Developing Suggestions: Difference between revisions

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Suggestion Navigation}}[[Category:Suggestions]]
<noinclude>{{Developing Suggestions Intro}}</noinclude>
==Developing Suggestions==
''This section is for presenting and reviewing suggestions which '''have not yet been submitted''' and are still being worked on.''


''Nothing on this page will be archived.''


===Further Discussion===
===Ignore based on Radio Broadcast===
*Discussion concerning this page takes place [[Talk:Developing Suggestions|here]].
*Discussion concerning the suggestions system in general, including policies about it, takes place [[:Category_talk:Suggestions#Suggestion_Discussion|here]].
 
 
==Please Read Before Posting==
*'''Be sure to check <big>[[Frequently Suggested#The List|The Frequently Suggested List]]</big> and the [[Suggestions Dos and Do Nots]] before you post your idea.''' You can read about many ideas that have been suggested already, which users should be aware of before posting what could be a '''dupe''': a duplicate of an existing suggestion. '''These include [[Suggestions/RejectedNovember2005#SMG.2FMachine_Pistol|Machine Guns]] and [[Suggestions/19th-Nov-2005#Sniper_Rifle|Sniper Rifles]].'''
*Users should be aware that page is discussion oriented. Other users are free to express their own point of view and are not required to be neutral.
*If you decide not to take your suggestion to voting, please remove it from this page to avoid clutter.
*It is recommended that users spend some time familiarizing themselves with this page before posting their own suggestions.
*''After new game updates, users are requested to allow time for the game and community to adjust to these changes '''before''' suggesting alterations.''
 
==How To Make a Suggestion==
===Adding a New Suggestion===
*Copy the code in the box below.
*<span class="stealthexternallink">[http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Developing_Suggestions&action=edit&section=7 Click here to begin editing.]</span> This is the same as clicking the [edit] link to the right of the [[Developing Suggestions#Suggestions|Suggestions]] header.
 
*Paste the copied text '''above''' the other suggestions, right under the heading.
*Substitute the text in <font color="red">RED CAPITALS</font> with the details of your suggestion.
 
<nowiki>{{subst:DevelopingSuggestion
|time=~~~~
|name=</nowiki><font color="red">SUGGESTION NAME</font><nowiki>
|type=</nowiki><font color="red">TYPE HERE</font><nowiki>
|scope=</nowiki><font color="red">SCOPE HERE</font><nowiki>
|description=</nowiki><font color="red">DESCRIPTION HERE</font><nowiki>
}}</nowiki>
 
*'''Name''' - Give the suggestion a short but descriptive name.
*'''Type''' is the nature of the suggestion, such as a ''new class'', ''skill change'', ''balance change'', etc. Basically: '''What is it?''' and '''Is it new, or a change?'''
*'''Scope''' is who or what the suggestion affects. Typically ''survivors'' or ''zombies'' (or both), but occasionally ''Malton'', the game ''interface'' or something else.
*'''Description''' should be a full explanation of your suggestion. Include information like flavor text, search odds, hit percentages, etc, as appropriate. Unless you are as yet unsure of the exact details behind the suggestion, try not to leave out anything important. Check your spelling and grammar.
 
===Cycling Suggestions===
*Suggestions with no new discussion in the past two days should be given a warning notice. This can be done by adding {{CodeInline|1='''<nowiki>{{SDW|</nowiki><font color="darkred">date</font><nowiki>}}</nowiki>'''}} at the top of the discussion section, where <font color="darkred">date</font> is the day the suggestion will be removed.
*Suggestions with no new discussion in the past week may be removed.
*If you are adding a comment to a suggestion that has the warning template please remove the {{CodeInline|1='''<nowiki>{{SDW|</nowiki><font color="darkred">date</font><nowiki>}}</nowiki>'''}} at the top of the discussion section to show that there is still ongoing discussion.
 
This page is prone to breaking when the page gets too long, so sometimes suggestions still under discussion will be moved to the [[Developing Suggestions/Overflow1|Overflow page]], so the discussion can continue.
 
 
__TOC__
 
<span style="font-size:1.75em; color:red">'''Please add new suggestions to the top of the list'''</span>
----
 
==Suggestions==
===Multi-Dump===
{|
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' '''[[User:BobBoberton|<span style="color: #FF4500">Bob Boberton</span>]] <sup>[[The_Fortress|<span style="color: #6B8E23">TF</span>]] / [[The_Fortress/Dark_Watch|<span style="color: #778899 ">DW</span>]]</sup>''' [[Image:Littlemudkipsig.gif]] 20:41, 26 October 2009 (BST)
|'''Timestamp:''' [[User:Khwud|Khwud]] ([[User talk:Khwud|talk]]) 17:27, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
|-
|-
|'''Type:''' UI change
|'''Type:''' UI enhancement
|-
|-
|'''Scope:''' Survivors/Dead bodies
|'''Scope:''' Interface
|-
|-
|'''Description:''' Currently, bodies are dumped one at a time, for one AP. This proposal changes the "dump [a/the] body outside" action choice to "dump the [body/bodies] outside (<COST> AP)." Effectively, you still pay one AP per body to dump them outside, but you can dump all bodies with one button press and save several [[IP Hit|IP hits]] in the process. ''Alternative: It still costs an IP hit per body, but consolidates multiple dumps into one button press.'' This makes building recovery more consistent, as repairing a building functions in this way at present.
|'''Description:''' Allow 'ignore' from radio broadcasts; users are hiding behind their anonymity to allow them to broadcast things that would broadly trigger them to be ignored, if their user ID was visible. Adding their name, or an auto-generated call-sign (it is for a radio, after all) or something so that they could be blocked based on their broadcasts would help user experience. In addition, and broadcasts that get more than a threshold number could get tagged for review, and the user potentially having their (in-game) ham-license revoked.
 
