentiation between these types of behavior; an "active" zombie looks just like one that is "passive". Zombies would benefit if they knew when other zombies were actively attacking barricades, and allowinf all players to see this would improve game flavor. With this suggestion, zombies would gain a new action type when outside any building- attack building with mob. Pressing this button costs 1 AP (most times) and does three things: It flags the zombie as being a member of the attacking mob, which represents the group of zombies actively pressing on the barricades. If the barricades have already fallen (and so can't be attacked) it links to map.cgi?in, giving the same effect as pressing the "enter building" button. This costs the normal 1 AP. It makes an attack on the barricades, if any are still present. This also would cost thew normal 1 AP. This doesn't actually allow any action type or effect that isn't already currently in the game. It's just a simpler way to attack barricades / enter an open building, that also has the side feature of flagging the zombies attacking mob status. In effect, the zombie is flagged and either enters the building or attacks the barricades (not both) at the normal cost. Note that is is possible that zombies who do not have MoL would hit attack building with mob outside a secured building and end up not spending any AP (no barricade to attack, but they can not enter) - this is an intentional feature, it lets the zombie join the attacking mob as a way for zeds without MoL to let other's know of their plight. Assume the zombie is "scratching at the door" if you like. Once flagged, a zombie remains a member of the attacking mob, but would loose this flag if: They perform any action except speaking, gesturing, or further use of attack building with mob. They enter the building (via "attack building" or just the "enter building" button) They log out They take fall down dead (revived or killed) They attack any character They fall below 10 AP ("You are getting to tired, and get pushed to the edges of the mob") They trigger any conditions that currently are used to indicate the player is using another character (whatever methods Kevan has for this that I may not know about) Note that the attack building with mob button would remain present even after the zombie had already joined the mob- allowing them to actually continue to attack, obviously. At that point its mostly there for convenience and also in case the flag somehow gets re-set. The intention is that attacking mob status would generally indicate the zombie's player was actively controlling them at the time, and intending to attack the building. This need not be foolproof- its meant to be a rough indication that people can use when they wish to display such intentions, not a perfect indicator of how many players are active. Information about a zombies 'Attacking Mob status would be used to create the follwing game effects: The scene description outside a building would include information about the size of the attacking mob. This would be something like "There are 47 zombies here; 23 of them are pressed together against the barricades, obviously seeking entry into the building." This enhances game flavor, and provides a bit of tactical information for both sides to use. Zombies might use this information to decide whether it is worth making an attack on the barricades, for example. The "50 closest people" who hear a zombie talk would always include (as the first 50) members of the attacking mob before any others. This ensures active zombie attackers can hear each other talk. If a zombie in your contact list was present in the attacking mob, a symbol such as "!" would appear next to their name in the scene description. Again, a bit of extra information for both sides to use. The scene description inside the building would also reflect the presence of the attacking mob outside, with a more general indication of its size. "You can hear the movement and moans of (a few = 1-5, a group of = 6-10, a pack of = 11-20, a crowd of = 21-50, a horde of = 51+) zombies just outside." Potentially useful information, mostly flavor text that allows the scene to reflect ongoing events. The above effects are aimed mostly at allowing zombie players to declare their activity level and intentions to other zombie players (just as movie zombies will cluster at a buildings entrance before attacking) and to allow more detail in scene descriptions.

Discussion

Wheh- not really all that complicated an idea, but it takes a lot of text to explain clearly. Any ideas on how to simplify it for the voting page? --S.Wiers ^X:00 21:13, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

As Swiers said, it needs to be simplified - people voting based on just the name of a suggestion, without reading through it, is already a problem, and encouraging them to do so by having a long suggestion would increase the chance of it failing. However, I must say that I have trouble figuring out what this would do, other than provide flavor. As far as I can tell, it makes an attack on the barricade, or, if the barricades have fallen, allows the zombie to enter without needing memories of life to open the door. The flavor part is fine, but the entering part bypasses memories of life. --Saluton 21:41, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Lol- it must need SERIOUS shortening, because "Swiers" (me) is the original author. And no, it doesn't let zeds enter secured buildings without MoL. Its almost entirely about flavor, but its a very specific type of flavor that would provide very useful information for active zombies in a siege situation. Basically its a spam free version of "show every attack made on barricades" that condenses the info down to "show how many zeds are attacking barricades as opposed to standing around inactive". --S.Wiers ^X:00 05:30, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

