Developing Suggestions: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 16:00, 25 August 2008

Suggestion Navigation

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 page is for presenting and discussing suggestions which have not yet been submitted and are still being worked on.

Further Discussion

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

Nothing on this page will be archived.

Please Read Before Posting

Be sure to check The Frequently Suggested List and the Suggestions Dos and Do Nots before you post your idea. There you can read about many idea's that have been suggested already, which users should be aware of before posting what could be a dupe, or a duplicate of an existing suggestion. These include Machine Guns and Sniper Rifles There users can also get a handle of what an appropriate suggestion looks like.
Users should be aware that this is a talk page, where other users are free to use their own point of view, and are not required to be neutral. While voting is based off of the merit of the suggestion, opinions are freely allowed here.
It is recommended that users spend some time familiarizing themselves with this page before posting their own suggestions.

How To Make a Suggestion

Format for Suggestions under development

Please use this template for discussion. Copy all the code in the box below, click [edit] to the right of the header "Suggestions", paste the copied text above the other suggestions, and replace the text shown here in red with the details of your suggestion.

===Suggestion===
{{suggestionNew
|suggest_time=~~~~
|suggest_type=Skill, balance change, improvement, etc.
|suggest_scope=Who or what it applies to.
|suggest_description=Full description. Check spelling and be descriptive.
|discussion=|}}
====Discussion (Suggestion Name)====
----

Cycling Suggestions

Developing suggestions that appear to have been abandoned (i.e. two days or longer without any new edits) will be given a warning for deletion. If there are no new edits it will be deleted seven days following the last edit.

This page is prone to breaking when there are too many templates or the page is too long, so sometimes a suggestion still under strong discussion will be moved to the Overflow-page, where the discussion can continue between interested parties.

If you are adding a comment to a suggestion that has the deletion warning template please remove the {{SNRV|X}} at the top of the discussion section. This will show that there is active conversation again.

Please add new suggestions to the top of the list.

Suggestions

Bandoleer

Timestamp:	Kamikazie-Bunny 13:13, 25 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Humorous Items
Scope:	Trenchies!
Description:	The Bandoleer (Bandolier to you Americans) is the ultimate trenchie must have fashion accessory this season! Location: Forts 2% Encumbrance: 16% Ammo Capacity: 16 shotgun shells Purpose: None (arguably inventory management) Features: Up to 16 shotgun shells can be placed in a bandoleer, shells in a bandoleer have 1% encumbrance. When a trenchie has a bandoleer clicking on a shell loads it into a shotgun, if no guns are available then it is loaded into a bandoleer. Clicking on the bandoleer removes one shell from the bandoleer and places it in a shotgun, if no guns are available then the shell is loaded into a bandoleer. Notes: In the event that someone is incapable of the basic maths (I'm looking at you trenchies!) 16% encumbrance + (16 shotgun shells at 1%) = 32% encumbrance. 16 shotgun shells at 2% encumbrance = 32% encumbrance. Bandoleers are always found empty, previous trencie raiders emptied them of their contents before they engaged their brains!

Discussion (Bandoleer)

"Purpose: None" Do I really have to say anything else? --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 13:45, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Also, ammunition doesn't weigh anything when they're loaded in a firearm. Shotguns are 6% both empty and fully loaded, pistols 4% likewise. Making them weigh something when they're in the bandoleer is inconsistent. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 13:49, 25 August 2008 (BST)

I could give it 24% encumbrance and drop the shell weight if you want it serious and with a purpose (allowing you to carry 33.3% more ammo) but then I'm sure people would scream "TRENCHCOATER!" and it wouldn't be so humorous... --Kamikazie-Bunny 13:54, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Jokes about Trenchcoaters are edgy and cool./sarcasm --Nitro378^{T JNL} 15:06, 25 August 2008 (BST)

It comes from the Freedom "bandoulière," so American spelling is always better. -- Galaxy125 16:40, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Doors on the outside

Timestamp:	User:Whitehouse 12:23, 25 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Building change.
Scope:	All buildings in the city, everyone.
Description:	Currently it would seem that barricades are constructed on the outside of the buildings. This is evident because barricades are destroyed first, then the doors can be opened once the barricades are gone. This suggestion simply proposes to make it so that the barricades are on the inside and can only be attacked after the doors have been opened. This change would have to be accompanied by "open door" button being added to the zombie interface for those who have memories of life. Another thing that would change with this is that doors are no longer automatically closed upon the addition of a barricade level, it is an action that must be done first, or else the cades are open to attack from newbies. Pros: Easier to spot which buildings newbie zombie will be able to successfully attack and enter. Higher level zombies can move around suburbs opening the doors of all buildings making them "attackable" for lower level zombies. Makes sense, although that might not be a pro if it comes in the way of game mechanics. Cons: AP cost for attacking buildings and entering goes up by one AP, because the action of opening the door is no longer automatic upon entering, but an action taken previously. Newbie feral zombies can't help an uncoordinated attack on a building with doors untill someone opens the doors (a horde of newbies would be at a disadvantage, but they are today too unless someone has memories of life). AP cost for barricaders is up by one AP, because they have to secure the doors to be safe from newbie attacks (no longer automated). Not sure if this is pro or con considering barricade to deconstruction rate. I checked Peer Reviewed and had a quick search but didn't find any similar ones, anyone know of any dupes? If not, is this suggestion a possibility or should I just toss it out? Criticism please. User:Whitehouse 12:23, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Discussion (Doors on the outside)

"Currently it would seem that barricades are constructed on the outside of the buildings. This is evident because barricades are destroyed first, then the doors can be opened once the barricades are gone." - Actually, all the in-game text points to the fact that barricades are constructed on the inside... But that actually does point out a logical inconsistency, because they why ARE doors the last thing to open? Unless you assume, as I often do, that you're not just dealing with outer walls and one room... Instead, think of all the zombie movies where the survivors are getting overwhelmed and move further back inside, closing doors behind them...
"Newbie feral zombies can't help an uncoordinated attack on a building with doors untill someone opens the doors" -- This is unfortunately simply horrible. Sure, newbies can't get past doors atm, but they can tear down cades and wait around for someone to notice and go inside... In any event they can still contribute to "the cause"... With this change, you's take all that away... it's a HUGE newbie nerf, ultimately.

Nice try... and the whole doors mechanic is messed up, IMO, all round... But I don't think this is the way to fix it. --WanYao 12:44, 25 August 2008 (BST)

While I do agree that at first this might seem extremely cruel to newbies, it also does point out to them where they should and should not attack. A building without doors (churches, junkyards) are good choices, because newbies normally can't get the cades down in the first place and once they do the doors are always waiting. And we know that levelling on cade destruction takes too long anyway. So if you think about it, survivors going outside to close the doors is highly unlikely, meaning that once the doors have been opened they'd be likely to stay open longer anyway. But I see your point about the benefit to the overall cause. Also, interesting point about outer walls and inner doors, never thought of that. - User:Whitehouse 12:55, 25 August 2008 (BST)

So, you couldn't close doors from the inside after the building has been barricaded? That would probably result in most EHB buildings having open doors, because closing them would be a lot of work. More than the 3 AP to close doors on a VSB building (exit, close, enter). I think I like this. Would the status of doors be visible inside? There would be the barricades in front so you couldn't see them properly... --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 13:06, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Yes, the idea was that you couldn't tell if the doors were open or not from the inside (thus resulting in a cost to check and fix it if they were open), but from the outside it would be made very clear. Although it seems that I missed a few things when I began to think about this suggestions.. now I don't know if you would be able to see barricade level. That would require glass doors.. and that would be a huge problem. - User:Whitehouse 13:09, 25 August 2008 (BST)

No More Piñatas

Timestamp:	Aeon17x 04:09, 25 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Mechanics change
Scope:	Everyone
Description:	You know, I just realized that the whole concept of buildings turning into piñatas doesn't make sense when you consider how ruin works in the first place. Think about it. When you ransack a building, the lockers get punched, the desks get overturned, and the whole place is ruined. But wait! What exactly did you destroy when you ransack the building? The lockers. The desks. These are the exact same stuff you use to build barricades, and they are the ones that are explicitly wiped out when a zombie ruins a building. So I propose something. Whenever a building block is ruined, then all the barricades it had before will instantly fall down to nothing and the building is reverted to secured door status.

Discussion (No More Piñatas)

Makes no sense. They are damaged, not destroyed. Thats why they can be fixed. The other two problems with your suggestion is that first, barricades are needed before the building is ruined, so they were already built. Second, is the fact that even damaged stuff ca provide an effective barricade. Dont belive me, go to a junkyard and try to walk through a garbage mound. Leave pinatas alone. They are not common, and dont take much time to disable and repair. After all, you only need to get them down to VSB before you can walk in and fix it. Boo hoo, it costs you 20ap or so, who cares. Across the city that will be given to maybe one person a day. Given the thousands and thousands of spare people, it doesnt hurt. So stop whining and see that it isnt a problem, and is actually a really interesting method of resource denial. To prevent pinatas, try not to leave zombies inside a barricaded building. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 04:57, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Unfortunately the people with the task of spending that 20ap are the same ones who don't have the spare ap because they spent it repairing buildings for 80ap+. All these little pro-zombie things work fine because if you divide the cost by the 20000 survivors out there they are nothing, when however you look at it in terms of the few people who actually bother doing anything rather than shooting zombies outside it becomes apparent that actually pinatas do cause problems. I like 'em coz they've got character but don't just write it off as 'its .0000001ap a day each', coz its not.--x o x o 06:59, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Dont belive me, go to a junkyard and try to walk through a garbage mound. >> I know someone who tried this before, it wasn't a pleasant experience... (nail went through safety boot, ow). Anyway, I guess I agree with you on leaving piñatas as it is when you said it's a method of resource denial. --Aeon17x 11:37, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Dupe. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 11:39, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Why one earth is everyone trying to nerf pinatas? [...] Couple of points re: pinatas

They are actually quite hard to actually pull off in practice. They almost always require 2 or usually more people to coordinate closely.
At most you're dealing with maybe 10 barricade levels to get a pinata down from EHB++ to VSB++ ... Meaning it's not that bad.