'''Possible Issues:'''
*Negative AP - Functions the same way as building repair.
*[[?rise]] implications - Doesn't really affect real-time combat; you can still only target/kill one zombie at a time.
|}
|}
====Discussion (Multi-Dump)====
====Discussion (Ignore based on Radio Broadcast)====
So similar to the old [[Dumping Bodies]]? --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 20:42, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
:Sort of, except (AP cost = number of bodies), not "one AP to dump all of them." --'''[[User:BobBoberton|<span style="color: #FF4500">Bob Boberton</span>]] <sup>[[The_Fortress|<span style="color: #6B8E23">TF</span>]] / [[The_Fortress/Dark_Watch|<span style="color: #778899 ">DW</span>]]</sup>''' [[Image:Littlemudkipsig.gif]] 20:54, 26 October 2009 (BST)
Nerfs parachuting to buff survivors for no credible reason. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 20:45, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
:Howzat? This is a change from "press this button a couple times" to "press it once." It's primarily intended to be a UI change, not a mechanics one. --'''[[User:BobBoberton|<span style="color: #FF4500">Bob Boberton</span>]] <sup>[[The_Fortress|<span style="color: #6B8E23">TF</span>]] / [[The_Fortress/Dark_Watch|<span style="color: #778899 ">DW</span>]]</sup>''' [[Image:Littlemudkipsig.gif]] 20:54, 26 October 2009 (BST)
::I fear it will never pass, because it would open the floodgates to other suggestions, runniing, firing 6 bullets at the same time, speed cading etc. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 20:56, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
:::I'm fine with it not passing. I'm just more interested in making building reclamation less of a click-fest when there are piles of smelly bodies all over the place. --'''[[User:BobBoberton|<span style="color: #FF4500">Bob Boberton</span>]] <sup>[[The_Fortress|<span style="color: #6B8E23">TF</span>]] / [[The_Fortress/Dark_Watch|<span style="color: #778899 ">DW</span>]]</sup>''' [[Image:Littlemudkipsig.gif]] 20:59, 26 October 2009 (BST)
::You step into your safehouse with one AP, me and my friend (Death Cultist B) are shooting each other/dying of an infection. You stay logged in with your 1 AP and see when we both die and appear as bodies. Normally you could only dump one of us, under your proposal you could dump 10,000 of us. If you can go into negative AP with this activity, which has clear tactical advantages, why can't I have a button that shoots all my guns until I run out of ammo and sets me at the appropriate negative AP? -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 21:00, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
:::Why do building repairs allow for negative AP? --'''[[User:BobBoberton|<span style="color: #FF4500">Bob Boberton</span>]] <sup>[[The_Fortress|<span style="color: #6B8E23">TF</span>]] / [[The_Fortress/Dark_Watch|<span style="color: #778899 ">DW</span>]]</sup>''' [[Image:Littlemudkipsig.gif]] 21:01, 26 October 2009 (BST)
::::Because otherwise repairs over 50 wouldn't be able to repaired. Buildings with over 50 bodies can be cleared. Basic logic. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 21:02, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::Massive repairs could've been made to drain you to zero AP while not completely annulling the cost of the repair. However, they weren't designed that way. --'''[[User:BobBoberton|<span style="color: #FF4500">Bob Boberton</span>]] <sup>[[The_Fortress|<span style="color: #6B8E23">TF</span>]] / [[The_Fortress/Dark_Watch|<span style="color: #778899 ">DW</span>]]</sup>''' [[Image:Littlemudkipsig.gif]] 21:04, 26 October 2009 (BST)
::::::Bodies weren't designed to be dumped in multiple either. Want to make it less of a click-fest? Don't dump them, bodies don't block repairs, or ruins for that matter, just accept the consequences for not performing the actions that everyone else has to. There's also the major 'Times it by a thousand' argument of Forts in this, which could have a player into -1000AP.... -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 21:08, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::::Ah, forgot the fort one. You have to move with that action, and since players aren't some kind of super(wo)men (debatable I know but stick with me here), you'd have to drag them individually. Basically, I'm looking to draw body dumping in line with how building repairs are handled, which had two options: One, this side of it (change body dumping); Two, change building repair. The second is quite [[Suggestion:20080729_Partial_Repair|dupish]], though. Hence, I suggest the other. Consistency, is all. --'''[[User:BobBoberton|<span style="color: #FF4500">Bob Boberton</span>]] <sup>[[The_Fortress|<span style="color: #6B8E23">TF</span>]] / [[The_Fortress/Dark_Watch|<span style="color: #778899 ">DW</span>]]</sup>''' [[Image:Littlemudkipsig.gif]] 21:11, 26 October 2009 (BST)
::::::::Unlike ruins though, this ''specifically'' affects other players, players who have a hard enough time as it is getting through cades, they don't need to be shot by you until you have 1AP and can then be safe in the knowledge that you can clear all the non-risen zombies due to the ability to go into negative AP, an ability that zombies don't have, we can't claw into negative AP, or ruin for that matter. If you're saying that things should be brought into line with repairs, surely you should start with the zombie analogue of ruining the building to begin with. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 21:19, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::A simple ?rise at the right time can cost a survivor quite a bit of AP to undo, will usually send a zombie into negative AP, and can be used to keep a building ruined or the cades down (via interference). It's not a true analogue, admittedly, but it's the obvious zombie ability that can disrupt survivor plans in a hurry, just as you're proposing his suggestion would do to zombies. I can't speak towards forts though, since I'm still a bit hazy on some of the mechanics involved. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 21:26, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 
I'd be in favor of it as it is, though I'd prefer that it not allow negative AP. Then again, I don't like negative AP anyway and think it should be done away with (e.g. partial repairs, not allowing negative AP for rising, syringes, or reviving, etc.). {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 21:15, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
----
----
 
===Shrink the map===
===Making AP's More Abundant===
{|
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' [[User:Chase1993|Chase1993]] 18:14, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
|'''Timestamp:''' --[[User:Uroguy|Uroguy]]<sup>[[Zookeepers|TMZ]]</sup> 16:28, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
|-
|-
|'''Type:''' Entire Game
|'''Type:''' Map change
|-
|-
|'''Scope:''' Entire Game
|'''Scope:''' Everyone
|-
|-
|'''Description:''' Okay, I may seem stupid, and this has probably been asked many times before, but WHY do we have so few AP's and WHY do they take so long to recharge? This makes the game EXTREMELY annoying to people who are not entirely dedicated to the game. When I recommended the game to my friends, they all replied in various ways this basic statement: "What the hell is this? It's not even a game; all you can do is spend 5 minutes max everyday on it." I myself enjoy the game, but it actually keeps me awake at night wondering WHY the game is like this. I propose that these changes be made:
|'''Description:''' There are just over 3000 active characters in the game currently likely counting a significant percentage of alts and zergs. Shrinking the map by eliminating the outer first two rings of suburbs would increase the amount of interactions between the remaining characters. This shrink could be increased or decreased depending on future changes to the playerbase.
      1. Player's maximum AP points increased to 100
      2. AP points recharge at the rate of 1 every 5 minutes
      3. After a player logs out, there character would stay online for 30 minutes before disapperaing
I understand that this would change some of the fundamental aspects of the game, but I think it would make the game much funner for all, and would CERTAINLY make it easier for casual gamers to play, get something accomplished, and enjoy the game. I would like people to comment on my ideas, and ways they could be tweaked, as I realize that other things may need to be changed as well for these changes to be feasible.
|}
|}
====Discussion (Making AP's More Abundant)====
====Discussion (Shrink the map)====
No. This makes individual players ''way'' too powerful, and you seem to miss the point that '''''UD is meant to be a five-minutes-a-day kind of game.''''' There are plenty of other ways to use up your free time between UD sessions, metagaming/joining a group being one of them. --'''[[User:BobBoberton|<span style="color: #FF4500">Bob Boberton</span>]] <sup>[[The_Fortress|<span style="color: #6B8E23">TF</span>]] / [[The_Fortress/Dark_Watch|<span style="color: #778899 ">DW</span>]]</sup>''' [[Image:Littlemudkipsig.gif]] 18:23, 26 October 2009 (BST)
 
Well, I'm not entirely opposed to increasing the max AP. But recharging at 1AP per 5 minutes is way too fast, 288AP per day is just overkill. As for everyone disappearing after 30 minutes, how the hell are zombies going to get food and XP when they break into buildings and there is no one there to attack? - [[User:Whitehouse]] 18:27, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 
Too many questions. Even the worst suicide repairs ever recorded (160 ap plus I think is the highest ever done) could be completed in a day. And zombies could ruin everything if players idled out so quickly. Also would probably cripple the server. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 18:36, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
:Folks in [[Soldiers of Crossman|my group]] have done 220+AP repairs, I believe, and there are others who have done larger ones.
 