This would have to be balanced by showing which survivors are actively erecting barricades.--SporeSore 14:27, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

That information is already available, or very easy to guess. You can see all the survivors present in a location, and the ones at the end of the list are the ones who are active. Zombies are not listed individually, therefore you can not currently see which ones are most active- that is the main point of this suggestion, in fact. I'm not even sure how the "balance" of seeing who the active barricaders would help the survivors. If anything, it would hurt them, as PKers (if not zombies) could target just those people. -S.Wiers ^X:00 18:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

---

Ransacking

Timestamp:	c138 RR - PKer 23:27, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Type:	Improvement
Scope:	Ransacked buildings
Description:	Adds a note to the building's external description to signify that it's been ransacked.

Discussion

I haven't got a problem with it. --Cap'n Silly ^T/W/P/C 05:46, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I like it, but lots of people would call it "x-ray vision". Still, you'd think a building with open doors and all its windows un-barricaded would sort of stand out at this point. --S.Wiers ^X:00 14:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

In response to cries of x-ray vision, I shall merely have to reference the 31st October update by which powered buildings became externally obvious. --c138 ^{RR - PKer} 19:26, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Good point. Might as well include that in the suggestion, to save the hassle. --S.Wiers ^X:00 20:29, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

You can see the light coming out the windows/openings. You can't, necessarily, see that the inside of a building has been trashed. Also, this would necessarily indicate barricade level (as yes or no), wouuld it not?--Pesatyel 01:48, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but you can ALREADY see a buildings barricade level from outside (its part of the buildings external description) so "ransack" status isn't new info there- you'd just be able to tell "doors wide open" from "doors wide open and contents strewn about". --S.Wiers ^X:00 01:58, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I like to think that by this point in the outbreak, pretty much all buildings look pretty beat up from the outside. As for seeing a powered building from outside, it's pretty obvious where people have lights turned on or are listening to a very loud juke box. Naw, to me this falls under x-ray vision. --Uncle Bill 21:48, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

True... But the main difference in my mind's eye is that a barricaded building has, y'know, barricades up around all its entrances. A ransacked building doesn't, and as well as having a very noticeable lack of boards and heaps of furniture, there's half a sofa sticking out the window, and the door to the main entrance is hanging off its hinges... If a building's so badly damaged that it needs to be repaired before simple boards can be nailed over its windows, wouldn't it be kinda obvious from outside? There's derelict, and then there's dilapidated. --c138 ^{RR - PKer} 00:32, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

How about this idea? A new skill under Ransack called Advanced Ransack. A Zombie, after ransacking a building, "advanced ransack" it so much that it is totally destroyed and everyone knows it is ransacked, for say 3 AP (It still cost 1 AP to repair though, just like regural Ransack). It is a flavour skill, mostly a waste of XP, but it also allow feral players who see an empty building with doors to realize it is indeed Ransacked and told not go in. Think of it as a Zombie Graffti, allowing passing Zeds to know that a building is ransacked, but forcing another Zed to waste AP to give other zombies that message.--ShadowScope 23:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

You should post that one yourself; you've put more thought into it than I have. ;) --c138 ^{RR - PKer} 00:30, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that is a damn fine idea. Its not x-ray vision, because the zombie does something to the visible parts of the building, see? Even though you do the action on the inside, the results could be seen outside- just like barricading. Hell, I'd say 1AP, but only usable in a building that is already ransacked (normal ransack)- its a second action on top of normal ransacking. --S.Wiers ^X:00 02:04, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