This anti-pinata trend is just survivors whinging -- and trying to nerf some small but sometimes useful zombie tactic/mechanic -- because they can't do everything all on their oddy knockies. Again. And people wonder why the "trenchcoater" label keeps getting tossed around... --WanYao 11:42, 25 August 2008 (BST)

STOP WITH THE ANTI-PINIATA SUGGESTIONS!!! As a survivor I like piniata's it allows for some good roleplaying such as the last survivor barricaded himself inside starved to death for fear of facing the zombies and is now looking for a different kind of meal! My only problem with them was when I was trying to repair a ruined building, spent most of my AP getting in, killed the zombie, dumped, repaired the building and had major -AP so that when I finally could do something the zombie had rose, broke in, killed me and re-ruined the building! Apart from that they're fun in a bun. --Kamikazie-Bunny 12:15, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Nurse

Timestamp:	Blake Firedancer ^{T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T.} 02:41, 25 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Skill
Scope:	Survivors
Description:	Adds a new Medical skill: Nurse Training. If you are inside a powered hospital, you can spend 5AP to heal someone without having to put everything into a FAK first. Heals survivors for exactly the same amount as a FAK would. Pros: No need to search for a FAK. New medical skill (Honestly, only 3?) Possible starting skill (new subclass: Nurse) People with 100% encumberance can still heal people. Cons: Can only be used in powered hospitals Might cost more AP than searching/using a FAK.

Discussion (Nurse)

In a powered hospital you're better off searching for FAKs than using something like this --Diablor 03:13, 25 August 2008 (BST)

That's pretty big buff your suggesting, even with a 5 AP cost. How does this work with Surgery? If it doesn't it nerfs surgery. If it doesn't its way overpowered with 5 AP to heal 15 HP. Maybe if you didn't get XP for the heal. However, with or without Surgery, hospitals will become perma-zerg heal stations where one level 1 zerge (ESPECIALLY if you try to suggest the "nurse" class idea above) can full heal another player (and XP would be meaningless to a zerge-healer).--Pesatyel 03:44, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Oh, right. I'd forgotten the zerging aspects of having it as a class. If I suggest this, that'll get cut out.

Just out of curiosity, how many AP's worth of searches on average does it take to find a FAK in a powered hospital? --Blake Firedancer ^{T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T.} 06:10, 25 August 2008 (BST)

About 5.3 AP to be precise, and you can find the information on that right here. --Ottari^{DA PDA NW} Read the Dispatch! 06:19, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Well, then 6AP for the skill sounds about right. This means that about half the time you'll be spending more than if you search for a FAK, the other half you'll spend less. --Blake Firedancer ^{T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T.} 10:51, 25 August 2008 (BST)

I'd say have it for 5AP and only heals 5HP, that way it's more effective before you buy First Aid/Surgery but once you have them it's only worth using if you need a guaranteed heal and can't spare the AP to search. How does this work with infection? If it doesn't cure infection you might be able to up the HP to 10(with firstaid). --Kamikazie-Bunny 12:04, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Doesn't jump out at me as a great idea as i don't really see a point for it. On the other hand it's not a bad idea but to avoid the zerging issues you should get rid of the class and make it a subskill of something. Maybe rename it and make it a sub or surgery? Whatever just so it costs a few hundred xp to end up with it.--x o x o 11:09, 25 August 2008 (BST)

You people really need me here. You know that?? I mean who else is going to dish out these? ....

	Mighty Bullshit Wand
	This user or group supports the use of the magical bullshit wand to educate users with bad suggestions.

"If you are inside a powered hospital, you can spend 5AP to heal someone without having to put everything into a FAK first. Heals survivors for exactly the same amount as a FAK would." .... wtf CENTAURS???

This is a bloody awful idea. It's insanely overpowered AND it doesn't make any sense. If anyone could perform centaurian magical healing spells like this, it's be a trained surgeon or doctor -- not a nurse. It also goes against the whole idea that survivors generally need to have tools and equipment to do stuff. Like shooties or healies or pokeseys. Blake, why do you keep coming up with these ridiculous ideas that completely violate all concepts of game-balance and all the most obvious game-mechanic assumptions??? Stop waste everyone's time with this crap, and start playing the game and learning how it actually works, and get better at it. Then -- maybe -- you'll see something that actually needs doing, and figure out a way of doing it that isn't utterly spam-o-fucking-liciously broken. --WanYao 14:51, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Allow me to translate from the WanYaoian. "I don't think this would pass, but it stands a better chance of passing if it wasn't named 'Nurse.' Also, survivors typically need equipment, so you should justify why this should be an exception." Myself, I think it could be called 'Triage' (not to be confused with [PR_Skill_New:_Survivor:_Science#Triage_.28Drop-Down_Wounded.29|this]), and would require a certain maximum HP on the target (like, you can't heal someone past 30 HP), and wouldn't cure infections. -- Galaxy125 17:00, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Pinata Decay

Timestamp:	Swiers 02:25, 25 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	adjustment
Scope:	barricaded ruins
Description:	The barricade level on any ruin would drop by 1 per day. This prevents pinatas from being a long-term problem (while leaving them a viable short term nuisance) and also rewards zombies from holding onto malls for a log time by getting rid of 'cades on the 3 "non-entry" corners for free. Ruin descriptonas already seem t imply things fall down over time; it make sense this would apply to barricades.

Discussion (Pinata Decay)

Any pinata nerf I'm good with and Swiers tends to make sense --Diablor 02:30, 25 August 2008 (BST)

I'd support it, I'm tired of having to look around for a ruined mall entrance as a zombie. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 02:56, 25 August 2008 (BST).

I disagree with an automatic level drop. What about, instead, zombies just get a bonus to hit?--Pesatyel 03:46, 25 August 2008 (BST)

I think this is more to aid survivors dealing with pinata's, and although I like the susgestion, I would rather see a larger time period then one level per-day. Seems like it'ed make it a bit too easy to take back the suburbs long behind zombie territory, as starting from inside a green suburb supplying without AP wasted on conflict, it'ed already be well on its way by the time you arrived, considering the current system. It would however help those on site a bit better.--G-Man 06:12, 25 August 2008 (BST)

I could go for a bonus to hit, or maybe better, all hits destroy two levels. And that would be ALL hits, both from survivors (lessing the impact of pinatas) and zombies (making emptied malls easier to clean up).
I don't see how the decay of 'cades would make re-taking zombie held burbs easier. Its not pinatas that stop survivors from moving in and setting up camp in Riddleybank...

Swiers 06:44, 25 August 2008 (BST)

A good idea. Don't like the bonus hit thing, it benefits all the good guys and doesn't screw over anyone. Balanced and good. Another quality Swiers suggestion.--x o x o 07:02, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Swiers = Suggestion gold.--Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 09:48, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Why one earth is everyone trying to nerf pinatas? Even you sweirs?!?!? The end truly is nigh... Couple of points re: pinatas

They are actually quite hard to actually pull off in practice. They almost always require 2 or usually more people to coordinate closely.
At most you're dealing with maybe 10 barricade levels to get a pinata down from EHB++ to VSB++ ... Meaning it's not that bad.

This anti-pinata trend is just survivors whinging -- and trying to nerf some small but sometimes useful zombie tactic/mechanic -- because they can't do everything all on their oddy knockies. Again. And people wonder why the "trenchcoater" label keeps getting tossed around... --WanYao 11:40, 25 August 2008 (BST)

For a maxed survivor it takes an average of 50 AP to take down 10 levels of barricades. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 11:55, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Just to clarify, that doesn't mean I want Piñatas removed. The 50AP can easily be spread over several days and it cannot be increased by anyone in the meantime. Just saying that it's not a small cost to fix them. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 12:08, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Personally I don't find Pinatas to be that great. Funny little prank and that is about it. Now, seeing as barricades are oddly enough on the outside of buildings (doors are the last to fall..) it makes sense that they are supported by the walls, and that when the walls begin falling and crumbling that the barricades would suffer too. Either instability (extra levels falling per successful attack) or simple decay (levels falling over time). - User:Whitehouse 11:59, 25 August 2008 (BST)

The only good and realistic anti-piniata suggestion... It makes sense that as a building collapses the things on the outside (the barricades fall of). --Kamikazie-Bunny 12:19, 25 August 2008 (BST)

I don't like the message this gives to survivors. The message being "waiting is good". Every day you wait, the average cost to fix a piñata would drop by 4 AP (5AP saved per barricade-level dropped, 1AP increse in ruin-repair). This makes fixing piñatas now instead of later a bad tactic. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 12:43, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Ruin Change

Timestamp:	--Diablor 01:56, 25 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Change
Scope:	Ruins
Description:	I find it a bit illogical that an extremely barricaded building could be ruined as it is, extremely barricaded. What I propose is a compromise. Instead of allowing EHB pinatas I suggest we limit the barricading level of a ruin to be vs++. Simple as that, no more ruined buildings above VS++. I'm suggesting this in light of me just realizing how much pinatas are greifable. What if a bunch of zombies came in, got revived, and turned every building with no population or a small population, into a pinata in a survivor suburb? This provides some countermeasure to that kind of griefing (Not to mention pkers could do it as well)

Discussion Ruin Change

Spoken like a true Trenchcoater. Griefing? Pinatas are no more 'griefing' that barricade strafing is. Imagine if a survivor group organised and repaired and barricaded Ridleybank, then left? The zombies wouldn't be able to get into the buildings, and when they did - there'd be no survivors there to eat. Ye gods! The griefing! --Bob Fortune ^RR 02:02, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Wtf is with this trenchcoater attitude everyone brands everyone with? Barricade strafing is an annoying tactic I must say but that's not what this suggestion is about. Pinatas need to be nerfed somewhat. Again wtf does this have to do with trenchcoating? --Diablor 02:29, 25 August 2008 (BST)

It is apparently the new attack/buzzword of the wiki. Any and all survivor oriented suggestions are automatic trenchy suggestions, whether the are (or they suck) or not. As for this suggestion, I don't think its going to solve the problem.--Pesatyel 03:52, 25 August 2008 (BST)

"The new attack/buzzword of the wiki"? No. Check the edit history on the Trenchcoater page. It goes back to mid-2006. Take time to read the page for yourself. It's both amusing and informative. While this pinata nerf may not be as explicitly trenchie as a sniper rifle or katana suggestion, it is still a reflection of a trenchcoater mentality. There's the assumption that a legitimate tactic used by zombies or PKers is griefing, or overpowered. --Bob Fortune ^RR 11:56, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Why one earth is everyone trying to nerf pinatas? Couple of points re: pinatas

They are actually quite hard to actually pull off in practice. They almost always require 2 or usually more people to coordinate closely.
At most you're dealing with maybe 10 barricade levels to get a pinata down from EHB++ to VSB++ ... Meaning it's not that bad.