:Anyway, getting back to the bigger issue, these changes would '''not''' make the game more casual friendly; they would actually do the opposite. Also, the entire game is balanced around a slow recharge rate and a limited max AP, otherwise people can do too much before others log back in again. There's a similar zombie game that recharges AP every 7.5 minutes. That game seems to be unbalanced though, in that people can go on killing sprees while others are recharging, and your suggestion is way beyond what that other game has. It would ruin the tempo and nature of the game and upset all of the balances done over the years, since AP is everything. So, no. Just no. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 19:18, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 
RE: TO ALL OF THE ABOVE
Of course, the 30 minute after logout could be changed. Perhaps 2 hours would be better. As to letting people accomplish way to much while other people are logged out, that's the idea. If people could accomplish alot, more people would be encouraged to play. It would obviously change the whole style of the game, and I didn't expect my suggestion to be universally well recieved, but come on, don;t you ever wish you could spend hours playing at a time? In my opinion, Urban Dead is the best game out there, and i've played WOW. I just wish I could play Urban Dead more often than I can now.  --  [[User:Chase1993|'''Chase1993''']]
:Hours spent playing UD being fun? Sure. Would that be fair to other players? Definitely not. There's your crux. --'''[[User:BobBoberton|<span style="color: #FF4500">Bob Boberton</span>]] <sup>[[The_Fortress|<span style="color: #6B8E23">TF</span>]] / [[The_Fortress/Dark_Watch|<span style="color: #778899 ">DW</span>]]</sup>''' [[Image:Littlemudkipsig.gif]] 19:41, 26 October 2009 (BST)
:How do people talk to each other in-game if they disappear quickly after logout? Or heal each other, for that matter? How does one justify a zombie being able to singlehandedly take a building from EHB to ruin in a day, even with a survivor or two inside? Or, on the flipside, justify singlehandedly barricade strafing half of a suburb to VSB in a day? These changes would create lots of empty buildings and even more boredom since people wouldn't be able to find each other.
:If you'd like to play UD for longer periods of time, there are already ways to go about doing that. Multiple characters, planning out in detail how to spend AP, meta-gaming with others, and participating on the wiki are just a few I've found. I can spend several hours a day on UD-related things if I so choose, but I like that I only ''need'' to spend 5 minutes a day. This game is not supposed to play like WoW. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 20:06, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 
If people could accomplish a lot more than they can now, people would be driven out of the game. As it is, it's possible to survive the night in one place. With your suggestion, it would be difficult for even that to be achieved. {{User:Rorybob/Sig}}19:34, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 
 
RE: To post directly above: In what way would it be impossible to survive the night in one place? If you dissapear 30 minutes - 2 hours after logging out, you can't be killed. I KNOW what I'm saying would drastically change the game. RE: To BobBoberton's Post: How would it not be fair to other players? If everyone played more often, then it would be fair to everyone. Also, there would be much more live action. Players would mainly be combating other active players (of which there would be many more if these changes took place), instead of always just attacking logged-out characters. As is, there is almost NO live action. The main purpose of my suggestion is to change this.  --  '''''Chase1993'''''
:Real-time combat isn't fair either. Faster internet connection? You win. Zombie with Infectious Bite? Either your opponent flees or uses lots of resources. Human? Run away with free running! And it doesn't make it fair if a player can kill half a dozen others every day - now, you're lucky to kill one player a day on average (taking stocking and cade-smashing into the equation). I could easily foresee a zombie victory (since a human one is nigh-impossible) where players just log in every, what, nine hours or so and kill five times as many other players a day. Zombies get stronger with more volume - as in how every well-coordinated large horde is always successful in a mall/NT siege. --'''[[User:BobBoberton|<span style="color: #FF4500">Bob Boberton</span>]] <sup>[[The_Fortress|<span style="color: #6B8E23">TF</span>]] / [[The_Fortress/Dark_Watch|<span style="color: #778899 ">DW</span>]]</sup>''' [[Image:Littlemudkipsig.gif]] 20:13, 26 October 2009 (BST)
:(dang edit conflicts) There would be ''less'' active players at any given time because of the fast disappearance and ''less'' live action with your changes (though live action would make up a larger percentage of encounters). Having played a game that works similarly to what you're describing, I can speak from experience. You don't see enemies for a few days, then suddenly wake up to find out that someone killed you in the night (as well as all of the other friendlies nearby). It's a giant game of hide-and-seek, with no sieges or close calls or real strategy, which is what UD would become with these changes. And see my earlier issues about FAKing and talking. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 20:17, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 
RE: ABOVE POSTS: Firsty, Aichon, again, you would NOT wkae up and find yourself dead because as I have said many times before, your character will disapper 2 hours after logging out. Secondly, you WOULD see enemies, because more people would log on and play. To BobBoberton: FASTER INTERNET CONNECTION??!!! I've played Urban Dead on 33.3Kbs, which is THE slowest connection availabe, and it worked just as fast as it does on my current connection. Again, focus on what you said: " you're lucky to kill one player a day on average". THAT'S what I want to change. What you need to understand is that of course, it would DRASTICALLY change the game (and to be frank, I don't think it's a change that will happen, because of server issues). As to it being a good change if it were possible, obviously my idea would have to be majorly tweaked, however, I cannot amagine anyone NOT being happy with the core element of my idea: being able to play for longer periods of time.  --  '''''Chase1993'''''
:I was speaking from experience with another game that's similar to your idea, and ''yes'', you ''do'' wake up dead often. And no, you would not see more people, because 2 hours is not appropriately scaled to the AP recharge rate (do the math for it...a 12-24 hour timeout would be more appropriate, but still problematic). Also, no, that is not the slowest connection. And finally, if you can't ''i''magine anyone not being happy, then you're clearly not listening to what anyone is saying. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 20:46, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
:(yay edit conflicts) Not wake up dead? With players getting max AP every eight hours or so (1 per 5 minutes), there's a very good chance that yes, you will wake up dead. I don't know about you, but on occasion UD is quite slow for me. It might be because the server's in the UK and I live in the US; it might be because of heavy server load at the time. Either way, sometimes UD is sluggish - and when that happens, it can be fatal with regards to real-time combat. And as stated before, killing more than one other player a day makes players too powerful, and the game severely unbalanced. UD's not broken, why "fix" it in this manner? --'''[[User:BobBoberton|<span style="color: #FF4500">Bob Boberton</span>]] <sup>[[The_Fortress|<span style="color: #6B8E23">TF</span>]] / [[The_Fortress/Dark_Watch|<span style="color: #778899 ">DW</span>]]</sup>''' [[Image:Littlemudkipsig.gif]] 20:47, 26 October 2009 (BST)
 
How long have you been playing? I'm guessing sub-3 months. Otherwise you'd know that entire suburbs would go down in minutes if unlimited play was allowed, [[MOB]] would take entire suburbs in a strike, [[Mall Tour|Mall Tours]] would be over in an hour and if a group like [[The Dead]] came from another community it would be the end of Malton. Your idea would kill the game for people who wanted to play casually, a hardcore strata of players would emerge on the zombie side and literally win the game through attrition. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 20:51, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 
I am unhappy. With characters disappearing every two hours, how could humans ever win a siege? More importantly, this does nothing to get survivors back on their feet more quickly. The sticking point will still be revives. OR would you be happy having to log in every two hours to stop your character at a revive point disappearing. Finally, this punishes all those players who aren't online 24/7. Urban deads simplicity is that it can be played in 5 minutes. And this is a zergers dream. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 20:48, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 
RE: ABOVE POSTS: To Iscariot, no I am not a long term player -- I have been playing the game for about 3-4 months now. However, I do LOVE the game. Is there no conceivable way that the game could be improved to let people play for long periods at a time? Secondly, in what way does it punish players that aren't online 24/7? They wouldn't get as much XP as others? Of course they wouldn't! In ANY MMORPG, the players that DO play are the ones that get to advance the levels, etc. It is SUPPOSED to be rewarding to the players that play often. That's what MMORPG's are TRYING to do. But at the same time, the dissapear 2 hours after logout would make sure that casual players can stay in the game without being killed. Of course they wouldn't advance as fast; that's the point. Also, of course it would make the game faster paced. It would change the gameplay. I don;t expect hardcore UD players to be entirely happy with it. But it WOULD make for faster gameplay, and more importantly, it would allow people to truely immerse themselves in Urban Dead. TO ALL ABOVE POSTS: Maybe I'm missing something, but why is it that everyone is saying it would nerf humans and make zombies too powerful? I simply don't understand the logic.  --  '''''Chase1993'''''
:Learn to sign your posts, and fast if you're going to engage in walls of text debates. Four months? Four whole months? There are players on this page who have played for four years, and they're going to give you the same opinion everyone else has given you. This is a bad idea and will hurt people. Given you weren't here, The Dead were an organised group of 1200 people from an external forum from all timezones of the planet. They could easily have people active 24 hours a day and given that the refresh time from the server isn't huge on UD, with limitless AP they could monitor the interior and exterior of ''every'' building in the city permanently. It doesn't matter that you'd idle in two hours, you'd be found long before then, a post made on their communication networks and you'd be dead five minutes after, as simple as. That's before we even get onto [[Extinction]], spying add-ons and auto-scripts. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 21:30, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
:Because if people dissapeared after 2 hours, zombies could ruin buildings without having to kill the humans inside the buildings. If this happened, the zombies could ruin all the NTs in a suburb in a day or two. The surivors would then be unable to revive anyone.{{User:Rorybob/Sig}}21:26, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
::Because the zombies are better organised. Its no secret that of the top 5 groups in urban dead, usually 4 are zombies. Also your point is that if people idle out more quickly, they won't be killed as much. What's that about? Its a zombie apocalypse. Dying is part of the process. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 21:28, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
:::Yep. Zombies can't ruin buildings until after all survivors are out of it, and your suggestion would make it so that there would be less survivors in buildings since they'd be disappearing constantly. Sieges, which happen all over the city, all the time, at very small scales, only work because humans can act as meatshields once the zombies break in (which they already do on a routine basis. If the meatshields are gone, the buildings will fall while people have disappeared. They'll come back to ruined buildings and a lack of revives if they were unfortunate enough to be one of the few that hadn't disappeared when it was attacked.
 
