Suggestions/31st-Mar-2007

Closed Suggestions

1. These suggestions are now closed. No more voting or editing is to be done to them.
2. Suggestions with a rational Vote tally of 2/3 Keeps over total of Keeps, Kills, and Spams will be moved to the Peer Reviewed Suggestions page by a moderator, unless the original author has re-suggested the Suggestion.
3. Suggestions under the 2/3 proportion but with more or equal Keeps to Kills ration will be moved to the Undecided Suggestions page.
4. All other Suggestions will be moved to either the Peer Rejected Suggestions page or the Humorous Suggestions page.
5. Some suggestions may not be moved in a timely manner; moving Suggestions to Peer Reviewed Suggestions page will take higest priority.
6. Again, DO NOT EDIT THIS PAGE IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM. It will be used as a historical record and will eventually be locked.

Clawshot

Spaminated with 12/12 Spam votes. (Reason: dupe/vandalism/spam/teleportation) --Funt Solo 11:08, 31 March 2007 (BST)

---

Consumer Class Starts With Random Weapon

Timestamp:	Jon Pyre 09:44, 31 March 2007 (BST)
Type:	Improvement
Scope:	Survivors, Consumers
Description:	I noticed a bunch of new weapons have been added to the game like the tennis raquet and the pool cue. I suggest that the consumer class start with one of the following, at random: baseball bat, golf club, hockey stick, fencing foil, tennis raquet, pool cue, ski pole. It'll be somewhat useful to an underpowered starting class (especially now that most malls are ransacked), but moreso having one of these second rate weapons is good flavor. They woke up one morning to a zombie apocalypse, grabbed whatever random thing in their closet could serve as a weapon and their cell phone, and headed for loot.

Keep Votes

1. Keep It'd be nice flavor for the class. --Jon Pyre 09:44, 31 March 2007 (BST)
2. Keep - I like the flavor...good work --Brainz 10:49, 31 March 2007 (BST)
3. Keep - I'm not too fussed on the nitty gritty - it's a good suggestion. --Funt Solo 11:32, 31 March 2007 (BST)
4. Keep - Nice flavor, I'm all for the use of less-known weapons. --Kaisuke 11:59, 31 March 2007 (BST)
5. Keep - Nice idea, makes sense, plus the Consumers really need some weapon or way to gain XP. --Lord of the Pies 12:39, 31 March 2007 (BST)
6. Keep - Flavah is gooooood. --_Ducis ^Dux_Sloth^Talk 12:51, 31 March 2007 (BST)
7. They have it hard. Give em a random weapon is a good idea. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 13:35, 31 March 2007 (BST)
8. Keep - aye! --Duke Garland 13:39, 31 March 2007 (BST)
9. Keep - What, no chainsaw? Oh well, keep it anyway. --Uncle Bill 15:31, 31 March 2007 (BST)
10. Keep - Adds flavour, isn't too complicated and gives the consumer class a little more. --Anotherpongo 16:03, 31 March 2007 (BST)
11. Keep - Though I think knife should be added to the list. It is the newbie weapon, after all.--Bluish wolf 17:17, 31 March 2007 (BST)

    Keep - Great idea and I agree with Bluish Wolf that the knife should be added to the list. Unsigned vote struck. --^T 23:16, 31 March 2007 (BST)