This anti-pinata trend is just survivors whinging -- and trying to nerf some small but sometimes useful zombie tactic/mechanic -- because they can't do everything all on their oddy knockies. Again. And people wonder why the "trenchcoater" label keeps getting tossed around... --WanYao 11:43, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Defeats the whole purpose of Piñatas, which is to deny access to the building. Hell no. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 11:59, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Computers

Timestamp:	Nequa(Link:http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/User:Nequa) 5:01 (central time), 24 August 2008
Type:	improvement.
Scope:	Humans.
Description:	As most people know. When you enter a NT building you can acess the necro net if you have the right skills. So why not have regular computers? I belive having a computer would be great. People would be able to send emails to other buildings across Malton. Another possibilty would be the ability to store info (EX: in police stations the Malton Police deparment can have a computer and allow people to see a in game rogues gallery and check for Pkers in the area). Computers could also have security so only people with a password can enter, that or you have the hacker ability which allows you the chance to hack the computer. To balance things out, computers would need power (obivous one), a internet connection for emails, they can be destroyed, they could have a viruse and thats all I can think of right now. If you have any sujestions on how to improve this idea, you know were to put them.

Discussion (Computers)

Explain to me exactly how a city under military quarantine, sparsely powered by Portable Generators, and under constant attack from Zombies, has city-wide internet access? What's more, You haven't told us what problem in the game your suggestion solves, or why it needs to be done. This is a zombie apocalypse, not a quaint modern city with a small problem with the undead. This suggestion is just never going to pass in any way shape or form. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 23:30, 24 August 2008 (BST)

I'd vote keep, assumig you could also play World of World of Warcraft. Swiers 23:38, 24 August 2008 (BST)

I dont know, explain to me why the necronet works? Any way you only need the internet to email people. You can still store stuff on computers without the internet. User:Nequa/Sig 5:53 (central time), 24 2008

How would the password be set? Could the hacker change the password? What skill tree would the hacker be under? How would zombies disable this? If disabled how would one repair it? Would there always be computers or would you have to set them up? If so, where could you find computers? How much ap would it cost to use them? Questions like these you must answer fairly quickly before you get spaminated. But as for your suggestion it's a possible dupe, however I do like the idea of computers. --Diablor 01:30, 25 August 2008 (BST)

I think this is a fine idea but like Diablor said you need to flesh it out some. My main question is; what is the hacking for, is it like radio operation and is required to use the computer or what?--Ninja13 03:12, 25 August 2008 (BST)

No, its for bypassing the security. My idea alows you to have security so no spies can see what you have in ther TO easly. User:Nequa/Sig 9:23 (central time), 24 2008

Necronet, I believe, is a hardened mainframe computer inside the necronet buildings. From what I can read of your suggestion, this is merely another, uncessary, form of communication. Granted it IS ingame communication, survivors already have enough to not need this overlycomplicated way of doing it.

And, lastly, if your going to sign your posts, just add ~~~~ at the end.--Pesatyel 03:58, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Tracking

Timestamp:	Kamikazie-Bunny 20:31, 24 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	More things to do!
Scope:	Scientists/Zombies
Description:	A recent software update by Necrotech has enhanced the NecroNet to enable tracking of tagged zombies. (Ingame justification) As every good scientist knows the NecroNet is very handy for tracking the local zombie presence. This update now allows Scientists with NecroNet Access to attempt to locate known tagged zombies... In addition to the current actions in NT buildings a new button labelled 'Locate' next to a drop down list of the users contacts is added. When the user selects a contact and clicks Locate a response is generated with either of the following response: "Error: Target not found. Subject may be out of range/untagged. "Target located at (xx,yy) - (location name) - (suburb)" In order for a contact to be located it must be dead, tagged and in range of the NecroNet (that means within the 9x9 grid of a powered NT building).

Discussion (Tracking)

I'd like to point uot some huge problem with it, but (aside from dubious flavor logic) I don't see any. At worst it maybe allows PKers to be located a little to easily (when dead.) If anything, that might encourage them to hang out in the NT dead zones as zombies. Nice tactical challenge.
Of course, there's always the griefer angle. Somebody could use this to track down your character every time you were waiting for a revive (especially if you were in a group that never left a certain area) and kill you as a zombie before you could get revived. Ugh. Swiers 23:46, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Yeah, Seems pretty Grieftacular... Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 00:09, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Not so much so I don't think it shouldn't pass. --Diablor 01:33, 25 August 2008 (BST)

It makes since to me as I never quite understood the point of DNA extraction in an of itself. Question I have is what are the chance of success?--Pesatyel 04:01, 25 August 2008 (BST)

You don't understand the point of DNA extraction, WTF??? Are you for real????!

Why oh why didn't I just stay away from this page? like i said i would......... --WanYao 11:45, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Wan... was WTF for me/idea or Pesatyel? Either way don't suppose you have any improvements to suggest. Damn EdConflicts! --Kamikazie-Bunny 11:55, 25 August 2008 (BST)

I was thinking of a guaranteed success and 1AP cost, all it does is provide a location which a scientists still has to spend AP getting to and even then there's no guarantee the target has not moved on.
As for the grief aspect... as far as I'm aware you become untagged the moment you drop below 1HP (death is such an inappropriate word for a zombie) so griefers would still have to seek out their targets to tag them or hope that someone else does it for them, but please correct me if I'm wrong. --Kamikazie-Bunny 11:51, 25 August 2008 (BST) Huh, I cant really see any problems with it. Sounds like a pretty cool feature. --Nitro378^{T JNL} 12:05, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Sewers

Timestamp:	Nequa(Link:http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/User:Nequa) 9:31 (central time), 24 August 2008
Type:	New way to get around.
Scope:	Zombie, and Humans.
Description:	What happend to Maltons sewers? They did not dissapear. I am wondering if it would be a good idea to be able to have sewers for Malton. Humans and Zombies can use it to escape the streets and use it for escapes or attacks where teh enemy is weak. Here is a chart I came up with. 1. Humans would need ether a new skill (sewer training) or a new iteam (gas mask). That is becase there are alot of dangerous gasses in the sewers and you have to be smart to live. Since zombies dont breath they dont need anything to go down there, but I think they should have a movment penalty to balance things out. 2. If you shoot of a gun you have the possibilty to set of a explosion. Those sewer gasses are deadly. Just use knifes and other hand weapons. 3. To get inside the sewers you need to open a man hole cover which would cost 1 or 2 AP. Also I am wondereing if zombies would be smart enough to open a man hole cover so I will need to hear some input on that. 4. Searching for iteams. I really have no idea what you could find in the sewer, but maybe you would be able to find everything undear there but the likly hood of it is not so good. I am open to suggestions so if you have any idea go right ahead.

Discussion (Sewers)

It's been suggested before. Not only has it (I believe) been voted down, but it violates Hiding of the Frequently Suggested Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 15:59, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Yea it's been voted down but it doesn't really violate hiding as it's just another level of area. --Diablor 19:44, 24 August 2008 (BST)

If you shoot of a gun, theres a chance of an explosions? survivors would need a skill and a gas mask to get down there? methane would explode if there was enough of it there, and there was an open flame or a decent spark but not from a gun shot. why would peopl need a skill to get down there? its a sewer, you open the hole and climb down. a gas mask? excessive much. it'll stink, but you could still breath. those are the main things that dont work about the suggestion itself, besides the fact that its a dupe.--Themonkeyman11 21:05, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Sorry my friend, but your wrong. here is a incerp of what I found.

Sewers are among the most dangerous locations to explore owing to extremely high risks of poisoning by build up of toxic gases naturally found in all sewers (commonly methane and hydrogen sulfide). There have been large numbers of fatalities from around the world through being overcome by toxic gases from sewers and the only safe way to enter a sewer is if the atmosphere has been tested by a working monitoring device and other confined space entry procedures followed.

Also, I meant a skill OR a gas Mask, NOT both.--Nequa, 4:58 central time, 24th August 2008.

Clear!

Timestamp:	Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 14:31, 24 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Faintly Ridiculous Item.
Scope:	People.
Description:	Right. Its a defibrillator. Encumbrance 8% Found only in powered hospitals, replacing newspapers in the search rates. Can only be used by people with diagnosis. (Doctors know how they work) Relies on hand to hand accuracy. Does 5 damage regardless of flak (not designed to stop electrocution) Same chance of running out after each use as spray can, at which point automatically discarded.

Discussion (Clear!)