---

Melee Weapons game mechanics

Timestamp:	Cataphract 19:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Type:	Game Mechanics
Scope:	Everyone
Description:	We all know melee weapons are heavily underpowered compared to firearms, which is highly unrealistic and barely balanced-but a 'simple' solution like making them more damaging or giving tons of skills is useless. I mean, shoot a zombie and chop it with an axe. Which is more effective and heck, easier to do? To keep things simple, this suggestion is two-fold: A)Melee Weapons should take into account that unlike ranged weapons where you shoot at a mass, at close combat you have many of these buggers attacking you. So 10 zombies in the same square make melee weapons useless because no survivor in his right mind would just hack away at a horde and let them overrun him- have you seen this in any movie? This, on the other hand, might create problems with zombies amassing in hordes to protect themselves... well, I'm afraid that's the case, folks. Weapons should be categorized by reach. Reach 0 are knives and fists, for example. Reach 1 would be for axes, swords, clubs etc. Reach 2 would be for spears and polearms. For every zombie in a horde after the first, reach 0 weapons receive a -10% penalty, reach 1 weapons receive a -5% penalty and reach 2 weapons receive a -2% penalty, all cumulative. Penalties reach up to 30%, but a two-tiered zombie-hunting skill, 'Horde Slayer', would decrease it to -20% and -10% respectively. B)Make melee weapons more anti-zombie. My ideas would include i)Increase accuracy. All weapons should have +10% to hit zombies. ii)Increase damage. A two-tier zombie-hunting skill, 'Zombie-slayer' that adds +1 for the first level and +2 for the second level. C) Durability of weapons. A weapon has DP-Durability Points, and sharp weapons have Sh-Sharpness. Every attack has a chance of reducing Sharpness (which reduces weapon damage), to simulate how bladed weapons blunt with use, and also a smaller chance of reducing Durability Points. When durability points reach 0, the weapon is broken and discarded. Durability points can't be restored, but Sharpness can- except that there's a chance that durability points are also removed in the process. Think of a sword- it blunts with use, you sharpen it, but eventually from the sharpening it gets so thin it breaks. The above should make melee weapons deadlier against lone zombies (as is the case, since a single zombie is easy to kill) but useless against hordes of'em. This will pave the way for more powerful melee weapons that do not unbalance the game but balance it. I'll post a list of weapons (full with damage, accuracy, reach and durability) and skills tomorrow- can't make another suggestion today. Also now set in cement. And to answer some of you (this is not a discussion but a statement meant to answer some typical questions): Q: But I can still hit one of them! A: Indeed, you can. But noone in their right minds would close in a horde of zombies with whatever weapon he might have at hand, because it's still difficult- your weapon can be caught up, and those precious seconds of inactivity used by zombies, and in a zombie-crowded room it's difficult to maneuver a large weapon. Thus, I've capped the penalty to 30%, with skills decreasing it to 20% and 10%. Q: We don't want more powerful melee weapons! A: Many have expressed interest in more powerful melee weapons, a realistic and flavor-adding suggestion. And it's a more satisfying experience being able to bash a zombie to bits than simply riddling it with holes. Q: Other melee weapons are flavor items, only the axe is useful. A: What's the point in that? Then remove all others. Otherwise, tweak the existing ones and add others to make it better. Q: Melee weapons have low damage and low accuracy but don't need to be reloaded- it's balanced. A: Maybe, but hardly realistic. But powering them up the way they are IS unrealistic. So, I have given them two drawbacks: they're not that good against hordes (it'd be much better if this was real-time and had distances, but we'll simulate it as much as we can) and the durability issue. Q: Why make it realistic? It's a game. A: Because it's supposed to be a realistic game with a gritty, real world feeling. It's got the 'survivability' factor good enough because if you stay out you're dead, but the combat factor, I'm afraid, is lacking. If I didn't want a realistic game I'd go play Star Wars or Pokemon.

Discussion

I don't think the game is really "position specific" enough to allow this. Consider the case of 100 survivors armed with knives vs 10 zombies. Are the survivors really "surrounded" and hence unable to use their knives effectively? Hell no, but by the above rules they would be. Making an attack takes a pretty long "time" (you can cross half the city for 50 AP, or maybe kill a zombie with an ax), so I think its safe to say a lot of moving for position goes on- enough to negate the dange of being outnumbered.

Besides which, if you nerf melee weapons because of zombie mobs, what about DNS scanning and revives? Are the zombies suddenly all docile and co-operative just because you have a syringe instead of an ax?

In short, nothing else in the game is this complex, and breaking it down for analysis like this just opens more holes than it closes. --S.Wiers ^X:00 23:22, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Right ... Realism does not equal fun. That's all I have to say, and a statement which I really wish more people would learn. --Saluton 02:18, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

---