:::As someone who has been playing the game for even less time than you, I'd suggest checking up on some of the historical stuff that happened in 2007 and 2008 with Extinction and the Salt the Land ideas. Now imagine if the zombies had no limits. The game would end, which is no fun for anyone. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 21:37, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
:{{*}}Cough* Eve Online *cough* Why don't you create more characters? This is supposed to be more of a quick, time killer game anyways. Well, the game that is, not the wiki or forums... --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 21:30, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
----
----


===Jammed In The Door===
===Action Points===
{|
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' {{User:Sorakairi/sig}} 09:56, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
|'''Timestamp:''' [[User:Wolldog1]] 10:07, 26 July 26, 2022
|-
|-
|'''Type:''' I have no idea
|'''Type:''' Action Points Increase Regeneration Rate
|-
|-
|'''Scope:''' Everyone
|'''Scope:''' Everyone
|-
|-
|'''Description:''' Okay, simply put a Zombie can choose to jam themselves in the doorway for 10AP. Being jammed in the door increases your AP regen time to 1AP/Hour. Jamming in doorway makes closing the door impossible until you clear the body, and as such make barricading impossible. Clearing the body pushes it outside. Clearing the doorway costs 5AP. When clearing, you can push up to 5 Zombies at at time i.e. If there are 6 Zombie jammed, then it will cost 10 AP to unjam. It costs another 10AP for a zombie to unjam themselves from the door.
|'''Description:''' Due to the passage of time with mobile games and other real time action games without restriction, I think that we should address the action points system of the game. This game can only realistically be played for 5 minutes a day. So it's not really a seller for new blood. If we want to see this game survive it needs to evolve into something more exciting than 5 minutes. My suggestion is double the regeneration rate to improve activity. I love this game. I want to play it more. And the die hard fans I'm sure feel the same. More will go on in a day, sure. But that's for both sides. We're ready for it. Let's get this game moving again. We need this.
|}
|}
====Discussion (Jammed In The Door)====
====Discussion (Action Points)====
You'll run into problems, since this violates one of the basic "do not" principles of suggestions, namely [[Suggestions_Dos_and_Do_Nots#AP.2C_Inventory.2C_Skills.2C_and_Barricades|don't mess with your AP]].  Also you need to specify how it would work.  Do the barricades need to be down for a zombie to jam themselves in a door?  Why would it make them regen their AP faster to be trapped in a doorway?  How can you actually jam your body into a doorway, is it even possible?  I'm just asking these question to get you to consider some of the possible answers.--{{User:Giles Sednik/sig}} 10:18, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 
When you say it "increases your AP regen time to 1AP/Hour," do you mean that it ''de''creases to 1AP/hour (i.e. AP recharges at half the usual rate) or that it increases ''by'' 1AP/hour (i.e. AP recharges 50% faster)? Anyway, the concept doesn't make sense from a realism standpoint, since if a zombie is jammed in the door so hard that a survivor can't close the door, the doorway itself would effectively be closed off, blocking any further zombies from entering. Also, why does it cost those values for AP and why can multiple zombies be cleared at once (and why up to five and not more/less)? There are a lot of details here that haven't been justified in any way, and, as I seem to be making a habit out of saying here, seem rather arbitrary. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 10:33, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 
I think I see what you are after but I doubt it would work in game. I was going to suggest a "defend door" skill for zombies a while back but knew it would hit problems. For the record i was thinking something like adding "next barricader" to the attack drop down and having the system run the attack whenever that action triggered it. --[[User:Honestmistake|Honestmistake]] 12:27, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
:I didn't bother because i could hear the trenchies screaming "auto attack"... Still the idea of some bugger trying to close the door in a siege only to have 20-30 dormant zeds suddenly savage him is funny :) --[[User:Honestmistake|Honestmistake]] 12:29, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
::Yes it is, as is some ignorant trenchie trying to 'cade his one man army base and finding that he can't because a zombie is stuck in the door.
 
I meant it like decreasing to just 1AP per hour. And seeing as and its a volutary thing, but I can see what you mean by not messing with AP. I figured moving 5 would be okay, because each of those zombies would probably weigh around 40kg and if your tough enough to survive in a Zombocalypse, then you should be able to push 40kg of dead body. And if I put my foot in a doorway, then you can't shut it - What if a) I was a dead body that felt no pain and/or b) my entire body was in the way. {{User:Sorakairi/sig}} 13:21, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 
I like the idea of blocking doorways, so I'm all over this in flavour terms. As you're trying to implement it, though, is another matter. I would say that blocking the door should cost, say, 5AP, and you can make no further actions after blocking the door or the effects are lost. While blocking you're just treated as a standing zombie, but the doors can't be closed unless you're dead. Having multiple zombies blocking a door seems a bit unfeasible though, since doors tend to be sized for one person. This way it's a more simple and elegant idea, which retains the flavour, and gives zeds a nice option in a smaller siege (especially if they've got a rotter or two on their side). {{User:Misanthropy/Sig}} 14:41, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 
I think the reason for the AP regen change (thematically) is that the body is being "used" (squished in the door).  As for the "don't mess with your ap", I have this, from the FAQ as a counter ''There may eventually be character skills which modify the maximum AP and its recharge rate, but the basic starting-character settings will remain the same.''.  If your jamed in the door, wouldn't that still impede others from entering, unless you were laying down?  And if your laying down, your a "corpse" and could be tossed like any other corpse.--[[User:Pesatyel|Pesatyel]] 19:00, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
:I'd imagine he tacked that sentence on so that if there were any great suggestions about AP manipulation, they could be implemented. This doesn't nearly qualify for that.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 17:15, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 
Have you ever ''been'' in a major siege? It's virtually impossible to stop zombies from getting in, so the real way the winner is determined is a contest between the humans who meatshield, re-cade, and kill, and the zombies who rush in, interfere, and take down humans. How does letting zombies stop humans from re-cading balance this situation out? For that matter, doesn't interference already cover this in spades?{{User:Lelouch/sig}} 03:04, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
----
 
===Building Repair Change===
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' [[User:Necrofeelinya|Necrofeelinya]] 03:55, 24 October 2009 (BST)
|-
|'''Type:''' Game Mechanic Change
|-
|'''Scope:''' Survivors
|-
|'''Description:''' Just running this idea up the flagpole to see who salutes, fact is I've played a zombie for so long I don't remember all that well how ruin repairs work for harmans anyway, and this is kind of a spur of the moment idea, but here it is.  I think suicide repairs are kind of silly.  First, you take a building that may have been down for so long it's utterly decrepit and turn it into a functioning building in an instant.  Your buddies 'cade you in, or maybe you use your zombie buddies to turn it to a VSB ruin from inside, and the guy who suicide repaired is stuck there for an indeterminate amount of time until he goes back to positive AP, possibly even idling out while he does so.  He can't play, so he may as well not even log on until the day he's calculated his next positive AP balance will be.  I'd like to propose an alternative. 
 