Defibrillators are incredibly bulky, and most have to be pushed around on carts or in ambulances. 8% doesn't do this justice. What's more, 5 damage doesn't really seem like it'd be all that worth it (especially if you increase the incumberance). Up the encumbrance to around 30%, the damage to 10 and add a max accuracy rate of 40% with HTH (only loses a charge when it hits of course) and I'm sold. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 16:08, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Yeah, kind of made the figures up entirely. Also, has no effects on barricades or decorations. As for radios and gennies, Im sure I can think of something crazy. --Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 17:15, 24 August 2008 (BST)

i like it, but what exactly are you aiming the defibrilator to do? being used as a ombat weapon? i was think more along the lines of medical things, as an alternative to using a syringe but the dead body can only be 2 hours old at the most, or it can be used to revivify dead bodies on a fixed success rate. its a good idea, and yes it would be reusable, unlike a syringe. i really like the idea, add a little more to it! 13:15 24 August 2008 (EST)

Too difficult to implement. What if they stand up after one minute?, it would also be ridiculously cheap compared to the cost of revives. --Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 18:20, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Techerizer is wrong about defibs being bulky. The old school ones are, but modern portable ones are about the size of a 12 pack of soda cans. Unfortunately, they also are designed in such a way that they need to be held against the skin long enoughto monitor the heartbeat, and then will only trigger if the heartbeat is abnormal, in order to prevent accidental triggering on people who show the symptoms of cardiac arrest, but have some other problem. Of course, that means they might work OK against zombies....
But as the suggesstor says, this is largely rediculous, and mostly makes sense as a homage to the recent Romero film. I'd expect to see glass jars of acid (1 shot weapon, HTH / melee skill, 10 points damage, no flak) as well, if this were deployed. Swiers 19:55, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Perhaps a defib could be used to bring a corpse (read: killed survivor, not killed zombie or revivifying zombie) back for just long enough to FAK 'em? --Blake Firedancer ^{T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T.} 02:41, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Free Speech

Timestamp:	--G-Man 06:06, 24 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Pro-Survivor
Scope:	Those who want to chat ingame.
Description:	Suggestions to have speech free before have been mentioned, and this is not quite one of them. For 3AP you can send an invite to another survivor in the same building to chat, they can accept for one. Declining is as simple as doing any other action, no IP hit required. The invite box will be added beside your normal speechbox and will include a drop-down menu listing the 50 closest names of other people in the building. If the other person accepts then as long as you or the other person does not leave the building, a speech box will replace the invite drop-box, with the drop-down menu only saying the other persons name, and "end conversation". Any speech put in this box will not cost any AP, but will only be heard by the person you are chatting with. Only one person can be invited to a conversation at a time, and the conversation must ethier be ended, or you/other person must leave the building to start a new one.

Discussion (Free Speech)

Yeah, not the clearest, but im tired at the moment.--G-Man 06:04, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Not one that I could vote Keep for. Survivors already have a gigantic in-game communication advantage and this would make that even more powerful. --Papa Moloch

Limiting chat to one person, and costing 3AP already cuts down on any massive damage, and would only truly aid people who like to bicker back and forth, as it'ed cost less to ask for help, request people to join a group, inform of Pkers or inform of zombies. Unless you felt informing one person by spending 3AP to send one message that requires time spent in the building is a good tactical desicison?--G-Man 12:46, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Isn't that what metagaming is for? You only get so much "game time" and can, probably more easily, just use a "normal" chat program for that. Also, look for past suggestins like whispering.--Pesatyel 08:06, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Using outside chat programs, tools etc. shoulden't be encouraged if it can be done ingame without "wasteing" (loose term, as it changes from p2p) too much AP. As well what would chat programs do for RP? As for past susgestions, would've looked but didn't have time yesterday.--G-Man 12:47, 24 August 2008 (BST)

so we have:

this - Different Speech Types
this - Whisper
thia - Free speech idea (FINAL version)

so far, although, except for whisper (not actually "there") They are different so far, and i've got to go. I'll continue looking later.--G-Man 13:00, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Since most people do not spend much time being logged in, this would be mostly useless. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 14:27, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Don't find new ways to do old things Suggestions Dos and Do Nots. Why would someone pay 3 AP when they can IRC for free? Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 16:02, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Because for some users, IRC programs are not user friendly. An online browser based text game shouldn't assume that all its users own and know how to use IRC. And for the record, this is a huge survivor buff, and shouldn't be passed. Whispering to someone is the only viable one.--CyberRead240 16:05, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Wtf is with people always saying "this is a huge survivor buff" to something as small as this. How is this a huge (As in OMG GAME BREAKING NOOB) survivor buff? --Diablor 19:50, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Whilst I do agree with this being a huge survivor buff with regards to unlimited chat for 3AP it is by no means game breaking... If all players human AND zombies only communicated via in game systems then it would be game breaking but as many players know quite a lot of people don't because of IRC and forums and such... however I feel Gs' on the right idea of making in game communication a more viable option. I would be in favour of a basic shoutbox somewhere on the screen that enables ALL players to communicate no matter where for free as it would help newbies and role-players alike. This thing however is too complex. --Kamikazie-Bunny 22:33, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Face Rot

Timestamp:	Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 15:21, 23 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Zombie Skill, subskill of brain rot.
Scope:	Zombies with Brain Rot.
Description:	The rot has spread, now it shrivels and distorts the facial features. The person underneath is hard to recognise. In game terms, its a buff for zombie anonymity. Unless the zombie is in your contacts you cannot recognise him if. He stands up Destroys barricades/equipment Kills or injures. His profile can still be gained through a successful scan, or if you recognise them via your contacts. (You could be familiar with his limp, a watch or other item, his groaning etc.)

Discussion (Face Rot)

Go on. Savage it, like my horribly ruined features. --Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 15:21, 23 August 2008 (BST)

I like it, what better way to implement Zombie Anonymity than through a skill? Plus. it promotes the Brain Rot! :D --/~Rakuen~\^Talk

I Still Love Grim 18:54, 23 August 2008 (BST)

How would this work when they're alive? --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 19:38, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Then their profile just states they look like Gary Busey --{User:Galaxy125/Sig}}20:52, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Bloody Brilliant!!! --BoboTalkClown 22:27, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Good, apart from one thing. How do you explain not being able to recognise a corpse you just saw die when it stands up. This case would only be when you are in the same location for the period of time in which a character dies and rises (in the case of first being a survivor which is recognisable to all anyway). Explanation could be that the face rot while cleared up by the revivification effect while alive, takes hold again almost instantaneous. But that still wouldn't change the fact that you saw that body die and rise, thereby knowing exactly who it was. - User:Whitehouse 23:36, 23 August 2008 (BST)

A good idea, except that Whitehouse's point might need addressing. How do looks change so quickly? ~Ariedartin • Talk • A KS J abt all 06:22, 24 August 2008 (BST)

I don't like this idea. It's balanced and innovative but it disregards the true zombie mentality. Yes, I love zombie anonymity. But I am always in the belief that true zombie characters should be willing to do the *above* three actions and have their anonymity threatened to whoever wants to use it, in order to succeed their goal. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 12:04, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Interesting points. I'm off to make a ridiculous suggestion, and I'll think about this. --Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 14:24, 24 August 2008 (BST)

In relation to Whitehouses point. How about an extra piece of text like. "Blah killed Example, their face decomposes before your eyes. "--Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 12:37, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Gun Bashing

Timestamp:	23:23 August 22 2008 (EST) --Not completely terrible(Apparently who suggested this --Diablor 06:08, 23 August 2008 (BST))
Type:	Improvement
Scope:	Survivors, Possible Zombies
Description:	When I first played this game as a level 1 civilian with a shotgun and pistols and all this ammo but a 5% hit rate, I was annoyed, plus because I wasn't able to get a fire axe for a while. I think the shotgun and pistol should be able to be used as a melee weapon once out of ammo, or with ammo. Either one. It's a small change but I do think it will help new players as well as old players. Pistol Whipping someone would do 2 damage, and hitting someone with a shotgun would do 3-4, and will have a 10% base accuracy rate just like all other melee weapons. Zombies could also use these for melee weapons. Its be kind of interesting to see that a zombie killed you with a shotgun ;).

Discussion (Gun Bashing)

It's not like I dislike the idea, but It's been suggested before. If no one finds a precedent before tomorrow I'll fetch some, but I'm too tired to go looking atm... Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 05:15, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Geezis... a) format it properly. b) sign it for fuck sake c) yes, from what i could figure out reading the gawdawful mess above, it's dupe-o-rific . --WanYao 05:44, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Also... Don't be a trenchcoater. The best ways to level up are FAKing, DNA scanning and "missing with an axe" (if you start up as Firefighter). --WanYao 05:51, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Fixed your template and yes this has likely been suggested before and is probably gotten as far as undecided. Nonetheless this isn't going to pass as it would be simply another useless attack when compared to the ax or knife for melee. I suggest knifes for newbies in fact my self. --Diablor 06:08, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Find a melee weapon. That is what they are there for. Look for the knife, it is specfically designed to be the "newbie" weapon (base 20% chance to hit). The main problem with the suggestion is that it nerfs melee weapons. No "dual purpose" weapons. Why would you waste encumbrance carrying a melee weapon if your shotgun or pistol does the same job? That's an extra clip/shell or 3 for said gun.--Pesatyel 08:10, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Sleeping Bags

Timestamp:	8:06 PM 22 August 2008 USA EST
Type:	New Item
Scope:	Survivors
Description:	I think we should add a new item. The sleeping bag. If you have a sleeping bag in your inventory, you will gain 2 action points per 30 minutes. Because basically what you're doing while not playing is resting. Sleeping bags are no doubt more comfortable than sleeping on the floor of Stickling Mall. Sleeping bags can not be used in the streets, because who wants to look like a hobo anyway? You can only carry one sleeping bag, and they take up a minimum of 50% of your encumberence.

Discussion (Sleeping Bags)

Good idea. But there should be a downside to it... such as getting out of the sleeping bag consumes 25 AP. :P

But seriously, increased AP recharge is currently categorized as a big no in the Urban Dead FAQ, read it up:

The limit of 50AP per 25 hours is to keep the game balanced and to stop too much from happening overnight; if we doubled the recharge rate, it'd mean people getting in a hundred AP's worth of actions while other players were offline, which is enough to cross the city or deal an easily fatal amount of combat damage.