12. Keep - More useful than a cell phone, which stinks even when the cell towers ARE powered. Level 1 consumers get ZERO use from their skills- the malls that are not ransacked have EHB's on all 4 corners. They should at least get a usable (if weak) weapon. --S.Wiers^ctdp_NTmap^x:oo 21:59, 31 March 2007 (BST)
13. Keep - Makes complete sense. --^T 23:16, 31 March 2007 (BST)
14. Keep - Strenghtens the weakest survivorclass a bit. - BzAli 01:33, 1 April 2007 (BST)
15. Keep - probably a dupe, but its a good idea. Mattiator 05:36, 1 April 2007 (BST)
16. Keep - Consumer's a dumb starting class, but it's good to help even the silly newbs. --c138 ^{RR - PKer} 10:57, 1 April 2007 (BST)
17. Keep - Sure - Jedaz^{ΣT MC ΞD GIS S! 13:10, 1 April 2007 (GMT-1)}
18. Keep - Consumers are stupid, yeah, give 'em tennis raquets >:) -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 14:15, 1 April 2007 (BST)
19. Keep - May as well, the cell phone is a weak starting item. --Timmonds 1:03, 1 April 2007 (EST)
20. Keep- But where's the shovel?--Grigori 18:28, 1 April 2007 (BST)
21. Keep - Why not? If they don't want it, they can drop it. And if they really wanted a challenge, they'd play as a lone zombie. Now there's a challenge...--Reaper with no name ^TJ! 22:02, 2 April 2007 (BST)
    

Kill Votes

Change - Resubmit without pool cue and with length of pipe and you'll have my support. The pool cue is a fairly powerful weapon (it does break, I know). --Anotherpongo 10:19, 31 March 2007 (BST)

Vote struck by author --Anotherpongo 16:03, 31 March 2007 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes
Strong Kill -I actually think we should leave the consumer as it is for people who want a challenge. --AlexanderRM 03:07, 2 April 2007 (BST)

• Re Starting with a very crappy weapon is more for flavor than to actually make things easier. --Jon Pyre 09:17, 2 April 2007 (BST)
• Re -well, come to think of it, they could just drop the weapon, but I'm not even going to bother moving to keep so... abstain. --AlexanderRM 00:31, 3 April 2007 (BST)

Note: this has been implemented as of 25/04/07

---

Encumbrance Fiddling

Timestamp:	Gene Splicer 16:21, 31 March 2007 (BST)
Type:	Mechanic Tweak
Scope:	Survivors
Description:	Nobody's said anything in discussion for a while, so here it is for vote. I find it a bit unrealistic (Yes I know that is a dirty word) that you can carry X amount of things with no penalty, but X+1 is utterly, utterly verbotten. I suggest that you be able to carry up to 125% encumberance worth of items, but once you go over 100% you suffer the following penalties: All movement, including free running, costs 2AP -5% melee weapon accuracy -10% ranged weapon accuracy I also suggest that anyone with 25% encumbrance or below be given the following bonuses: Able to enter HB buildings +5% melee weapon accuracy +10% ranged weapon accuracy Your encumbrance would be red (overweighted) blue (normal) or bright green (unencumbered) with suitable flavour text explaining what it means. This would mainly benefit newbies, as they are the ones most likely to be using melee weapons (Yay Knife), would most benefit from extra entry points (no free running) and anyone who has played for a while would almost certainly have more than this quantity of items on hand anyway. It would also benefit that brave bastion of heroism and manlyness, the I Carry Naught But An Axe And Some Faks firefighter. The high level of pack rattery required for ranged weapons means the +10% to hit would be a boon to low-level Cops and Privates, but rarely affect higher levels. This would not apply to zombies as (flavour) zombies rely more on brute strength than agility to move about, and (gameplay) "Its pretty painless for a zombie to drop enough stuff to get under 25%, netting them a 5% hit bonus, which is a good reason why it should not apply to zombies." Thanks to S.Wiers and Pesatyel

Keep Votes

1. Keep- I like it, mainly the newbie-helping part. Adds some nice gameplay choices, too.--Grigori 19:44, 31 March 2007 (BST)
2. WTFZOMBIES - A good Idea. Mattiator 05:41, 1 April 2007 (BST)
3. Keep - As I see it, it's a boost to survivors, and survivors need a boost at the moment. - Jedaz^{ΣT MC ΞD GIS S! 13:15, 1 April 2007 (GMT-1)}
4. Keep - I like the idea of higher encumbrance costing you in other areas... making players make the choice between heaps of stuff, or being able to move more freely -- boxy ^{T L ZS Nuts2U DA} 14:22, 1 April 2007 (BST)
5. Keep - I love the general idea. The figures need work, as per the kill votes, but the overall idea sounds great to me. --Karloth Vois ^RR 14:28, 1 April 2007 (BST)
6. Keep - The numbers need reworking, gun accuracy increase should be less than the melee, if at all affected. But otherwise I like the idea. - Whitehouse 18:13, 1 April 2007 (BST)
7. Keep - As whitehouse. A good idea, let Kevan figure out the numbers. --LadyEleanor 18:54, 11 April 2007 (BST)
   

