User talk:Kevan

If you want to report a bug, put it up on the Bug Reports page for review.

If you've got a question about the Wiki, use the Wiki Questions and another user will see it and answer it.

If you want to discuss game balance or the future of the game, try a discussion forum.

If you'd like to respond to someone who's posted here, you should do so on their talk page.

If you're from the future, there are a couple of archives.

If you'd like to speak to an operator, please hold.

Suicide Repair

Most of the time it isn't easy to let a building reach the higher levels of decay and takes the effort of multiply zombie players. Lately as more buildings reach higher level of decay we see a raise in suicide repairs. Where survivors just spent all their AP and more to repair a long time ruined building and prepare to get eaten and revived. If suicide repairing was not what you where going for with the implemention of decay, please consider changes like:

a)Make it impossible to spent more AP on repairing than are left to this character, and probably setting a cap at 45AP as a maximum for decay.

or b)Repair only removes some part of the decay level and not all at once. Probably like tearing down barricades. --Experiment211 21:15, 13 July 2008 (BST)

Database error on the wiki

I have been getting the following message after making edits:

A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was:

    (SQL query hidden)

from within function "SearchMySQL4::update". MySQL returned error "1062: Duplicate entry '20534' for key 1 (localhost)".
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Category_talk:Historical_Groups"

The edits seem to be working, however. This bug just took place twice on the Historical Groups Talk/Voting page. --WanYao 11:13, 25 July 2008 (BST)

I just got one on the same page. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 15:51, 25 July 2008 (BST)

Ditto. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 21:06, 25 July 2008 (BST)

Happened to me too today.--Gamestriker4 21:57, 25 July 2008 (BST)

Database error

A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software. The last attempted database query was:
(SQL query hidden)
from within function "". MySQL returned error "1194: Table 'searchindex' is marked as crashed and should be repaired (localhost)".

Is also appearing when searching brain rot in the Suggestions and Talk Suggestions namespaces.--Karek^maps?! 19:02, 26 July 2008 (BST)

Erg. I've had some server trouble lately, I'll take a look at it. --Kevan 12:21, 27 July 2008 (BST)

Yesterday it was still doing this... It's rare as of late, it seems-- it was happening with almost every edit for a bit there -- but it *did* happen yesterday again.... --WanYao

Just hit the same after searching for brain in images. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 15:21, 3 August 2008 (BST)

I've repaired the database, it should be okay now. Let me know if any error messages still creep through, though. --Kevan 10:54, 4 August 2008 (BST)

A Little Idea for Group Affiliations

I've had an idea and would like to submit it for your consideration. Would it be possible to add in the option of a URL link added to a player's group affiliation, a la the current system with the 'Real Name' links? This would be very useful for players looking to join a group and for groups looking to recruit players, especially zombie groups who lack the ability to spray-paint places without death-culting. Whilst the RN link is used by some, myself included, for recruitment, more likely than not the majority will simply not bother clicking it after the first few times they have done that on a profile have taken them to YouTube songs or Rick-rolls. A link under the group affiliation would draw more desirable attention.

There are two ways in which I could see this working: The first is to have the group affiliation act in the same way as the Real Life link, with the player choosing the URL; the second would be to have the GA act as the list of confirmed groups on the stats page does: An automatic link to the wiki page of said confirmed group. My personal belief is that the latter would be the superior option, so as to avoid abuse via unsavoury links which would undermine trust in the system (this is of course going under the assumption that you have a system which makes the links appear automatically on the stats page, rather than having to add them all in yourself of course).

Just my thought for the early morning.