So, unless you find some way to balance this for everyone, this suggestion isn't gonna work out. --Aeon17x 01:11, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Read it yourself: 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.--Pesatyel 08:13, 24 August 2008 (BST)

well this sounds like good idea to me as long as the number of AP it is possible to have cannot go over 50. heres an ideac for balance, if a zombie finds a survivor in a sleeping bag and they get them with tangling grasp they have like, doubled chance to hit or something.--Ninja13 01:35, 23 August 2008 (BST)

This is a horribly one sided survivor buff that violates the most basic tennants of Suggestions Dos and Do Nots, Leave Other People's AP Alone. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 02:06, 23 August 2008 (BST)

That arguement should be used with an understanding of it, its a guideline not a rule, and suggestions can still be made. Unfortunly the AP system is set up as it is for a reason as explaned above, and as well this would screw zombies as there's no benefit for them, what would stop someone from getting this when they have 98% encumberance, and dropping it when they resupply only to repeat?--G-Man 03:56, 23 August 2008 (BST)

I dislike the suggestion too, but I believe you quoted the wrong principle. ~Ariedartin • Talk • A KS J abt all 06:24, 24 August 2008 (BST)

I'd maybe support this on one condition; getting inside a sleeping bag reduces your HPs to 2. That means any attack (except a punch or newspaper swat) will kill you with a single hit (punches take 2 hits). Because really, how hard is it to kill somebody who is sound asleep?
See, survivors ARE doing something besides sleeping when the payer is offline; they are defending themselves. Swiers 05:16, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Oh, and another condition; you have to spend AP getting inside the bag, at least 10 or so. Free AP just for having something in your inventory? Hell no.

Swiers 18:30, 23 August 2008 (BST)

For fuck sake... Read what Kevan's FAQ says about extra AP. Like, do the most basic homework humanly possible ... first... BEFORE posting here. --WanYao 05:46, 23 August 2008 (BST)

If you want this to have even a 5% chance of passing you would have to give some kind of bonus towards zombies for attacking survivors in sleeping bags, such as a x2 damage (Which pkers would love as well) or have damage go to the sleeping survivor's ap as well as their hp, ex. bitten, lose 4 hp and ap. --Diablor 06:12, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Also your suggestion lacks something very important. The actual place you could get one and the search rates. --Diablor 06:14, 23 August 2008 (BST)

If you have a sleeping bag in your inventory, you will gain 2 action points per 30 minutes. No. Fucking. Way. No matter what you do -- even if you give zombies ooze-powered hover-skis that double their movement, too -- this is a no go. Period. You can't double AP regeneration. Period. It's utterly, spam-fucking-tastically game breaking. Period. Did you not read what Kevan himself wrote in the FAQ, which I linked to??? Please don't feed this completely broken and utterly unworkable idea with comments like, "Well, do something to make it ok for zombies". Sheeeeeeeeeesh... spam is spam. Period. --WanYao 06:54, 23 August 2008 (BST)

If you have a sleeping bag in your inventory, you will gain 2 action points per 30 minutes? YES FUCKING WAY! THATS EXCELLENT. ILY.--CyberRead240 07:00, 23 August 2008 (BST)

I clearly remember it being said that having no AP does not mean you're sleeping. By association, that means that this suggestion is illogical in how you want it to work with the mechanics of the game (along with being bad in other ways as described above).-- Unsigned

A tent that forces you to use it outside for the effect, (not inside where in a moderate suburb in a random building your unlikly to encounter a zombie inside in the first place) would probably be more legimate. Useful for getting AP to get inside, but mostly useless for long hauls (green suburbs may vary on this rule) and encourages survivors to leave there AP more to the wind. Positive effect for zombies and survivors on a low basis.--G-Man 03:36, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Having the tent destroyed if your hit outside would help too, so its not a permanet item, and greater hit percentage before the next AP you use, even if the tent is destroyed between that time period. (your still wrapped up in the fabric.)--G-Man 03:40, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Just because THIS idea doesn't work, doesn't mean AP altering ideas won't work at all. So given what Kevan said in the FAQ, maybe we should be looking at skills instead.--Pesatyel 08:13, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Remove “cock” from the banned words list

Timestamp:	Kolechovski 17:51, 20 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Filter fix.
Scope:	Bad word filter.
Description:	“Cock” is one of a number of words that sound as static when broadcast over the radio. However, there are many legitimate uses of the words “cock”. Here is an example. I tried to broadcast, “When the cock crowed, the cocky cocker spaniel cocked a shotgun at the cock-eyed cockatrice at the Cocker Museum.” It appeared as: 28.01 MHz: "When the ..." static "... crowed, the ..." static "...y ..." static "...er spaniel ..." static "...ed a shot" (29 minutes ago) 28.01 MHz: "gun at the ..." static "...-eyed ..." static "...atrice at the ..." static "...er Museum" (28 minutes ago) I’ve heard static hiss, but I’ve never heard it crow. What type of dog was that? A staticer spaniel? I’ve never heard of that. And have you heard of a mythical creature called a staticatrice? No? I haven’t either. As you can see, there wasn’t a single bad use of the word “cock” in that sentence, but the filter went nuts over it. And the Cocker Museum…that’s one of a number of places in the game that contain the word “cock”. Imagine a radio conversation calling for help. 28.01 MHz: “Zombie breach at the …” static “…er Museum!” 28.01 MHz: “The …” static “…er Museum? Where’s that?” 28.01 MHz: “Not the …” static “…er Museum, the …” static “…er Museum!” 28.01 MHz: “That’s what I said, the …” static “…er Museum! 28.01 MHz: “No, you said the …” static “…er Museum! Help is needed at the …” static “…er Museum!” 28.01 MHz: “That’s what I said! Look, where is the location you need help?” 28.01 MHz: “Randallbank-(67, 37)” 28.01 MHz: “That’s the …” static “…er Museum, right?” 28.01 MHz: “No, it’s not called the …” static “…er Museum, it’s called the …” static “…er Museum!” 28.01 MHz: “But I can’t see any …” static “…er Museum in this suburb! The location you gave me has the …” static “…er Museum!” 28.01 MHz: “You’re not making any sense! Besides, there isn’t a …” static “…er Museum! The coords I gave has the …” static “…er Museum!” 28.01 MHz: “Now look who isn’t making sense.” Etc., etc., etc. That’s what it would look like from a third party, because each side, thinking they broadcast “Cock” correctly, didn’t know it was staticed. All that confusion and wasted AP over understanding a simple call for help. And trying to spraypaint “Entry point at the Cocker Museum” would probably yield these results. Your spraycan hisses and runs out. “WTF?” Your spraycan hisses and runs out. “!!?” Your spraycan hisses and runs out. “WTF is this!? I already went through 3 spraycans, and I still havne’t sprayed the message!?” Your spraycan hisses and runs out. “Why won’t it spray!? All I want is to notify people they can enter at the Cocker Museum!” Your spraycan hisses and runs out. Your spraycan hisses and runs out. Your spraycan hisses and runs out. “All my spraycans are gone! Fuck! This is bullshit!” So the word “cock” should be removed from the ban list. There are many non-rated-R uses of it, and the game has many locations containing “cock”. It shouldn’t be banning the names of its own locations! Besides, the banned word list doesn’t stop Real GAYmer from broadcasting his obsession with “c0cks”, so it doesn’t actually do any good existing.

Discussion (Remove “cock” from the banned words list)

...Or, you could just use coordinates. Giving text rapists more ammo isn't going to fly very far no matter how you justify it. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 18:37, 20 August 2008 (BST)

I don't see how this gives text rapists any more ammo. They already bypass the filters as they are anyhow. The game simply shouldn't be banning its own names. Besides, do you have any idea how many people don't know the coordinates? And why does this appear so nicely in editing mode, but seem all smashed together in view mode after I make the edit? The radio and spray can lines should be seperated.--Kolechovski 19:14, 20 August 2008 (BST)

That's because consecutive lines get bunched up together by the wiki. Either use bulletpoints, indent them, or separate them with empty lines. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 19:29, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Use <br/> for line breaks, or * for unnumbered bullets. ~Ariedartin • Talk • A KS J abt all 19:58, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Oh Em Gee. This is stupid. I'm a big fan of lulz from cock but seriously just put a space between the C and the O (like so: C ock).--x o x o 00:23, 21 August 2008 (BST)

Or use the zero-width non-joiner, which gives you a "c‌ock" that doesn't get censored. Really, the whole wordlist is pretty much pointless. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 14:33, 21 August 2008 (BST)

The suggestion is rather unnecessary to be honest... I just don't think Urban Dead users need the word 'cock' uncensored at all, how would they really benefit? D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 04:09, 21 August 2008 (BST)

Well it would help spreading ALiM propaganda...--x o x o 04:15, 21 August 2008 (BST)

Why not just ask for a whitelist on 'Cocker'? --Aeon17x 05:18, 21 August 2008 (BST)

Remove your cock from ... from what??? Oh, right, the banned words list... Hummn, yeah... okay. --WanYao 06:26, 21 August 2008 (BST)

It's not just the Cocker Museum. There are actually 24 locations throughout Malton which contain the word "cock". (I could make a list, but that'd be rather pointless. =P) I Am Sabbo 11:35, 21 August 2008 (BST)

POINTLESS??? POINTLESS!!!! POINTLESS!??!?!??!?!? Surely good sir has not stumbled across the genius that we at UDWiki call ALiM!--x o x o 11:43, 21 August 2008 (BST)

And I thought we had 'em all...--Nallan (Talk) 11:46, 21 August 2008 (BST)

A quick grep, pointless or not:

(90,5) Club Cocker
(54,9) Hiscock Alley
(78,13) Cocker Boulevard Fire Station
(19,16) Hiscock Walk

(53,19) the Hitchcock Building
(22,28) Cockle Street
(23,31) Willcocks Grove
(47,31) Laycock Grove

