Developing Suggestions

NOTICE

The Suggestions system has been closed indefinitely and Developing Suggestions is no longer functions as a part of the suggestions process. However, you are welcome to use this page for general discussion on suggestions.

Shortcut:
DS

Developing Suggestions

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

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

Further Discussion

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

Resources

• The Frequently Suggested List
• Suggestions Dos and Do Nots

How To Make a Discussion

Adding a New Discussion

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

Adding a New Suggestion

• To add a new suggestion proposal, copy the code in the box below.
• Click here to begin editing. This is the same as clicking the [edit] link to the right of the Suggestions header.

• Paste the copied text above the other suggestions, right under the heading.
• Substitute the text in RED CAPITALS with the details of your suggestion.
• The process is illustrated in this image.

{{subst:DevelopingSuggestion
|time=~~~~
|name=SUGGESTION NAME
|type=TYPE HERE
|scope=SCOPE HERE
|description=DESCRIPTION HERE
}}

• Name - Give the suggestion a short but descriptive name.
• Type is the nature of the suggestion, such as a new class, skill change, balance change.
• Scope is who or what the suggestion affects. Typically survivors or zombies (or both), but occasionally Malton, the game interface or something else.
• Description should be a full explanation of your suggestion. Include information like flavor text, search odds, hit percentages, etc, as appropriate. Unless you are as yet unsure of the exact details behind the suggestion, try not to leave out anything important. Check your spelling and grammar.

Cycling Suggestions

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

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

---

Suggestions

Heal Over Time

Timestamp: -- boxy talk • teh rulz 09:56, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Type: Healing change

Scope: Application of FAKs

Description: At the moment, First Aid Kits (FAKs) are a powerful tool for survivors in real time combat situations. If there is a survivor online with a full load of FAKs, there is no way that a single zombie can kill any survivor in that location (unless the online survivor is inattentive). All they need to do is continue to apply FAKs to the target survivor (even themselves) when they get anywhere near death. A zombie has no chance to keep up with the healing. This suggestion would change the application of FAKs to limit the healing that can be done immediately. Multiple FAKs can still be applied, however only 5 HP (10 with First Aid, 15 with surgery in a hospital) will be added initially, and 1 HP each half hour (on the AP tick) thereafter. On the UD screen, a healing survivor would show as below. TripleU said: Also here are HealthyDude (60HP), HealingDude (34+15HP), and HurtDude (46HP) Each FAK applied will still only cost 1 AP, and have the potential to heal the same amount of damage (depending on the skill level of the healer). Survivors with diagnosis would still be able to tell how much health a survivor had, and in addition, how many HP were yet to be added over time due to already applied FAKs. The colour coding on injured survivors would instead be applied to survivors who still needed FAKs to heal completely (not just those who were in the process of healing, and only needed time). FAKs couldn't be applied to survivors who already had enough healing potential to fully restore them (over time). Infections are only cured at the time an FAK is applied. If a surviver is bitten while in the process of healing, the HP will continue to be added, but the infection will remain unless another FAK is applied. If the survivor dies before all HP has been applied, that HP is lost, and he stands up as normal, as a zombie with full HP. I'm unsure as to whether to apply the same rules to zombies... the way I play zombies, FAK healing is inconsequencial. Unsure if it's different for different styles of play.

Discussion (Heal Over Time)

Previous discussion that inspired this suggestion -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 09:56 12 February 2011 (BST)

Am I right in understanding that no matter your skill level with FAKs you intially get 5HP and the remainder (if any; +5 for First Aid, +10 for Surgery) is applied over time? It's just that I found the description above a little unclear. - User:Whitehouse 13:05, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

I know, I'm finding it hard to explain it without making it TL;DR. No, the initial healing will be dependant on the skill of the healer. If they have surgery, and are in a powered hospital, the initial healing will still be 15HP, but further heals will only happen over time (ie. the second (15HP) FAK applied will take 7.5 hours to take full effect -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 07:08 13 February 2011 (BST)

E.g. I FAK a survivor, they gain 15hp, but any further FAKs I give them heal over time rather than as a one off payment?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 09:44, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

From the discussion Boxy linked to:

Boxy said:

I think and appropriate change would be that there is a limit to how much healing can be done to one player in each half hour (AP regen) period. You can still apply FAKs, but the healing wouldn't take affect until the next AP tick. This would mean that survivors couldn't heal quicker than a zombie can attack. Nothing lamer than watching the survivor you are attacking miraculously gain full health in the time it takes you to claw at him a couple of times

