Talk:Frequently Suggested

Corpses as Zombie First Aid Kits

There have been a several suggestions to allow zombies to nibble on corpses of slain players to regain health. Considering how plentiful these are it would become far too easy for zombies to regain health. First-Aid kits must be searched for but you can't take a step without walking on a corpse. Suggestions that use player corpses as a healing mechanic are usually overpowered and rejected. Just so you know, you should take this off, because Kevan's done it now. Yonnua Koponen 10:57, 19 October 2008 (BST)

Stockpiles, etc.

I suggest you add stockpiles to the list, they are VERY frequently suggested- and shot down. --Hhal 16:40, 31 August 2007 (BST)

The List

The biggest problem with this page is that the links are faulty in many cases. They usually point to the decision page, like Peer Reviewed Suggestions, but the suggestion in question is eventually archived, regardless of dispensation. It's going to take time to locate the actual examples and link them properly. Perhaps an alternative (in addition) to that solution would be to better summarize the general idea of the suggestions listed here, like they are in Dead in the Water. --otherlleft ^W! 16:45, 22 August 2006 (BST)

• I've begun going through The List to correct the link and add a general summary line for scanning convenience. --otherlleft ^W! 21:41, 24 August 2006 (BST)

Dead in the Water

Portable Light Sources

Flashlight, torch, lantern or glowstick no matter what you call it a portable light source is overpowered. Light sources boost search rates and aid skills like Surgery. There is a huge difference between a portable generator and one of the previously mentioned items. A generator is carried until set up and then always in place until destroyed. A portable (or personal) light source will be kept in a player's inventory until dropped by that player. The portable personal light source offers all of the benefits with out any of the risk. It can not be destroyed as long as it is in an inventory.

It can't be balanced by limiting the length of duration and adding a fuel source that needs to be found because it will only be used when searching for more fuel for it. Thereby removing the "balancing factor" of the time and fuel.

If the item is also able to be turned off and on at will it makes it ridiculously unfair due to the fact that the main balancing drawback of a lit building is the fact that it attracts zombies. --– Nubis ^NWO 02:47, 22 October 2008 (BST)

Is it possible to amend the wording on the main page to say that lighting up dark buildings to boost hit % falls under this category? --William Told 20:19, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

X-Ray Vision

Total prohibition on all suggestions of how to use windows is ridiculously over-broad. How about having criticisms that actually apply to more than the most extreme tenth-of-a-percent of the possible ideas in the category? The latest one had a reasonable limitation, both from the pov of flavor-text and from the pov of keeping it from being overpowering. --Dan 22:37, 6 May 2006 (BST)

X-rays for survivors and X-rays for Zombies. So I don't think we should really put this in "Dead in the Water" - Jedaz 14:27, 24 August 2006 (BST)

I don't think this page is intended so much as policy as it is practicality. Maybe it's possible for someone to come up with a good idea in this category, but this page puts you on notice that the wiki users are likely to reject it out-of-hand. --otherlleft ^W! 21:42, 24 August 2006 (BST)

Barricade Negation

Should a footnote be added to include the new Interference ability? --Sexy Rexy Grossman 10:44, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

That's not negation. Negation is ignoring the barricades as if they didn't exist at all. Interference just makes it harder to build them. The effect of the barricades is exactly the same once they're built. --Midianian|T|T:S|C:RCS| 10:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

What Midianian said, although the section on weakening barricades just needs removal, or clarification that it means getting around barricades without attacking barricades.--Karek^maps?! 14:14, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Military Weaponry

The current weapons are actually very unbalanced, in my opinion. Pistols are far outclassed by the shotgun. And both are fairly unbalanced when you look at zombie attacks, which don't require any sort of ammo. While I might be stating obvious fact, people who decide what belongs in the "Dead in the Water" section don't... or they're zeds.

People aren't asking for nukes or instant-zombie-killing-devices-o'-doom, they are asking for something to bridge the gap between the shotgun and the pistol (sniper rifles or assault rifles) or something that does less damage than a pistol, but has more ammo (sub-machine guns).

Skills would further make these weapons "balanced".

Military weapons, it would seem to me, could only logically be found in forts. Wouldn't this make these weapons more difficult to find and utilize? And would it not also at a greater importance to forts, which would become targets for more zombies? Seems like that would add another aspect to the game.

If the game becomes too "unbalanced" for the zombie players, then they can have some other skill. Oh, and how they need them. With the ability to gain HP while attacking, drag their enemies to the streets so their comrades can finish them off, ransack buildings, and make "Headshot" seem like a minor deal, they really do need more skills.

That's my case. ----Bob Z Moose 19:13, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Player Killing

Obviously as a part of the game if a well thought through skill can be developed then it shouldn't be shot down just because it's related to PKing. For the stupid PKing suggestions, yes. For the ones which have been thought through, no. This should go for some other sections of this, there's far too many people saying "this is in frequently suggested, therefore it's crap", which doesn't necessarily hold. --Daxx 19:49, 2 Jan 2006 (GMT)

PKing needs to be addressed soon. I play as a human and attempt to fight zombies - but I have never feared zombies because the only people who actually attack me are PKers. Kind of defeats the purpose, doesn't it? I've been playing for a few years now and it's out of control at this point. --JoeBoo 17:39, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Insta-Kills

I don't see why this should be forbidden as a game mechanic open to suggestions. We already have Syringes that do exactly this. I agree that quick kills should be limited, but I really don't think they're terrible when they do happen. Standing up isn't that big a deal. --Dickie Fux 17:44, 28 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Corpses as Zombie First Aid Kits