(47,32) Silcock Row
(67,37) the Cocker Museum
(59,38) Peacock Road
(42,52) the Hiscock Arms

(44,52) Silcock Auto Repair
(33,54) the Locock Building
(99,55) the Silcock Building
(99,56) the Alcock Building

(41,60) the Mycock Building
(48,61) the Willcocks Building
(42,65) Tancock Park
(96,66) Tancock Walk

(49,68) Cockle Cinema
(75,71) the Cockell Building
(10,91) Cockburn Plaza Railway Station
(52,91) Cockayne Grove Police Dept

Garum 12:27, 21 August 2008 (BST)

Funny you should mention Mycock, as it is actually ALiM's current featured lolcation!--Nallan (Talk) 13:08, 21 August 2008 (BST)

How about a whitelist on all those places? --Aeon17x 16:05, 21 August 2008 (BST)

You put this suggestion here to be evaluated, well I'm evaluating it: This Suggestion is not going to pass. if you want to represent a location, just use directions or the coordinates system. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 15:52, 21 August 2008 (BST)

Not everyone has a GPS, or even a bookmark to an online UD map. And these are legitimate locations in the game, some of them are even TRPs. Would you like it if there was a four-block building named Cockadoodle Mall and you can't name it on the radio? --Aeon17x 16:05, 21 August 2008 (BST)

Yes, because then I could just say the Mall SW of here, or the Mall at (xx,xx), and not have to sit through moron after moron spam the radios in it with cockadoodle jokes. I'd be glad that people couldn't say it on the radio. Also, there's nothing stopping me from calling it Doodle' Mall, or if my audience is extremely thick, C0ckadoodle Mall. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 16:11, 21 August 2008 (BST)

People are going to be jerks no matter what, live with it, besides as you just pointed out they could just put c0ckadoodle and such variances if they wanted to use it, if this passes and is implemented the only difference is people can actually put the location name and you would see less 0's among the spam of whatever radio station no one can be bothered to re-tune. Personally it's got my vote and no faults. --Kamikazie-Bunny 22:49, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Yes, a good idea. Thumbs up.User:Not completely terrible/sig 20:34, 22 August 2008 (BST)

It's sad that this should even have to be suggested. Absolutely should be implimented. --BoboTalkClown 22:33, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Tangling Grasp Negates Dark- Ella Version

Timestamp:	Ellaandcharlie 11:10, 20 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	combat, balance change, dark buildings
Scope:	zombies
Description:	Whenever a zombie inside a dark building lands a successful Tangling Grasp on an opponent, their instincts and senses (particularly smell) kick in, allowing them to negate all darkness combat penalties for as long as they maintain the Tangling Grasp. If the grasp is lost for any reason, hit %ages go back to the normal for dark buildings, i.e., halved. This helps reduce the Dark Fortress effect. And it's logical that if a zombie is actually grasping an opponent, it's no longer "fumbling in the dark"... Note: I claim no originality in making up this suggestion. I have been working on a few previous suggestions. I would like to thank many many lovely users who suggested fantastic suggestions that got killed by repeat offending nazis. But let's get onto the discussion on this awesome idea I made!

Discussion (Tangling Grasp Negates Dark - Ella Version)

I would vote keep on this so fucking hard. This is perhaps the best Tangling Grasp mod suggestion ever. Thankyou for making all our lives so much easier. I love you, and your posts. Please don't ever stop :)--CyberRead240 11:13, 20 August 2008 (BST)

I love this suggestion! Normally I just complain about other peoples ideas without going to any effort of my own. But wow, this suggestion is great. 2 thumbs up! D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 14:18, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Did you even look at this page? There's a suggestion that has the exact same name and effect only one suggestion below. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 15:51, 20 August 2008 (BST)

You do realise that the suggestion is a copy, and (I'm guessing) most likely made to mock the creator of the previous one by overly positive response to this one? - User:Whitehouse 16:18, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Well then it's spam, and abuse of the suggestions system. As I said on the old suggestion, if you want to ridicule someone, use their talk page. (or better yet, your own) Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 16:32, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Just ignore it, kids... --WanYao 02:47, 21 August 2008 (BST)

I object to the statement of immaturity but support the basic premise of your comment. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 03:27, 21 August 2008 (BST)

kids could kick yo' ass any day of the week.--x o x o 03:40, 21 August 2008 (BST)

Well seeing as I'm not a goat, I don't see how that has anything at all to do with this discussion or suggestion. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 03:49, 21 August 2008 (BST)

The Whambulance is speeding towards techercizer.... watch out, its travelling so fast I think it'll end up hitting him. Oh... and in response to his original reply, the word gullible is also coming somehow. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 04:07, 21 August 2008 (BST)

Maybe because it rhymes with Finklestein? Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 04:20, 21 August 2008 (BST)

OMG NO IT DOESN'T!!!!!1ONE!!! --CyberRead240 05:53, 21 August 2008 (BST)

I TOLD yous to just ignore it... But you didn't listen, did you?? **sighs** --WanYao 06:27, 21 August 2008 (BST)

They don't listen to this Wao character it seems. But then again, I wouldn't! And why is he stealing my suggestions :( Ellaandcharlie 07:18, 21 August 2008 (BST)

I don't care if it's a dupe. It needs to be implimented, and that's more important than the bureaucratic nonsense called the Dupe. --BoboTalkClown 22:37, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Refresh Button

Timestamp:	-Ninja13 08:45, 20 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	improvement
Scope:	everyone
Description:	Wouldn't a "Look around" button be useful? For example if you are in siege and you want to keep an eye out for changes in the barricades or you are a zombie on the other side of the 'cades who also wants to keep an eye on them. Now there would be a button up in the set of actions at the top near the attack drop-down lists that allows you, for zero AP, to update your surroundings.

Discussion (Refresh Button)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active conversation. It is marked for deletion in 4 days.

--Diablor 01:34, 25 August 2008 (BST)

What the hell do you think the refresh button on your browser is for? - tylerisfat 10:04, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Oh yeah, hey everyone, I'm back from vacation! looks like i missed a crap load of suggestions that sucked balls. kudos especially to blakefiredancer and his self-indulgent suggesting. - tylerisfat 10:05, 20 August 2008 (BST)

I agree. Refresh repeats your last action, while you can just reload the map.cgi or whatever it is page using the address bar a look around button would make a lot of sense.--x o x o 10:14, 20 August 2008 (BST)

I agree with this one. It's better than Wans shitty suggestions anyway.--CyberRead240 10:57, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Oh. I feel dumb. I think that i was seeing it in reference to movement, which would not repeat an action, and wouldn't be a problem. I suppose then its a reasonable suggestion. Although i don't see a need for it, as why just sit there refreshing without doing another action? Maybe its just me. - tylerisfat 22:13, 20 August 2008 (BST)

A separate button would be nice since the browser's refresh button repeats actions and reloading the page from the addressbar wipes the page from history, so you can't look back on the events. In the meantime you can use this. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 10:56, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Or this bookmarklet: javascript:window.location.href="http://www.urbandead.com"

Swiers 19:06, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Or just a regular bookmark. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 00:04, 21 August 2008 (BST)

A reguar bookmark doesn't let you use the back button, does it? If it does, then sure, a regular bookmark to http://www.urbandead.com would work.

Swiers 20:06, 21 August 2008 (BST)

Of course it lets you use the back button. Why wouldn't it? Oh, and it should point to http://www.urbandead.com/map.cgi to be useful. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 20:26, 21 August 2008 (BST)

so if most of you are in agreement should i put it up for voting?--Ninja13 04:00, 21 August 2008 (BST)

if you want. The general view seems to be not really needed but the code would take about 2 seconds so why not. Yeah put 'er up.--x o x o 04:06, 21 August 2008 (BST)

No, Peer Reviewed already. - User:Whitehouse 19:00, 21 August 2008 (BST)

Tangling Grasp Negates Dark

Timestamp:	WanYao 08:51, 19 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	combat, balance change, dark buildings
Scope:	zombies
Description:	Whenever a zombie inside a dark building lands a successful Tangling Grasp on an opponent, their instincts and senses (particularly smell) kick in, allowing them to negate all darkness combat penalties for as long as they maintain the Tangling Grasp. If the grasp is lost for any reason, hit %ages go back to the normal for dark buildings, i.e., halved. This helps reduce the Dark Fortress effect. And it's logical that if a zombie is actually grasping an opponent, it's no longer "fumbling in the dark"... Note: I claim no originality in making up this suggestion. It's what most zombie players thought (hoped...) was going on -- mistakenly -- when dark buildings were first introduced.

Discussion (Tangling Grasp Negates Dark)

If you go through Kevan's talk archives to find the section where I asked about this, you'll see he's got it in mind as a potential zombie dark buff if needed. As such, making the suggestion seems functionally redundant, though maybe a god poll of public sentiment. Swiers 09:03, 19 August 2008 (BST)

Yes, I have read that... However, it has not been implimented... So it's still Suggestion page fodder. ;) And, yes, it might be a bit of a prod for him to get on some kind of zombie de-nerf for dark buildings, whether it's this or something else. In any event, talking about it can't be harmful, can it? --WanYao 09:53, 19 August 2008 (BST)

Seeing as a zombies main attack is biting or clawing, and they are holding their target it makes sense that they would attack at full accuracy. - User:Whitehouse 09:18, 19 August 2008 (BST)

Yeah, makes sense. why wouldn't their attacks just be 100% if they had a grip on someone, even if it wasn't dark?Shooty08 13:08, 19 August 2008 (BST)

Coz that would make zombies overpowered. Same reason me with an axe hits a unmoving zombie only 40% of the time. There's a happy medium between gameplay and realism that needs to be found will all these sorts of changes.--x o x o 14:02, 19 August 2008 (BST)

that, was sarcasm. I know that completely unbalance the game. Shooty08 13:02, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Let's envision this concept in combat: even in the dark, I could simply shove a shotgun or lead pipe near my body to block that zombie's melee attack while they're groping me. And with the decreased visibility, it's not too unlikely that they'll hit that instead of myself. --Aeon17x 14:38, 19 August 2008 (BST)

It's best to think of an idea in terms of mechanics first, flavour second. UD combat doesn't follow normal rules of logic. If I had a shotgun with two shells in it, and you were asleep in a Mall, I could walk right up to you and blow your head off in the real world. In UD, I'd have no chance of killing you unless you were already greviously wounded.

