Template talk:NecrotechDangerLevels

What

Why was "In Zombie Hands" removed in 2014? DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 02:25, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

My best guess is zombies are going to ruin any building they take as a matter of course and "In Zombie Hands" was seen as redundant. Feels like a relic of the pre-ruin era. Igotmadenoughtomakeanewaccount (talk) 02:36, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

"In Zombie Hands" is now only listed on the mall version of the template — but can still be used for any building. If a building is actively occupied by zombies, especially by a bunch of them but really by any number, it should be marked as IZH. I mostly use "Ruined" for when a building is unoccupied, when it's been occupied e.g. by my zombie alt but I plan to move on immediately, or from EMRs which don't indicate the presence of zombies in an NT building. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 03:55, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

That said, I'd be very much in favor of re-adding IZH & Ransacked to all the building status templates. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 03:58, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Why isn't there a survivor version of IZH? Seems like ruined is simpler and contested? I think is the one for "being fought over". Anyone care to find the reasoning for the removal of IZH? I cannot remember. -- LABIA on the INTERNET ^{Dunell Hills Corpseman} #24 - |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ^TMG 09:44, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Here's the start of the branching-paths of discussion: Template talk:BuildingDangerLevels#missing `rebuilding` and `in zombie hands`. "Rebuilding" was removed due to minimal usage, and "in zombie hands" was removed "since it's rare that there's more than 1 zombie holding a ruin" (q: Kirsty Cotton) and at the time there were still number-of-zombies as part of the definition. However, it was explicitly stated that "people who know the old status and think they're appropriate, they can still use them" (q: Kirsty again). Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 14:59, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Npov

If the danger levels are going to be adjusted, the obvious survivor bias should be addressed. As seen in the DMZ and in Riddleybank, zombies can and do hold ground. There should be corresponding "safe" "under attack" and "under siege" versions for zombies. -- LABIA on the INTERNET ^{Dunell Hills Corpseman} #24 - |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ^TMG 09:49, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

I'd definitely be in favor of "safe" v "human-occupied" or "safe" v "repaired" (probably the latter). This would be both more NPOV and would match the splitoff of "intact" from "safe" in the suburb-level reports. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 14:53, 31 March 2020 (UTC)