Apparently, Kevan has ignored this and made Digestion overpowered... Can't believe it... --User:Srdestructiveche

Overpowered? Corpse eating is damn near useless. Pretty much the only useful time would be if you are wounded, and inside a building you want to hold, and there's bodies in there, and there are no survivors to attack. The rest of the time, getting killed is likely an equally attractive option. So its rare circumstances indeed that make this useful, and not ones in which a higher AP cost would be justified / required for balance.  Swiers 07:06, 16 October 2008 (BST)

Because it was so useful before.--Karek^maps?! 08:56, 16 October 2008 (BST)

At any rate, given that this feature is now in the game, it seems unlikely to remain frequently suggested in the future. I don't see a need for it on this list any more, especially if the longer the list is, the less likely it is that people will read it all. --Toejam 11:32, 16 October 2008 (BST)

Current Projects

I'm gonna make a few edits and try and clean this up a little bit. If you don't like what I do you can change it back. - Dark Phantom^Talk 04:20, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Dead links?

Under player killing, the two links in the sentence "Therefore, skills that are of sole use to PKers or gameplay changes that legitimize PK behaviours are similarly shot down" appear to lead to empty pages. I'm not sure where they're supposed to point, but they should be fixed or removed. --Pdeq 09:27, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

It's a strange problem; those links (1, 2) do have content - you can see it if you hit the view source tab - but the wiki doesn't display it. I've seen this happen to a couple of pages recently - I thought the page being too long triggered it, but the exact same content as on one of those pages displayed perfectly when I cut and pasted it into my sandbox. So I don't know what causes it, or what the solution is. --Toejam 16:22, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

You are correct. The page is too long. When using the "preview" button in sandbox, the content was displayed but came along with this warning: "WARNING: This page is 54 kilobytes long; some browsers may have problems editing pages approaching or longer than 32kb. Please consider breaking the page into smaller sections." I think we need to (1) figure out a good way to split the page, following whatever protocol this wiki normally uses and (2) Get a sysop to deal with it, because the page is protected. --Pdeq 20:27, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Flashlights

One of these crops up every now and then, but gets spammed or duped pretty quick. Worth adding? Linkthewindow  Talk  08:13, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

You mean torches?? ;)--xoxo 08:24, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry man, I'm an Aussie too :P. Anyway, torches, glowsticks, all the same ;). Linkthewindow  Talk  09:49, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

ahh ok, awesome :P Have you seen Sandpit Revolution by any chance? --xoxo 10:37, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I have *hurries and adds template to sandbox to indicate his change of heart.* Linkthewindow  Talk  10:39, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Screw your pits and boxes! --Midianian ^{Big Brother Diary Room: [510,24]} 10:45, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

*Abruptly pushes thread back on topic* So what do you think this anyway? Linkthewindow  Talk  10:53, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, chuck it on. Not that anyone ever bothers looking at that thing.--xoxo 11:54, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Portable Light Sources Flashlight, torch, lantern or glowstick no matter what you call it a portable light source is overpowered. Light sources boost search rates and aid skills like Surgery. There is a huge difference between a portable generator and one of the previously mentioned items. A generator is carried until set up and then always in place until destroyed. A portable (or personal) light source will be kept in a player's inventory until dropped by that player. The portable personal light source offers all of the benefits with out any of the risk. It can not be destroyed as long as it is in an inventory.

It can't be balanced by limiting the length of duration and adding a fuel source that needs to be found because it will only be used when searching for more fuel for it. Thereby removing the "balancing factor" of the time and fuel.

If the item is also able to be turned off and on at will it makes it ridiculously unfair due to the fact that the main balancing drawback of a lit building is the fact that it attracts zombies. --– Nubis ^NWO 02:47, 22 October 2008 (BST) Shit, I put this in the wrong place back then. --– Nubis ^NWO 13:13, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Good idea comparing flashlights with generators. I think saying flashlights are always overpowered is too strong a statement though, it'll depend on the specific mechanics of any suggestion. Oh and nice emphasis on the downsides of generators. --Toejam 15:58, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll add on Nubis's text this afternoon. By the way, this shouldn't apply to the current flashlight suggestion, for obvious reasons. Linkthewindow  Talk  20:58, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Added. Linkthewindow  Talk  06:06, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Re Infection Immunity

[[User:|]] said:

These would take away from the risk of playing a human, and make kills less satisfying.

Now I don't want to sound too whiny, but isn't this the same thing as saying Brain Rot takes away from the risk of playing a zombie?--Brian Eetar ^DTD|CFT|GMG 20:25, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Sewers/Tunnels

This cropped up in Developing Suggestions today, and it was suggested that it be added to the list. Can I get some input on what other people think of this? --Pestolence^(talk) 21:13, 6 May 2009 (BST)

Johnny Bass came up with the following proposed text for this entry: "Many suggestions appear adding a sewer network, a subway, or some other underground tunnel network. These probably will never pass due to the shear volume of coding involved in them as well as the excessively large ramifications that they typically would have on gameplay. While these suggestions would add an element of realism, how could one realistically explain their sudden appearance in game? The amount of changes to the way the game currently functions would be impractical to code and further add to an overabundance of space on the map."

If no one objects in the next day or so, I'll add it to the list. --Pestolence^(talk) 03:12, 8 May 2009 (BST)

Added. --Pestolence^(talk) 18:18, 9 May 2009 (BST)