I suggest that ruin repairs no longer occur in an instant.  I think that players with the construction skill and toolboxes should be able to set their character to repair a ruined building, and the AP cost to repair should be gradually deducted from their AP at a rate of 1 point per half hour, the same rate at which they accumulate AP.  The effects as I see it (and if anyone else sees another effect I'm sure you'll let me know) are as follows:
 
First, ruin repairs would take longer to bring a building up to a functional level where they can be 'caded.  No more buildings instantly coming up and your buddies protecting you by 'cading for you.  That's the negative for survivors.
 
Second, you would no longer be stuck in a building while suicide repairing it.  If you have 50 AP, you can set yourself to repair a building and all along you'll have 50 AP, since the rate of AP consumption is the same as the rate of AP accrual.  And what this means is that ''you can interrupt a suicide repair and run away if you're ambushed''.  You're no longer stuck.  Say you start a repair with 23 AP saved.  Your 23 AP remains intact the whole time you're repairing.  You can use it to run away at any time if the heat in the neighborhood gets to be too much. 
 
Third, this opens up a new possibility... multiple survivors working to repair a building more quickly.  If more than one survivor wants to work on repairing a building, their efforts combine to speed its repair.  Thus, if two survivors want to repair a building that costs 150 AP to fix, it'll cost them just 75 AP each.  If a third survivor joins in, that'll bring it to 50 AP each. 
 
Fourth, since repairing becomes an action that works over a period of time, you can no longer idle out while recovering from a suicide repair.  If you idle out, you stop repairing the building.  It's that simple, if you're not technically there, you can't repair. 
 
Honestly, I'm not really sure what the effect on game balance would be, and I have no idea what the effect in Malton would be.  It's hard to predict.  But I think it just makes more sense this way.  Old ruins instantly coming up and becoming functional has been kind of a silly concept all along, and the notion that you can't run away while repairing a building is kind of silly too.  The notion that the cost of repair all has to fall on one survivor has been silly, and being able to idle out to avoid the full cost of suicide repairs is as well.  This would address all of that.  Opinions?
|}
====Discussion (Building Repair Change)====
Well, first of all AP =/= time.  It is related, but they are not equal.  Everything else in game occurs instantly, including syringe manufacturing and surgery (two things that would, comparatively, take longer to do).  This idea IS different, but that will be the primary argument I think people will use.  What might be better is to allow a player to allocate X amount of AP to a repair job as they see fit.--[[User:Pesatyel|Pesatyel]] 04:06, 24 October 2009 (BST)
 
Yeah, you can run away if ambushed - because the probability of logging on in the middle of an attack and still being alive is ''so high.'' Granted, you're probably not going to be noticed in a ruin, but still - high level zed wanders in with 30+ AP, you die. Oh, and you could just zerg buildings to "repair them faster" or leave expendable sleeper characters in buildings repairing them over time. UD does not play the game for you. --'''[[User:BobBoberton|<span style="color: #FF4500">Bob Boberton</span>]] <sup>[[The_Fortress|<span style="color: #6B8E23">TF</span>]] / [[The_Fortress/Dark_Watch|<span style="color: #778899 ">DW</span>]]</sup>''' [[Image:Littlemudkipsig.gif]] 05:38, 24 October 2009 (BST)
:I think your missing part of the point.  If you attempted to repair a 150 AP ruin, for example, your charcter is out of action for 3 days.  If your APed out in a building and get attacked before you play again, there is the chance the attacker won't kill you and, when you log back in with some AP, you can respond (attack back, heal, run).  But if your APed out for multiple days, if your attacker can't get you on day 1, there is always day 2 and 3 (using the above example).  As for the other part, there IS an "auto-effect" feature in the game already.  Granted the suggestion isn't quite the same as the in-game feature, nor do I like the suggestion as it is, but just stating a fact.--[[User:Pesatyel|Pesatyel]] 06:32, 24 October 2009 (BST)
 
My main issue with this idea is the automatic aspect of it. Auto-attacking and auto-defending aren't kosher (and for good reasons), and I don't see why auto-repairing should be either. I do agree with the idea that it's a bit silly for a single person to be able to undo a half year's worth of ruination in one action though. Perhaps a better way to handle it would be to only let survivors spend AP that they actually have? So, if a building needs 75AP to be repaired, and someone wanders in with 25AP, they could repair it back to 50AP by themselves. It's somewhere in the middle between your suggestion and what we have now. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 05:48, 24 October 2009 (BST)
:I kind of like that idea.  Or even tweak it to say that you cannot complete any action that would take you to less than -10 AP, and apply it across the board to all actions.  So using Aichon's survivor, they could repair 35AP on the building.  A survivor with only 1 AP could not complete a syringe manufacture (or might not be able to do so at all). I don't like the auto-repair as the initial suggestion goes, but I'm all for the partial-repair. --{{User:Maverick Farrant/sig}} 07:52, 24 October 2009 (BST)
::I was actually thinking of suggesting that we disallow any negative AP at all, but I figured that might be a bit of a bigger issue, and I didn't want to distract people from the suggestion as it is now by bringing up even more points (such as ?rise, suicide revives, etc.). {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 08:39, 24 October 2009 (BST)
:::I was thinking that initially too, but then realized that it isn't the going into negative AP that bothers people so much as MASSIVE negative AP. So setting some kind of barrier (-10, -15, whatever) helps limit things. --{{User:Maverick Farrant/sig}} 19:14, 24 October 2009 (BST)
 
I like the sentiment, I don't like the mechanics.  Maybe it'd be better to increase the rate of repair AP needed?  So instead of 1 AP a day, we'd go 5.  That way, you're not out for only three days to repair half a year's worth of ruination, you're spending fifteen days, even if it's instant. [[User:RinKou|RinKou]] 22:44, 24 October 2009 (BST)
:That still doesn't fix the issue of someone essentially idling out from doing a suicide repair though, which was one of the issues being addressed. --{{User:Maverick Farrant/sig}} 23:06, 24 October 2009 (BST)
::As this suggestion is currently proposed, there would be little cost to survivors for repairing a building.  You would simply plan to rest in a ruined building while you were near 50AP and then allow yourself to automatically pump out the "repair points".  As it is now, massive repairs are a sacrifice and a major pain in the ass to survivors.  Dealing with -80AP requires teamwork and we should encourage teamwork.  I could see 3 or 4 survivors fixing any building with almost no drawback if this suggestion were implemented.--{{User:Giles Sednik/sig}} 00:16, 25 October 2009 (BST)
:::Giles is right and the limited AP repairs working towards the total are no better as they would allow a survivor to wander in spend 40AP and wander off again only to come back and do it all over again until its fixed. Nothing a zombie could do would counteract that as they could not speed the ruin back to its former state! --[[User:Honestmistake|Honestmistake]] 01:32, 25 October 2009 (BST)
::::that makes sense.  What about just a cap on how long a building could contine to "ruin"?--[[User:Pesatyel|Pesatyel]] 18:52, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 
Okay, with all that said, I think this suggestion is basically DOA.  Especially because of the zerging issue.  I don't see a way to really fix it without scrapping the suggestion and starting from scratch.  Thanks for the input.--[[User:Necrofeelinya|Necrofeelinya]] 02:06, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
----
----