Regards. --Papa Moloch 04:37, 4 August 2008 (BST)

Please make your suggestions here: Category:Current Suggestions. Seriously Moloch, you have been around long enough to know how suggestions are handled. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 04:40, 4 August 2008 (BST)

FWIW, my personal version of 'ActOnProfile' already modifies the group name to be a link to the wiki page for that group. Its pretty handy, even if just to find out the group has no page. A fancier GM script could easily determine if the page actually exists, and not make it a link if it doesn't, which would be nice. Server side code could likely do the same thing better.  Swiers 05:02, 4 August 2008 (BST)

Copyright question

after playing Urban dead I had an idea making it into a warcraft 3 map and before I release 1: may I release a map made by maps and the same idea of urban dead and with its name/s 2: are there any requires you want? for example I could advertise for the site every 5 mins(I can have the map do that for me)I have all ready given credit to Urban dead and if you want I can give direct credit to you also—The preceding Template:Wikipedia comment was added by Undeadpope (talk • contribs) 23:42, 6 August 2008.

l2english.--xoxo 11:34, 7 August 2008 (BST)

If it's clearly presented as an unofficial fan project, and isn't making any money, then I wouldn't have a problem with it. --Kevan 11:51, 7 August 2008 (BST)

IP hits and construction

If I repair a badly damaged building (15ap etc.) Is that one IP hit or 15? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 10:32, 9 August 2008 (BST)

It'd be one. it's a measure of how many times you refresh the map page not ap. The only exception (as far as i'm aware) is syringe manufacture which is 20.--xoxo 03:53, 10 August 2008 (BST)

I thought i was getting more than my regular action. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 11:32, 10 August 2008 (BST)

Monroeville and headshot

All the high level survivors I know (about 30) have been holding out for the return of perma-death headshot with the quarantine. I see the quarantine is back, but everything still says that headshot is not permanent. Is this the case? If you're not bringing it back then you might as well close down the server or at least tell us officially. Because as currently constituted only one side can win, and though we could probably prolong things indefinitely I fail to see the point. --Babe's Ghost 03:59, 17 August 2008 (BST)

I couldn't agree more with this post. Staying alive as a member of an organized group in Monroeville is possible but it takes a large amount of coordination and effort. I fail to see the "game" part of current Monroeville on the survivor side, something permanent headshot would bring to the table. If balance is an issue, I'm sure the zombie side would love to have non-curable Infectious Bite. --Calem 10:09, 17 August 2008 (BST)

The evidence of the most recent opening of Monroeville suggests that it takes about 6 weeks for the city to go from totally survivor-dominated to totally destroyed with the survivors on the run and hiding in the wreckage. Therefore, it seems to me that the most fun and interesting way to do it would be to run Monroeville in cycles. Every five to six weeks or so switch the rules to give one side or the other the advantage. So, having now had an extened Zombie Friendly period of time, you allow the Survivors to have their turn for a month and a half with closed borders and "permanent" (until the next cycle) headshot. Then re-open it to new admissions with the usual "Zombies stand back up" rules for a month and a half, then close it again and so on and so forth. That way, both sides always have something to look forward to and there's always something to plan for. Frankly, this solution still favors the Zombies somewhat in that a dead Survivor still never gets a chance to come back to life, but its significantly more fair than the current situation where Survivors can never repair a building for more than a couple of days before getting buried under a tide of zombies. While that may accurately reflect the desperate conditions of the later Dead movies and some of the supporting fiction, its not much fun to be a Survivor under these circumstances, and this is a game. --jng2058 12:54, 17 August 2008 (BST)

Agreed. Right now Monroeville is only a game of attrition with an inevitable (tedious) end. Maybe that's in keeping with Romero's cannon, but it puts survivors in an unwinnable position and leaves the zombies without enough challenge to stave off boredom. If the game's going to be left open, then since zombies are in the advantage right now (by 4:1) why not restore headshot and see what happens? CoopVancer 21:34, 17 August 2008 (BST)

Actually Coop- if you think about it- zombie take over isn't necessary canon in the zombie/post-apoc genre nor Romero canon, but merely an outcome of the core theme. What destroys the humans isn't the zombies, which are fairly weak, but their failure to overcome their individual self interest and cooperate. Restoring headshot would work now consistent with the canon. Headshot is something survivors learn with experience. At present, most of the survivors, don't have the XP to have headshot.