Kill Votes

1. Current encumbrance system works just fine, thank you. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 16:34, 31 March 2007 (BST)
2. Kill - Not Needed, current system is working good...and i don't see it as a need ingame...--Brainz 16:55, 31 March 2007 (BST)
3. Kill - If free running was impossible while 100+%, I might have voted keep. --Storyteller 17:13, 31 March 2007 (BST)
4. Kill while i would like to see encumberance penalties (esp for freerunning) I do not like this method or its numbers. I also think anysuch NERF is very unlikely to survive review as too many players are comfy as is!--Honestmistake 17:15, 31 March 2007 (BST)
   • Re - How nerf? You can reach 100% without penalty, penalties only occur when you exceed it --Gene Splicer 20:00, 31 March 2007 (BST)
5. Chenge - what i just wrote in disscussion --Duke Garland 17:45, 31 March 2007 (BST)
6. Change - nice idea. However, it's overpowered. For the 25% bonus, I could carry a flak jacket and five pistols (or some combination of ranged weaponry that would allow me to expend nearly 50AP on attacks) - all at +10% to hit, plus the ability to jump into a heavily barricaded building from the street. The second part (under 25% enc.) should be further limited - make it under 20%, so that someone with a portable generator can't climb into HB buildings. Drop the ranged weapon bonus altogether and keep the 5% on melee weapons. Also stick in a requirement for Body Building and/or Free Running to get into HB buildings, because that's a serious bonus. I would absolutely drop the idea of going over 100% encumbrance. 100% is 100%, after all. --Funt Solo 21:21, 31 March 2007 (BST)
7. Change Agreed, the 10% bonus to firearms / enter HB buildings is to easy to get. A pistol and a few clips gives you almost 50 AP worth of shooting at 75% accuracy. A survivor thus equipped could kill TWO flack jacketed, body built targets. Which seems minor (shotguns let you do 3+) until you consider they still have 75% encumbrance left for scrounging up other goods, and can enter HB buildings. Anyhow, a large bonus / penalty to firearms is unrealistic; those don't require rapid, dexterous movement. Switch the HTH / ranged mods, and get rid of the HB building bit, you may have a winner. I'd also totally negate free-run when emcumbrance is over 100%- do you know how hard climbing is with any significant weight or bulk on you? --S.Wiers^ctdp_NTmap^x:oo 22:11, 31 March 2007 (BST)
8. Change - Wow. I like this one a lot. Just get rid of all the bonuses under 25% encumbrance except for + 5% to hit with melee. --_Ducis ^Dux_Sloth^Talk 23:13, 31 March 2007 (BST)
9. Kill - This is a very good idea, except I think that the firearms benefit for <= 25% should be 5%. --^T 23:38, 31 March 2007 (BST)
10. Kill - No, I hate the idea. Encumbrance is an awful thing already and has weakened survivors and now you're suggesting for an extra 25% this much penalties? I still have around 150% and I'm not willing to have to scrap useful stuff just because of this. --Marie^{The Grove on Tour} 18:11, 1 April 2007 (BST)
11. The "under 25%" bonuses are over powered (maybe not the melee one).--Pesatyel 20:19, 1 April 2007 (BST)
12. Change- Reducing accuracy by 5% or 10% could result in newbies trying to attack with a crowbar at 0% (or at a ridiculous -12.5% with a flare gun). There needs to be a lower limit for the accuracy penalties (like it not being able to reduce one's accuracy below, say 20%). Otherwise, we'll have newbies with 0% or even negative accuracy.--Reaper with no name ^TJ! 22:16, 2 April 2007 (BST)
    

Spam/Dupe Votes
Spam/Dupe Votes Here

---