===Focused Search===
===Drone===
{|
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' {{User:Blake Firedancer/sig}} 11:40, 23 October 2009 (BST)
|'''Timestamp:''' [[User:Rosslessness|<span style="color: MidnightBlue ">R</span><span style="color: Navy">o</span><span style="color: DarkBlue">s</span><span style="color: MediumBlue">s</span><span style="color: RoyalBlue"></span>]][[User_Talk:Rosslessness|<span style="color: RoyalBlue">l</span><span style="color: CornflowerBlue">e</span><span style="color: SkyBlue">s</span><span style="color: LightskyBlue">s</span>]][[User_Talk:Rosslessness/Quiz|<span style="color: LightBlue">n</span><span style="color: PowderBlue">e</span>]][[Monroeville Many|<span style="color: PaleTurquoise">s</span>]][[The Great Suburb Group Massacre|<span style="color: PaleTurquoise">s</span>]]<sup>[[Location Page Building Toolkit|<span style="color: DarkRed">Want a Location Image?]] </span> </sup>  19:10, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
|-
|-
|'''Type:''' Skill (Civilian)
|'''Type:''' Survivor Item
|-
|-
|'''Scope:''' Survivors
|'''Scope:''' Survivors
|-
|-
|'''Description:''' This civilian ability allows survivors to search for a specific item.
|'''Description:''' Portable drone, found in mall tech stores, which are pointless as we all know. Encumbrance is 10%. When activated for 15ap they provide an image of a 10x10 grid centred on the survivor, showing the current outside status of all blocks including zombies, survivors and dead bodies. Like DNA scanners, Drones are multi use.
 
Next to the Search button, there will be a drop-down menu. In that menu, there will be a listing of every item in the game, as well as a default setting of "Anything".
 
When it is set to a specific item, searches will automatically discard any found item that is not the specified item, stating ''You search for [wanted item], but find [received item] instead.'' Searching for a specific item ignores the 'auto-discard' settings in the player's profile.
 
Search rates are NOT affected. This means that, no matter how often you look for one, you'll never find a shotgun in a school. You will also not be informed if the item cannot be found in the current area. You also cannot search for guns with specific ammo counts.
|}
|}
====Discussion (Focused Search)====
====Discussion (Drone)====
So, this is essentially the equivalent of unchecking all but one option in your Settings, except that it would be faster to do? Or is there more to it than that? {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 11:48, 23 October 2009 (BST)
Would there be a message displayed to the players to the effect of "there's a drone buzzing overhead", similar to a flare? --{{User:A Helpful Little Gnome/Sig}} 02:19, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
:Yeah, that's pretty much it. --{{User:Blake Firedancer/sig}} 22:52, 23 October 2009 (BST)
 
no. :| --[[User_talk:Suicidalangel|<span style="color: DarkMagenta"> SA</span>]] 12:17, 23 October 2009 (BST)
 
It's like no-one even checks the archives for [[PR_Skill_New:_Survivor:_Civilian#Specific_Search_.28Search_Bonus.29|better versions]] any more. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 12:43, 23 October 2009 (BST)
 
I could find some others I reckon. But yep, its a dupe. --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 14:08, 23 October 2009 (BST)
 
Not sure, but I think I suggested a version of this. It was crap though. {{User:Sorakairi/sig}} 01:06, 24 October 2009 (BST)
:Haha, everything ever has been suggested it seems.  What would we do without Iscariot finding all the dupes?
::Generally.  But the above dupe is nearly 4 years old to the day.  A lot has happened since then and there is no reason not to retry ideas.  Some people don't actually give a crap about suggestions.  They just like yelling "DUPE!".--[[User:Pesatyel|Pesatyel]] 04:11, 24 October 2009 (BST)
:::Sure, a lot has happened, but how much has happened to searching? That's the only thing that matters here. --[[User:Midianian|Midianian]] 11:38, 24 October 2009 (BST)
:::::Well, as mentioned in the suggestion, you have the auto-discard feature.--[[User:Pesatyel|Pesatyel]] 19:26, 24 October 2009 (BST)
 
I don't see the need for a change that can be just as easily done by going into your Settings page. --{{User:Maverick Farrant/sig}} 19:10, 24 October 2009 (BST)
----
----


===Who killed me?===
===Backpack===
{|
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' --{{User:Haliman111/sig}} 00:23, 21 October 2009 (BST)
|'''Timestamp:''' [[User:Wild Crazy|Wild Crazy]] ([[User talk:Wild Crazy|talk]]) 20:55, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
|-
|-
|'''Type:''' Interface Change (I think?)
|'''Type:''' New item
|-
|'''Scope:''' All players
|-
|'''Description:'''
 
Simple. I think the capitalized letter "i" should be viewed as [http://www.freefoto.com/images/2001/09/2001_09_3---Letter-I_web.jpg this] instead of a lowercase "L". Why? To stop confusion.
 
'''EX:''' RossIessness "rossiessness" attacks and kills another group's member. That member takes a screenshot, and reports it to his group. Now "Rosslessness" and "Rossiessness" are both going to be blacklisted/searched by the group. The current "i" now is a major troll tool.
|}
====Discussion Who killed me?====
[[http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=1017692| Haliman]] profile A....[[http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=1615892| Haliman ]]Profile B...still very exploitable in my opinion. --{{User:The Colonel/Sig}} 00:56, 21 October 2009 (BST)
 
So, you want a serif font to be used, but only for capital letter Is in character names? Seems somewhat convoluted to me. Besides, it seems kinda odd to make a change like this in order to support meta-gaming, since that's the only time that it matters. Most of the PK list sites require links to the profile anyway, so you have the character ID, which is already unique. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 01:03, 21 October 2009 (BST)
:''it seems kinda odd to make a change like this in order to support meta-gaming, since that's the only time that it matters.'' - That's pretty much all that keeps ALOT of the players here playing UD. --{{User:Haliman111/sig}} 01:13, 21 October 2009 (BST)
::I don't disagree with that, but, aside from making data available, which is already being done, stuff like this seems to fall outside the scope of the game. Besides, a more consistent way to do it would be to display the character ID of the person that killed you in parenthesis next to their name, but since we already have a link to their profile, such things should be unnecessary. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 01:26, 21 October 2009 (BST)
:::That would take up a lot of space on the game screen.--{{User:Haliman111/sig}} 01:37, 21 October 2009 (BST)
::::We're arguing details of an unrelated issue, but 9 characters (e.g. "(1598119)"), at most, is not a lot of space. Besides, as I said, such things aren't necessary anyway. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 03:07, 21 October 2009 (BST)
 
Totally unneeded. If I want to confuse the subject or frame you I will. Read the section on [[User:Iscariot/How_to_abuse_Brainstock's_Rogues_Gallery|Industrial Light and Magical Fraud]]. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 01:18, 21 October 2009 (BST)
:Already saw. But all the names to frame me are taken ''*cough, KRAUSER cough cough*''--{{User:Haliman111/sig}} 01:31, 21 October 2009 (BST)
::I don't even need control of the account I'm using to frame you with. I could make an iwit of Bub killing Petro with a katana if I so chose. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 01:37, 21 October 2009 (BST)
::: After reading that...he scares me. I found it rather amusing though, and a good read. --{{User:The Colonel/Sig}} 17:05, 21 October 2009 (BST)
::::I've always been annoyed with fonts that don't distinguish between I and l, Illustrated by the Ill coceived font on this page.  However I agree with others here that it isn't a gameplay problem.  STIll, I'd support you just because I, GIles the lIl, fucking hate fonts that use the same characters for different letters.--{{User:Giles Sednik/sig}} 02:27, 24 October 2009 (BST)
:::::i c wut u did thur...{{User:Lelouch/sig}} 02:55, 24 October 2009 (BST)
::::::For one thing, it ''isn't'' the same character used. Lower case L's have a little curvature at the bottom, which ''is'' visible in-game. Capital i's are completely straight, and if you view [http://img182.imageshack.us/img182/5899/idesmarchdc0.gif pictures with characters who use this trick], you will definitely notice the dissimilarity. Also, there are entire groups who depend upon this text for their gimmic. Changing the font suddenly would inconvenience these existing groups, and make them considerably less interesting to see in-game. Additionally, this similarity in character makes it all the more important to click on your attacker's name, and actually '''look''' at who they are. --{{User:DT/Signature}} 20:56, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
----
 