I'm going out on a limb here, but I'm assuming you're a very 'pro-survivor' type player. Which is fine of itself, I guess. However, I'd recommend you trying playing a feral zmobie for a few weeks. It's not great fun, one of the reasons why historically this particular zombie apocalypse has been rather short on zombies. --Bob Fortune ^RR 22:01, 19 August 2008 (BST)

Nice red herring right there, Bobby. And way to go on thinking that I'm pro-survivor. ;) --Aeon17x 02:11, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Dark buildings are equally bad for survivors and zombies, why should we change the balance, the tangling grasp bonus still functions at 100% efficiency. IMO it's fine as it is (Btw you left suggestion name in the title lol) --Diablor 19:47, 19 August 2008 (BST)

They are by no means equally bad for survivors. For several reasons... 1) survivors begin with higher to hit %ages and their weapons do more damage than zombie attacks 2) survivors have a way to negate darkness penalties -- generators... zombies have no means to negate these penalties. none at all. 3) a couple of measly FAKs, i.e. a handful of APs, can negate an entire day's worth of zombie AP... and save a survivor's life.

Dark buildings are unbalanced against zombies. This idea seeks to deal with that imbalance. --WanYao 22:03, 19 August 2008 (BST)

Quite right. Zombies get the raw deal with Dark buildings. Firsty, survivors can, should they choose, search up a generator and some fuel to light the place up. Quite a common tactic among Bounty Hunters these days. Secondly, survivors don't need dark buildings. With two exceptions, there's nothing of value inside. It's easy for survivors to just move on down the road. Zombies, on the other hand, unlive to kill survivors. Dark buildings makes this difficult for them. --Bob Fortune ^RR 22:06, 19 August 2008 (BST)

If dark buildings are so problematically unbalanced against zombies, why don't we see survivors sleeping in ruined dark buildings? Simple- because normal, unruined buildings are safer. Are dark building is of special value only so long as it is both dark AND has no zombies / dead bodies inside it. Remember, survivors can't dump bodies from dark buildings, so they can't get rid of the zombies (who thus effectively ave infinite AP) without powering the building (which makes it not dark, boosting zombie attacks). I think its pretty well balanced right now, with survivors having the advantage in firepower and generator use, but requiring a more co-ordination to use it effectively. Zombies simply have to take out the 'cades & generator, and the building is eventually theirs. Swiers 22:53, 19 August 2008 (BST)

But you don't actually check all those dark buildings, do you? I've seen plenty of survivors who hide out in dark buildings because after all, it is safer than "hiding" on the streets. (and if you're in a red suburb and actually want to survive, hiding in a dark building is the way to go from what I've found.)

All in all, I like this idea. We all know that the game is currently balanced slightly in the survivors' favor, and if this suggestion is implemented, the balance will definitely be closer to equal than it is now. I Am Sabbo 01:33, 20 August 2008 (BST)

If survivors are hiding in dark buildings in red suburbs why are you not checking dark buildings? Besides it's not like dark buildings are trp's anyways. Back to the point, just because survivors can install generators at any given time in a dark building, what incentive do they have? It wouldn't help less it's one of the forts and would just be a big waste of a genny and fuel can since it's not a trp. Per avoiding the penalty if this was implemented survivors wouldn't have a way to avoid tangling grasp now would they? Dark buildings are meant for hiding and they are equally balanced for survivors and zombies, zombies can hide in them as well as survivors and thats the bottom line. Why else would anyone go to a dark building? --Diablor 03:28, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Survivors do hide in open, ruined dark buildings. I do it, and I see a fair number of other people doing it, too. There are very good reasons for hiding in dark ruined buildings, i.e. even if you are disccovered, zombies are totally nerfed inside them. And, the whole thing about not seeing bodies? Who cares? It's irrelevant... except that is allows zombies to spy? Ah, zmobie spaiz, whatever, dark still nerfs zombies in combat hardcore... And, it's a PKer buff as well... I thought thew guides were neither buff nor nerf PKers -- but this update did just that, gave PKers a fantastic place to hide... No, it's time to start tweaking darkness, imo, but mainly for zombies. Perhaps I'm whining? Maybe... but someone has to take the opposite side to people complaining about Decay costs ;P --WanYao 07:39, 20 August 2008 (BST)

lol, yeah ;P ;P ;P ;P--CyberRead240 07:57, 20 August 2008 (BST)

And, the whole thing about not seeing bodies? Who cares? Any survivor who is inside an UNruined dark building and hopes to keep it barricaded so as to keep zombies out? If there might already be zombies inside, or if once they get in there's no way to get them out, the buildings are not defensible. Granted, in areas where survivors have unruined buildings, they don't really NEED to defend dark buildings...

Swiers 08:25, 20 August 2008 (BST)

None of that makes sense, swiers... Unless I am missing something... If you want to repair a dark building, you plop a genny. Then you can see the bodies. Then you simply dump the bodies. And, you can barricade with bodies inside a building, any building. Unless there are bazillions of bodies, it's a moot issue. And if there are bazillions of zombie bodies, you have problems anyway... But it's not like you have to clear invisible standing zombies... The only thing you can't do is barricade if the genny is taken out and there are standing zombies inside. --WanYao 10:05, 20 August 2008 (BST)

A dark Safehouse with dead bodies inside is effectively a safehouse with zombies inside it- zombies you can not get rid of without dropping a generator, even if the safehouse is EHB. Dropping a generator makes it not dark, until you kill the generator, which means clearing a few bodies costs the AP needed to find a generator (at east 10) plus fuel (often another 10) plus killing the generator (another 10), which means it almost never happens. As a lone feral zombie, I have cleared out intact dark building that had as many as 4 or 5 survivors in them simply by standing up each day and munching. It took multiple days to do, but the result was always the same; every time I managed to get in; I eventually managed to ruin the buiding.

Swiers 19:13, 20 August 2008 (BST)

So the simple way of putting it is that dark buildings allow for ninja zombies... Yet... all it takes is one generator and poof! no more ninja-zombie-monsters hiding under your bed! The way I see it, the scenario you're describing is yet another example of pathetically stupid survivor gameplay! I mean, all it'd take is for someone to say ZOMG we have a problem, then get on a radio and broadcast the location and explain what needs to be done... then someone does it. If they're not doing this, they deserve to be eaten... There is a reason that areas with smart survivor populations try to keep barricaded potentially dark safehouses lit, whenever possible... However, I'm gonna let this suggestion die, anyway, because -- although I don't 100% agree with your reasoning, swiers -- I do get the gist of it... --WanYao 03:03, 21 August 2008 (BST)

I've been waiting for this for a long time. WanYao to suggest a game change. Now it's time for WanYao treatment! OMFG NO STUPID GOOOOOOOOOOOONG SPAM STUPID CRAP LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL GAME RUINER OUT OF GENRE and so on. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 09:47, 20 August 2008 (BST)

How droll. GONG! Next contestant, please. --WanYao 10:05, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Despite your efforts at passing off DDRs comments as mindless jabber, his comment is so very correct. The UR SUGGESTION SUX OMG NOWAY is totally warranted. PLZ take this to voting?--CyberRead240 10:48, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Were you plan on actually contributing criticism, or did you just want to stand around and act like an asshole? Because that's what Talk Pages are for.

I believe that this would make things easier for zombies, but considering that survivors can't barricade or fix ruined dark buildings, I think the current zombie attack percentages work fine. Of course, this screws over zombies when they come across an EHB unruined dark building, but how often does that happen? The inability to dump comes into play there though. In Summary, It feels (at least from my perspective) like Dark Buildings are already balanced (at least in terms of survivors vs zombies). Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 16:03, 20 August 2008 (BST)\

Jesus, Okay, DDR, that was stupider than yer "100 days in UD" or whatever video... and in no way funny or true, grow the fuck up. Mick, nobody gives a shit except for yer BeatBox Homiedawgs. Techercizer, you don't grasp basic gameplay: survivors can drop a genny and fuel, they get better accuracy and damage, they can heal each other back to full health in around 20 ap tops (counting time to find a FAK or four). Zeds on the other hand? They have unlimited ammo... yaaaay--/~Rakuen~\^Talk

I Still Love Grim 19:41, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Yeah, what they said. ~Ariedartin • Talk • A KS J abt all 20:02, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Dear Techercizer, from your comments, I can tell you haven't been here for very long.--CyberRead240 05:51, 21 August 2008 (BST)

Dear Read, from your comments, I can tell I don't give a crap about anything you have to say. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 15:54, 21 August 2008 (BST)

Lol that doesn't even make sense. Niiiiice one ;)--CyberRead240 17:00, 21 August 2008 (BST)

Dear responders, from your comments, I can tell none of those replies are relevant to my comment. ~Ariedartin • Talk • A KS J abt all 17:02, 21 August 2008 (BST)

Yeah, pretty much. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 17:18, 21 August 2008 (BST)

Dear J3D, from your comments, I can tell that YOU FUCKING RULE LOL!--x o x o 07:54, 22 August 2008 (BST)

Please stop making the talk page into a forum for flaming people. We all know most of us are Trolls, especially Wan but this is getting out of hand. Please let this suggestion die. --Diablor 19:28, 22 August 2008 (BST)

Are you kidding? Wan is like the Anti-Troll. Regardless, it's kind of hard to appreciate your crackdown on off-topic discussion when it is in itself posted as an off-topic discussion... Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 19:33, 22 August 2008 (BST)

Lol Wan is the biggest suggestion troll around. I guess you wouldn't have learnt that yet.--CyberRead240 06:31, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Makes some sense in flavor terms, absolutely needed in gameplay terms. No Dark Fortress! No Dark Fortress! --BoboTalkClown 22:40, 23 August 2008 (BST)

SyringeNullification

Timestamp:	~ Galaxy125 22:10, 18 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Balance Change, Item
Scope:	Zombies, Necrotech employees
Description:	"Suggestions Dos and Don'ts" says players should, "Leave Other People's Inventory Alone - Many suggestions involve destroying things in other people's inventories. Remember - every opponent in the game is still another player, and what you might do to them they will do to you! If you don't want your items destroyed, don't destroy theirs." The following suggestion goes against this, though. I suggest that claw attacks include a 1% chance to destroy a syringe carried by the attacked survivor. This is low enough that it would only be effective in large-scale assaults, and if you're carrying a syringe during a large-scale assault you're probably combat-reviving anyway. In addition, Hunting Goods stores in malls would be boosted by a 2% chance of finding a Bandolier. Like with Flak Jackets, only one is ever needed, and they're emplaced immediately. They have an encumbrance of 5%. They would protect syringes from destruction, and reduce the encumbrances of syringes and of shotgun shells to 1%. This hits the flavor of zombie movies where necessary plot devices are lost during a zombie attack. Look at what you're wearing right now. Is there any place where you could hide a delicate syringe where it would remain undamaged during a fight?