Yes, your reading is correct that perma-headshot isn't returning.--Kevan 16:59, 18 August 2008 (BST)

Headshot not returning means doom for us all

I am Federationtrooper, Kevan Mville is facing its last battles as zeds continue to kill the last of survivors. If we dont get headshot back we will all die, its are only hope to put one last fight agaisnt the zombie race. If you wont give back headshot then will you send sotmhing like airships to rescue us? --Federationtrooper

Jesus fucking Christ. You are aware that this is a game, yes? That it's a game that was only ever intended to be temporary? Kevan has presented his end game: Zombie apocalypse. Play for the challenge of staying alive for as long as you can. --Papa Moloch 20:14, 18 August 2008 (BST)

Sure, it's a game, kind of like heads I win, tails you lose is a game. The zeds always whine about game balance, even going so far as to go "on strike". Yet when the game is demonstrably out of balance as the 4-1 zed to survivor ratio shows, their position is "It's just a game." Typical zed hypocrisy. Barhah to you too.

While you are right to argue that it's Kevan's game and he gets to make up the rules, I and others invested time playing it in hopes that there would be a chance to win. Presumably, our looking at the ads helped fund it, so we have some right to comment and complain. If there's no chance to win, then there's no reason to play. I know that almost all of the high level survivors I played with thought it was much more fun and much more challenging than Malton. In fact, many people, myself included, let their Malton characters go idle and have said they won't go back.

I agree. My Malton characters idled out when the quarantine was lifted. I missed the first opportunity to Monroeville and have continued with this game because, in my opinion, its a better game. But when I entered, I believed that the quarantine would be reinstated as was promised, and so the survivors had a chance. Now the rules have changed. I understand that Kevin wants to end the game, but he should have been clearer about that when he reopened the quarantine. A lot of survivors are feeling let down. They have played well but with the belief that they had a chance, expecting the quarantine to be back since July. I think its quite understandable that they are disappointed and feel cheated or deceived. This sucks.--Larry 01:25, 19 August 2008 (BST)

You do realize that it was the headshot permakill thing that killed the game in the first place right? If he had never done that Monroeville wouldn't be shutting down now and would be considered a massive failure by a very very large part of the community. It killed the fun for anyone who actually wanted a challenge, which is what Monroeville originally was No-revive Malton.--Karek^maps?! 01:33, 19 August 2008 (BST)

Karek- What I like about Monroeville is that there is no revive and there are significant consequences for your actions. The survivors appreciate that. Those that remain play a very careful game where they are rabbits and zombies are wolves. For the rabbits its a game of hide, deception, avoidance and refuge. Fine, but that's not the game that most survivors signed up. New players entered this game with the expectation that eventually they would get a chance to take back the city, to hunt zombies, even if only a few survived. Now that's changed too. As for consequences for zombies? A headshot means you lose a few AP at most. So its a pretty shallow, one sided game. It would be better if the sides were even and both sides were hunting each other. Regardless, I think it would be better if Kevin returned the game to permanent quarantine based on what was expected when quarantine was lifted. --Larry 01:55, 19 August 2008 (BST)

No, actually, they didn't. When perma-headshot was added it was with the expectation that the city was never going to be reopened. It made most people idle out and quit. When it reopened and it was gone many zombie players stood up and many players unidled and/or made new characters. The problem with perma-headshot was it isn't even close to balanced, survivors can get 6 headshots a day or more, they don't have to deal with barricades, they can free run away, they store AP, etc., perma-headshot isn't giving both sides a chance to win it's giving survivors the victory even if they are outnumbered 10:1, and most people realized that when he did it. The few zombie players that stuck around ended up horribly frustrated, most of the survivor groups I know ended up pking and killing headshoters because it was ruining the game they signed up for, there was no challenge.--Karek^maps?! 02:00, 19 August 2008 (BST)