===Pipe Bomb ===
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' [[User:VanDammit|VanDammit]] 04:46, 17 October 2009 (BST)
|-
|'''Type:''' New Weapon
|-
|-
|'''Scope:''' Survivors
|'''Scope:''' Survivors
|-
|-
|'''Description:''' Due to my frustration of finding Lengths of Pipes and then realizing they have no use beyond providing cheap barricades and encumbering me, I have put on my thinking cap and done some thinking.
|'''Description:''' This will be a new item found in schools with a 2% find rate and sports stores with a 4% find rate. The low numbers are because, like a flak jacket, once you find it you have it forever. It increases you encumbrance by 30%. However, you can't use an item that is in your backpack until you remove it from the backpack. It costs one AP to add an item to your backpack and one AP to remove an item. An item affects your regular encumbrance until added to the backpack. Items such as GPS, radios, cell phones, and flak jacket do not work when in your backpack. Items in your backpack will not be shown in your inventory, but the backpack itself will be shown in your inventory. There will be a drop box next to the word backpack that shows all the items inside. When you click on an item in that drop box, it removes it from your backpack (1 AP).
What if,  
'''length of pipe''' + '''skill''' (new skill! Engineering! or something) + '''maybe some other item''' (something that'll blow up...gasoline?)
= '''Pipe Bomb!'''
 
Basically, you take it, and chuck it at a zombie.
 
Of course, this would be item combination. So if there are lots of item-combo haterz, then we'll just make this pipe bomb an item you can find.
Okay, so now...what does it do?
 
'''It's a 55% base hit rate, but only does 1-3 damage''' (random, and low).
HOWEVER
If there's a hugeass horde of zeds, '''every single one takes damage from it due to shrapnel shred.''', unless you guys think that's a Multiply by a Billion scenario. In that case, we can just cap off the number of zombies that can be hurt to like....8 or 10 random unlucky zeds.
 
Encumberance: 10%
You use it by standing in the same block as the target, and attacking the target with "Pipebomb". The target will definetly sustain damage if the 55% hit, and surrounding targets will be chosen at random.
 
Get a message:
 
''You light the fuse from a safe distance, chuck the pipebomb, and dash for cover. A few seconds later, the explosion sends shockwaves and bodyparts through the air, and the sound echoes into the surrounding area. You chuckle at the carnage you have caused. Haha!''


But NOTE THIS:


The 55% percent hit rate is given that you succeed in throwing the pipebomb in the first place. You have a 15% chance of screwing up, in which case...
Q: Wouldn't this buff survivors, since they can carry more bullets and kill more zombies?


''You light the fuse from a safe distance and prepare to chuck the pipebomb when, suddenly, you realized the fuse is alot shorter than you thought it was. In panic, you accidentally drop the bomb, and fly into the air alongside chunks of the surrounding asphalt as the bomb detonates. Haha!''
A: Since it costs an AP to add and remove an item, it wastes a lot of AP to put bullet clips in your backpack if you are planning on using them right away.


This is a one time use item (no sh!t), and it'll be a semi-rare item (to prevent the Multiply by a Billion scenario, where survivors rain down bombs on zeds)
Ummm...what else?...


Q: If it wastes AP, what is the point?


Ohyeah!
A: It will be useful if you want to carry around an extra stash of items, such as FAKs and Revivification Syringes, or if you are going far away from any resource buildings and need some extra supplies.
And to even odds out, if a pipe bomb detonates, zombies/survivors in surrounding blocks (i dunno, like 3x3?) can hear it, so i guess it'll attract zombies. xD


You can also set off pipebombs next to barricades (if you attack the barricade with Pipebomb), which will instantly take it down 2 levels (a form of demolition),


''You light the fuse and swiftly lodge the bomb into a crack between the boards of the barricade. You manage to jump behind cover just in time as the blast tears through a layer of the barricade.''
Please give your thoughts.
 
Although there will be a 45% chance that:
 
"''As you light the fuse and prepare to lodge the bomb between the cracks of the barricade, you trip, drop the bomb, and fly into the air alongside pieces of the barricade as the bomb detonates in your face. Haha!.''
 
In that case, you sustain major boo boos, and the cade will be damaged 0-1 levels (cuz the bomb wasn't lodged in). No surrounding bystanders are hurt if you attack barricade, whether you succeed or get laughed at.
 
 
I don't know about this last part, but anyways: it can be used indoors xD (to clear out zombies). Although that'd give an unfair advantage to medics, who can just blow all the survivors up and get major healing XP....so scratch that.
That's it!
 
....Haha!


|}
|}
====Discussion (Pipe Bomb)====
====Discussion (Backpack)====
{{SDW|28 October 2009}}
No idea who you are, but I gotta say, this suggestion gave me a really good chuckle. Or, at least a snort. Well, it would have, if I wasn't on the tail end of a cold. Long story short, horrible suggestion, but I enjoyed the (what I believe to be and am hoping is in fact) good humor present in it. Thanks for that much. {{User:Aichon/Signature}} 05:57, 17 October 2009 (BST)
 
Your argument is that your sick of finding useless pipes?  First of all pipes can be used for a quick barricade.  Secondly, if you go into your settings and switch it off, you won't FIND any pipes.--[[User:Pesatyel|Pesatyel]] 06:04, 17 October 2009 (BST)
 
This is a dupe.  I can't be arsed to look for the others, but pipebombs/Molotovs have been suggested almost as much as an SMG.  In addition to the multiply by a billion rule, there's also the problem of why AoE doesn't work in this game at all.  AoE worked in Nexus War because most of the game was clearing out buildings as fast as possible.  The problem with UD is that the only people who'd try to clear out a building as fast as possible are, for the most part, PKers.  Unless you're trying to reclaim a ruined building, this will have next to no effect on zombies.  The only real other tactical use would be to weaken zombies outside during a siege so you can take them down easier once they get inside, but at that point, 1-3 damage is completely useless anyway. [[User:RinKou|RinKou]] 19:50, 17 October 2009 (BST)
 
RinKou seems to have put forward a simplified version of my standard argument against AoE. Understand that you might think it's cool for bombs and explosive weapons, but you are an idiot and you're just going to be hurting yourself when people like me with my death cultist come along and start piñata-ing malls in a single strike with a few friends. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 19:56, 17 October 2009 (BST)
 