Discussion (SyringeNullification)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active conversation. It is marked for deletion in 5 days.

Delete on the 26th --Diablor 19:26, 22 August 2008 (BST)

No. No. No. Suggestions Dos and Do Nots also says Multiply it by a billion, and I don't think that every survivor ever attacked having all his syringes destroyed is fair. Beer bottles and delicate electronic equipment survive attacks just fine, as do syringes. Not only that, but this doesn't even solve any in-game problem! It's an overpowered, useless survivor buff, and the first thing I've ever seen that makes me want to call someone a zombie trenchcoater. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 23:03, 18 August 2008 (BST)

Multiply it by a billion, then. That doesn't negate the fact that, on average, each destroyed syringe is equivalent to the loss of 300 HP. That's right, survivors lose 1 syringe per every 5 deaths. It's not designed to solve a problem, it's designed to slightly enhance realism. Multiplying it by a billion does nothing. -- Galaxy125 04:48, 19 August 2008 (BST)

LOL!!! This is funny. Very funny. Oh, wait, this isn't a joke? Leave my fucking inventory alone, alright? Got it? Good. --WanYao 23:21, 18 August 2008 (BST)

And the sickeningly trenchy "bandolier" idea is a massive and totally unbalanced survivor/ecumbrance buff. And probably a dupe, too. FAIL. --WanYao 23:24, 18 August 2008 (BST)

Seriously, one would think that after that Horses fiasco you'd have started doing your homework and putting in some thought, but this is about as close to Trenchy as an idea can get and still be onesidedly pro-zombie. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 23:50, 18 August 2008 (BST)

This isn't pro-zombie. It's a giant survivor buff. --WanYao 01:39, 19 August 2008 (BST)

Right, I didn't see the shotgun part. This Idea is no longer the closest thing you can get to Trenchy and be pro-zombie, it is in fact another Trenchy empty-space-between-the-ears-fart onto the talk:suggestions system. congratulations. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 01:46, 19 August 2008 (BST)

The fact that you were debating about whether it was pro-zombie or pro-survivor shows me that this is a good idea that needs some work. Unless you're going to help, though, lemme know if I should make a Bridge page so you can lurk under that, instead. -- Galaxy125 04:48, 19 August 2008 (BST)

The "Bandolier" idea is added to give survivors a way around it. Don't like it? I don't blame you, it does seem a little overpowered. Have any suggestions? I didn't think so. -- Galaxy125 04:48, 19 August 2008 (BST)

I'm leaving your fucking inventory alone. This is SyringeNullification, not Condoms'n'Lube'n'BananasNullification. -- Galaxy125 04:48, 19 August 2008 (BST)

No you're not, you moron. You're asking for a 1% chance per hit for a needle to break. Wake up. --WanYao

Lol Wan i think you missed the point there :P He's basically accepted his suggestion is shit and is attempting at insulting you...--x o x o 08:43, 19 August 2008 (BST)

Huh. Personally I carry a couple of syringes at any time, so that if I'm killed, then I always revive a survivor or two after being revived myself. So your assumption about not many people carrying syringes in a siege is probably off. Also, the bandolier thing...oh man, that is really overpowered. At the very least, limit the number of syringes and shots it holds. -- Ashnazg 1207, 19 August 2008 (GMT)

I don't recall syringes being made of cellophane. ~Ariedartin • Talk • A KS J abt all 20:03, 20 August 2008 (BST)

Nope, just glass. Oh, wait... --BoboTalkClown 22:42, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Realism does not always = fun. --BoboTalkClown 22:42, 23 August 2008 (BST)

A new way to revive

Timestamp:	Werewing 11:14 8th August 2008 (BST)
Type:	balance change and improvement
Scope:	All players,in areas where no survivors exist
Description:	I believe there should be an in-game way to revive without the assistance of other players,it should be some sortof machine that has a high durability,that changes its position and fully "heals" itself upon then enbd of the day/or the end of the week.This may seem erratic and probably has ben suggested before,but in some suburbs,there isnt a living player in sight. Details/summary: An automatic machine that can revive players at a changing spot in each subarb Cost to players:For fairness reasons,since standing up costs a whole 10 AP something like this must take near 30-40 AP Durability:Something like this shouldnt inhibit zombie players permanently,so it should be destructable(for the day/week) something like 150 durability shoul dmake it dustructable to a small hoarde of determined zombies. A small side note:I'm new at suggesting here,especially in this bizarre format,so do tell me if there seem to be errors in this suggestions template.

Discussion (A new way to revive)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active conversation. It is marked for deletion in 4 days.

--Diablor 01:35, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Fixed it. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 12:33, 18 August 2008 (BST)

Thank you-werewing7:34 EST(I dont see the server time anywhere)

It seems like something a mad scientist could create given a few years, a moving, self-repairing revivification clinic.Shooty08 13:20, 18 August 2008 (BST)

Well whatever it is, it couldn't move itself since Urban Dead has no NPCs. Not only that, but you haven't explained how it would effect Brain Rot, or how the cost would change for those with Ankle Grab. Not only that, but it wouldn't be able to "automatically" revive anyone, (no NPCs), and exactly how would you justify this kind of radical technology constantly arriving and being distributed to a city under a full military quarantine? Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 15:42, 18 August 2008 (BST)

Survivors need more reasons to work together, not less. If a suburb has no working revive points, then it's time to move out and find one if you get killed and really want a revive. Revives are ridiculously easy to find already. No self serve revives, evah -- boxy ^{talk • i} 15:49 18 August 2008 (BST)

lol... no, as everyone above. this is a role playing game and as such you need to work with other people, it's that simple. 'sides, how will this tell mrh?-cows from hostiles? but... when UD goes steampunk this would totally rock... "those COMBAT REVIVE-ers, they mad, MAD i tell you!!" --WanYao 18:14, 18 August 2008 (BST)

I believe there should be an in-game way to revive without the assistance of other players, I believe that's totally against the point of the game; its a low tech MASSIVELY MULTIPLE online rpg. Multiple, as in other players are required. Swiers 19:15, 18 August 2008 (BST)

Hey, dude. I can certainly see where you're coming from. In this war between the survivors and zombies, survivors win by reviving and zombies win by killing (survivors killing zombies is relatively pointless). Since death cultists are allowed to swandive from tall buildings, life cultists should be equally enabled, right? However, the sides are not supposed to be symmetrically equal. Death is (by nature) supposed to be easier than life. Revive points must for now suffice. -- Galaxy125 21:47, 18 August 2008 (BST)

Your understanding of this game is pretty superficial, isn't it? Sometimes, people still amaze me.... --WanYao 23:27, 18 August 2008 (BST)

I killed 3 zombies standing outside my mall yesterday now i haz 3000 spare xp and nothing to spend it on :( --x o x o 01:02, 19 August 2008 (BST)

How does that have anything to do with this idea? Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 01:33, 19 August 2008 (BST)

It's a pretty superficial game. -- Galaxy125 04:49, 19 August 2008 (BST)

Well I see this is going no where,but to be quite honest I didnt know there was a way to move between suburbs in the game.-werewing.

Research man, you've got to do research before you post suggestions! Try getting some game experience first, that will help you be able to judge what things are already in-game, and what things would be way out of balance. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 15:56, 21 August 2008 (BST)

@@ Line 173: / Line 173: @@
 This is a bloody awful idea. It's insanely overpowered AND it doesn't make any sense. If anyone could perform centaurian magical healing spells like this, it's be a ''trained surgeon or doctor'' -- not a nurse. It also goes against the whole idea that survivors generally need to have tools and equipment to do stuff. Like shooties or healies or pokeseys. Blake, why do you keep coming up with these ridiculous ideas that completely violate all concepts of game-balance and all the most obvious game-mechanic assumptions??? Stop waste everyone's time with this crap, and start playing the game and learning how it actually ''works'', and get better at it. Then -- maybe -- you'll see something that actually needs doing, and figure out a way of doing it that isn't utterly spam-o-fucking-liciously broken. --[[User:WanYao|WanYao]] 14:51, 25 August 2008 (BST)
+:Allow me to translate from the WanYaoian.  "I don't think this would pass, but it stands a better chance of passing if it wasn't named 'Nurse.'  Also, survivors typically need equipment, so you should justify why this should be an exception."  Myself, I think it could be called 'Triage' (not to be confused with [PR_Skill_New:_Survivor:_Science#Triage_.28Drop-Down_Wounded.29|this]), and would require a certain maximum HP on the target (like, you can't heal someone past 30 HP), and wouldn't cure infections.  --{{User:Galaxy125/Sig}}17:00, 25 August 2008 (BST)
 ----