And now? There is no chance. You have survivors who quit because they don't see a point to this anymore and are horribly frustrated. Now we have a city where most of the players I see are low levels and many of the zombies have scent trail, so the survivors get hunted down and wiped out. There are resource buildings so long destroyed that they can't be repaired effectively and besides most of the survivors don't live long enough to get construction. Simple problem- survivors have always been at risk of getting killed, but now zombies can't. its just a matter of time before all the survivors are killed. So now? No balance at all. The only way for survivors to "win" is if zombies get bored of looking for them and quit. I think it safe to say that if you ask most players (survivors or zombies), they'd say that they were expecting permanent head shot to return when the quarantine came down. And that's the problem - Players expected one thing, and got another. --Larry 02:53, 19 August 2008 (BST)

Turning on headshot now would in no way unbalance the game. Last I looked there were about 230 humans (a number that will never increase, and has been dropping at about 5/hr since signups were turned off) against 1800 zeds, plus who knows how many idled-out zeds and dead bodies that could stand up at any point. By tomorrow the odds will probably be 10-to-1 against survivors. Even with perma-headshot, those humans are probably still doomed, but at least they'd have a *sliver* of a chance. And for zombies it would add some risk to a game which I imagine has gotten exceedingly stale and monotonous. The zombies can't really even claim the respect of victory here - they're basically just playing a game with god mode turned on. CoopVancer 03:15, 19 August 2008 (BST)

Letting it die out while allowing survivors a chance to learn something from the experience that could be put to use in malton is the best that can be hoped for. Turning on headshot again makes that impossible. Ignoring all of that, sure it would unbalance it, survivors can hide, they have ~10,000 squares to do it in. Do you know how much AP it takes to explore ~10,000 squares(minimum of 2 per square)? Add in barricades, decoys, FAKs, headshot, and darkness. No, survivors have a massive AP advantage here and it gets bigger the less of them there are. Run and hide, run and hide, run and hide and stop complaining, the less people there are the better your chances.--Karek^maps?! 04:46, 19 August 2008 (BST)

What's so hard to understand Karek? We (one of several grps of high lvls still standing in MV) have already done that for the past two months, run hide run hide. It's not that hard, just takes a lot of work and we're damn good at it now. We haven't had a single breach in, let alone a single zed scratch us. Can we keep doing this? Yes. Is it fun? Not anymore. How long do you want to keep doing it for? A month? A year? Ha. We're not really frustrated about HS not coming back, but as for there being no more "game" for survivors. It's a chore. We're trying to come up with something.--Calem 08:06, 19 August 2008 (BST)

2AP per square? Whoop de doo. There are 2000 zeds. That means in theory they could cover the 10,000 squares five times a day. Now I know that's not how it works, but the fact is any place you go you have a fair chance of being discovered that day. So you have to cade, which means repairing, which drains your AP, while the repaired building draws zeds like flies to shit. FAKs and headshots are drains on survivor AP, since there TRP's get checked so frequently. You want tedious, try searching a ruined building. In the end it will be a war of attrition to see who gets bored first. Wow, talk about an innovation in game design!--Babe's Ghost 17:21, 19 August 2008 (BST)

And your solution is stop people from playing the game at all? You can do better than that, and if you can't then you should probably leave. The game's not about winning, never has been, it's about getting along, it's about community, it's about working together, and it's about making your own fun not removing everyone else's.--Karek^maps?! 08:15, 19 August 2008 (BST)

:But players understand that they can be permanently killed when they join the game. The game is about surviving, not cooperating or community. Whether you survive through cooperation or by playing individuality is the player's choice that you pay a price for. That's why monroeville is better- like real life there are consequences which could include being killed off permanently by mistakes, being foolish or bad luck. But now players can't survive and zombies can't die. That's no balance. I can understand zombie players don't want to be killed off. Why can't you understand that for good survivors being killed by a zombie is the same result. No headshot means that there is no hope for survivors, no challenge for zombies. --Larry 16:31, 19 August 2008 (BST)

Personally, I would gladly pay $5 or even $10 for a character license to play in a big perma-death world like Monroeville. Charging would support the server, would let you re-roll a new character after one died, and would cut down on the zerging that's been going on by both sides. As a benny, speaking by both sides could be AP free, which would really enhance the immersiveness of the game. Even if the overall numbers were lower that would make it more interesting and post-apocalyptic.