# You spelled shit wrong.
# This idea has been done to death.
Can we get pipe bombs/AoE weapons included in the D&DN or Freq Suggested?{{User:Lelouch/sig}} 22:53, 18 October 2009 (BST)
:[[Frequently_Suggested#Area_of_Effect_Abilities|They already are]].--{{User:OrangeGaf/Sig}} 23:18, 18 October 2009 (BST)
::Thanks gaffy, and to SC: try reading the basic rules and guidelines before you suggest something.{{User:Lelouch/sig}} 23:49, 18 October 2009 (BST)
:::Remember though that "freq suggested" is not the same as "insta-spam, do not even think of suggesting!!!!" It is there to warn potential suggestors that such ideas need to be '''very''' carefully thought out as they '''will''' hit strong opposition and harsh questioning!. Kevan himself has stated that he is not opposed to well reasoned (and balanced) suggestions of all these types. --[[User:Honestmistake|Honestmistake]] 23:02, 20 October 2009 (BST)
::::Insta-Spam is rarely the problem.  It's the "Insta-Dupe".--[[User:Pesatyel|Pesatyel]] 03:41, 21 October 2009 (BST)
----
----
===Music store===
{|
|'''Timestamp:''' [[User:Dr yep|Dr yep]] 20:28, 15 October 2009 (BST)
|-
|'''Type:''' Resource
|-
|'''Scope:''' Search
|-
|'''Description:''' In honor of the character Tallahassee, from Zombieland, add music stores to the malls and allow players to find banjos that can be played/used as weapons. Other instruments too--who couldn't use a little live music in times like these? Busking is discouraged.
|}
====Discussion (Music store)====
{{SDW|27 October 2009}}
Dupe.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 20:40, 15 October 2009 (BST)
I do believe "Music, Music, Music!", or a suggestion with a similar name, went to Peer Reviewed. It talked about instruments also, but in much more detail.{{User:Rorybob/Sig}}20:58, 15 October 2009 (BST)
:Which I ''still'' maintain is a dupe of [[Suggestion:20071027 Instruments]] --{{User:Rosslessness/Sig}} 22:14, 15 October 2009 (BST)
::I didn't think the "Music, Music, Music!" one let you play them?--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 09:21, 16 October 2009 (BST)
:::Just checked, you could play them here's the link [[Suggestion:20090411 Music! Music! Music!]] {{User:Sorakairi/sig}} 10:56, 16 October 2009 (BST)
::::Oh, I thought they were weapons. Which it turns out they weren't at all.--{{User:Yonnua Koponen/signature‎}} 11:49, 16 October 2009 (BST)
::::: I wanted them to be weapons. But it was accepted as non-attack, which sucks. {{User:Sorakairi/sig}} 13:25, 16 October 2009 (BST)
::::::the additional use as a weapon would be a significant enough difference to make it not a "Dupe".... sadly it would not make enough difference for it to be worth a "keep" from me!--[[User:Honestmistake|Honestmistake]] 23:13, 20 October 2009 (BST)
:::::::Close though as i do like the idea of beating zeds (and random passers by) with mah geetar!!--[[User:Honestmistake|Honestmistake]] 23:14, 20 October 2009 (BST)
----
----
==Suggestions up for voting==

Latest revision as of 17:27, 8 July 2024

NOTICE
The Suggestions system has been closed indefinitely and Developing Suggestions is no longer functions as a part of the suggestions process.

However, you are welcome to use this page for general discussion on suggestions.

Suggestion Navigation
Suggestion Portal
Current Suggestions • Suggestions up for Voting • Clothes Suggestions
Cycling Suggestions • Peer Reviewed • Undecided • Peer Rejected • Humorous
Suggestion Advice • Topics to Avoid and Why • Help, Developing and Editing

Developing Suggestions

This section is for general discussion of suggestions for the game Urban Dead.

It also includes the capacity to pitch suggestions for conversation and feedback.

Further Discussion

  • Discussion concerning this page takes place here.
  • Discussion concerning the suggestions system in general, including policies about it, takes place here.

Resources

How To Make a Discussion

Adding a New Discussion

To add a general discussion topic, please add a Tier 3 Header (===Example===) below, with your idea or proposal.


Adding a New Suggestion

  • Paste the copied text above the other suggestions, right under the heading.
  • Substitute the text in RED CAPITALS with the details of your suggestion.
  • The process is illustrated in this image.
{{subst:DevelopingSuggestion
|time=~~~~
|name=SUGGESTION NAME
|type=TYPE HERE
|scope=SCOPE HERE
|description=DESCRIPTION HERE
}}
  • Name - Give the suggestion a short but descriptive name.
  • Type is the nature of the suggestion, such as a new class, skill change, balance change.
  • Scope is who or what the suggestion affects. Typically survivors or zombies (or both), but occasionally Malton, the game interface or something else.
  • Description should be a full explanation of your suggestion. Include information like flavor text, search odds, hit percentages, etc, as appropriate. Unless you are as yet unsure of the exact details behind the suggestion, try not to leave out anything important. Check your spelling and grammar.

Cycling Suggestions

  • Suggestions with no new discussion in the past month may be cycled without notice.


Please add new discussions and suggestions to the top of the list


Ignore based on Radio Broadcast

Timestamp: Khwud (talk) 17:27, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Type: UI enhancement
Scope: Interface
Description: Allow 'ignore' from radio broadcasts; users are hiding behind their anonymity to allow them to broadcast things that would broadly trigger them to be ignored, if their user ID was visible. Adding their name, or an auto-generated call-sign (it is for a radio, after all) or something so that they could be blocked based on their broadcasts would help user experience. In addition, and broadcasts that get more than a threshold number could get tagged for review, and the user potentially having their (in-game) ham-license revoked.

Discussion (Ignore based on Radio Broadcast)

Shrink the map

Timestamp: --UroguyTMZ 16:28, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Type: Map change
Scope: Everyone
Description: There are just over 3000 active characters in the game currently likely counting a significant percentage of alts and zergs. Shrinking the map by eliminating the outer first two rings of suburbs would increase the amount of interactions between the remaining characters. This shrink could be increased or decreased depending on future changes to the playerbase.

Discussion (Shrink the map)

Action Points

Timestamp: User:Wolldog1 10:07, 26 July 26, 2022
Type: Action Points Increase Regeneration Rate
Scope: Everyone
Description: Due to the passage of time with mobile games and other real time action games without restriction, I think that we should address the action points system of the game. This game can only realistically be played for 5 minutes a day. So it's not really a seller for new blood. If we want to see this game survive it needs to evolve into something more exciting than 5 minutes. My suggestion is double the regeneration rate to improve activity. I love this game. I want to play it more. And the die hard fans I'm sure feel the same. More will go on in a day, sure. But that's for both sides. We're ready for it. Let's get this game moving again. We need this.

Discussion (Action Points)

Drone

Timestamp: RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 19:10, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
Type: Survivor Item
Scope: Survivors
Description: Portable drone, found in mall tech stores, which are pointless as we all know. Encumbrance is 10%. When activated for 15ap they provide an image of a 10x10 grid centred on the survivor, showing the current outside status of all blocks including zombies, survivors and dead bodies. Like DNA scanners, Drones are multi use.

Discussion (Drone)

Would there be a message displayed to the players to the effect of "there's a drone buzzing overhead", similar to a flare? --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 02:19, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Backpack

Timestamp: Wild Crazy (talk) 20:55, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Type: New item
Scope: Survivors
Description: This will be a new item found in schools with a 2% find rate and sports stores with a 4% find rate. The low numbers are because, like a flak jacket, once you find it you have it forever. It increases you encumbrance by 30%. However, you can't use an item that is in your backpack until you remove it from the backpack. It costs one AP to add an item to your backpack and one AP to remove an item. An item affects your regular encumbrance until added to the backpack. Items such as GPS, radios, cell phones, and flak jacket do not work when in your backpack. Items in your backpack will not be shown in your inventory, but the backpack itself will be shown in your inventory. There will be a drop box next to the word backpack that shows all the items inside. When you click on an item in that drop box, it removes it from your backpack (1 AP).


Q: Wouldn't this buff survivors, since they can carry more bullets and kill more zombies?

A: Since it costs an AP to add and remove an item, it wastes a lot of AP to put bullet clips in your backpack if you are planning on using them right away.


Q: If it wastes AP, what is the point?

A: It will be useful if you want to carry around an extra stash of items, such as FAKs and Revivification Syringes, or if you are going far away from any resource buildings and need some extra supplies.


Please give your thoughts.

Discussion (Backpack)

Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Developing_Suggestions&oldid=2433158"