My group and I could stay alive indefinitely. That much we've made clear. But I don't really see the point of spending all my AP running every day. But you sure as hell aren't getting my brains. I'd jump out of a window first. Because you haven't won. I just got sick of beating you. --Babe's Ghost 22:11, 18 August 2008 (BST)

TL;DR: BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAW! --Papa Moloch 00:21, 19 August 2008 (BST)

"You haven't won. I just got sick of beating you". Thanks for making me laugh most heartily, good sir Ghost. --Bob Fortune ^RR 00:27, 19 August 2008 (BST)

Nice to see you putting your debating skills to use Moloch. Proof that you have no argument.--Babe's Ghost 01:07, 19 August 2008 (BST)\

If you really could live indefinitely... then now is the chance to prove it, be one of the last people standing. Right now all we're seeing from you is a failure to face the challenge given to you by the game creator, and that deserves no argument. --Aeon17x 14:33, 19 August 2008 (BST)

"Failure to face the challenge" Sort of like when the zeds went on strike? Over a couple measly XP no less. Face it, zeds whine when there's a perceived imbalance, but when everything is tilted their way (currently almost 10:1) they're afraid of failure. I guess that's why you play a zed huh? Because you didn't want to risk losing? The fact zeds only support changes that favor them speaks volumes. --Babe's Ghost 17:21, 19 August 2008 (BST)

As Aeon. There's no need for a counter argument to what you're coming out with, because you're saying nothing of value. Monroeville was only ever going to be temporary, so either it was going to be a 'win' for one side or just an arbitrary shutdown of the city. Essentially you're whining about a game that was not meant to last not lasting and the fact that 'your' side wasn't chosen to 'win'. Indeed, the fact that you're menstruating over 'victory' shows you up as a colossal trenchcoater. Personally I couldn't give a crap about Monroeville and haven't played there in a couple of months, but the zombie side was similarly screwed to death in the gap between the cinematic and DVD release (months long), creating a survivor win. Now Kevan has reversed it and the zombies get their time on top, only this one is the final round for Monroeville. Ultimately, I just find the whining about it amusing, especially when idiots like you cite the zombie strike (which was a result of an imbalance in a lasting game that even Kevan recognised). --Papa Moloch 20:40, 19 August 2008 (BST)

Whats going on here? Is Kevan shutting down malton? (at least I think thats what the original city was called, its been too long since I played) The man 13:57, 19 August 2008 (BST)

Talking about fun and interest to play and initiative to keep playing... I'ld like to share my opinion too. I enjoyed the video diaries contest much more than any "killing" of species "x" while being species "y" (that's what a game is about for you, people?). I didn't enjoy headshot=permakill phase except the killing out idle survivors bloodnights and radio chatter along that (hey, i kept my own farm of idlees to stab daily!). After quarantine was lifted i enjoyed travelling around. After a zombie ate me i didn't got frustrated, but enjoyed being part of the horde to crack up human fortresses instead. Now i enjoy shambling in ruins looking for food. With darkness and very sparse zombie presense feeding groan isn't of much use and humans can basically get away mostly with a scratch and in lucky case infection. I would still enjoy if headshot = perma would be brought back along with faks not curing infection. Funny enough, i don't really care, the game is not a mmorpg, that you waste 8 hours per day for and demand satisfaction, and never was. I know though, that masses care, so Kevan should definitely add a MacGuffin. Tweaking skills effects is not a MacGuffin. --~~~~ [talk] 18:31, 19 August 2008 (BST)

Will there be any type of reward for x number of survivors remaining?

I'm just going to say the only reason to ask this is because what the point of trying to survive if the hoard of zombies will eventually take over all? All i want to know is there anything that actually would give hope to the survivors?

Yeah, it would be nice if the last 100 survivors were transported to Malton with text like "NAME survived the second Monroeville quarantine." or "NAME was one of the last 100 to die in Monroeville." on their profile page. --BetterLuck 23:23, 18 August 2008 (BST)

I hope something happens that's good at least for survivors, now they outnumber us way too much now--Kazypoo1 15:44, 19 August 2008 (BST)