--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:45, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Ah right. So what resets the ability for the first FAK to instant heal? Attaining full health? - User:Whitehouse 14:27, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

This is fucking genius. ----Anarchomutualist _says: ^{The state is war, ⓐnarchy is order.} 04:42, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

---

Inventory organisation

Timestamp: Ashizard 18:07, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Type: inventory

Scope: survivors

Description: I think it would help if you had the option to drag and drop where you wanted particular items in your inventory to stay, grouping all offensive weapons together or FAK's etc thoughts?

Discussion (Inventory organisation)

Peer Reviewed, Dupe, Dupe, Dupe, Dupe, Dupe, Dupe, and Greasemonkey Script. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 18:26, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

---

Bull Rush

Timestamp: Feb. 10, 2011

Type: New Zombie Hunter Skill

Scope: Survivors

Description: So, I was thinking. There is only one zombie hunter skill. So much potential to add to that. One thing I was thinking about is the survivor being able to charge and "push" a zombie out of the building. The zombie has to be less than 13 hp and the door has to be left wide open. Its sort of like Feeding drag, except the survivor is pushing the zombie out of the building. Whether the survivor has to go out in the street with the zombie or not is open to discussion. This might be useful if there is a large break and you desperately need to get zombies out of the building to decrease their numbers.

Discussion (Bull Rush)

Put a limit on a minimum number of zombies present before it can be used and I'm for it. If it can be used on lone ferals it's really overpowered, but as a tool versus hordes it should be alright. Just make it exactly the same as feeding drag (<13HP, door open), only versus zombies. Probably keep the survivor inside, but maybe bring them outside too? Like a rugby tackle. Maybe minimum five zombies present before it can be used? 18:20, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Maybe the limit should be for zeds inside AND outside. Not trying to make it OP, just to make it a decent counter to the beachhead tactic —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Laffayette (talk • contribs) 18:34, 8 February 2011.

How does one tell how much HP a zed has left without first attacking them? --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 18:29, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I'd support this if it was somewhat limited (as Mis said). Perhaps a 50% chance of success, but obviously accounting for the same conditions for feeding drag. Flavour-wise, it could be explained by the strength of a zombie as opposed to a regular survivor.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 21:05, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I like Yonnua's add-on. But maybe make it possible on any number of zombies just less effective on lower numbers. Explanation could be that with fewer zombies it's easier for them to dodge your rush? Anyways balance is balance logical or not. Possibly do it as 1-5 zombies have a 30% chance 6-10 zombies have a 40% and 11 or more zombies have a 51% chance. Also just a thought if you fail on pushing a zombie out you take some health damage. Which could also depend on zombie numbers, not sure on the numbers that'd be fair but if you succeed the zombie also has to stand back up outside.       00:35, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Variable percentage might work (like cadeblocking, but in reverse), but health damage and forcing the zombie to stand up are a bit sketchy, imo.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 08:30, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Well charging into a crowd of zombies wouldn't end well in a real world zombie apocalypse but there wouldn't be a limitless source of generators either.. In any case. I'd say adding a tad bit of risk to doing it is fair. The standing up is just a thought, possibly have it so only 5AP without ankle grab is spent and 1 AP with ankle grab? As it's not quite as damaging for a zombie as getting shot to death.       04:29, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Cool. It looks like this is getting support. I'm all for the percent being low with fewer zombies and increasing with zombie hordes. So, now what happens?

---

Sleep

Timestamp: --Scvideoking 22:47, 6 February 2011 (UTC)scvideoking

Type: Tweak

Scope: Survivors

Description:A new in-game concept where it would take a lot of work but hear me out.A new button would appear at all locations.When asleep a survivor gains 1 AP per 15 minutes,but they get the same screen for when they run out of AP.there would be a button saying wake up instead of being able to do nothing.They are easier to hit by anyone. -When in a building the description would list people asleep EX:Urbandead,Bob,sally,and tom are all asleep in various places of the building. These players would have an extra 20% chance to get attacked by all other urbandead players. what do you think? may be a dupe and my extreme and most sincere apoliges to the disscussion below me for necrotech adrenaline shots I didnt mean to delete you post

Discussion (Sleep)

Tinkering with APs is generally a bad idea. Also, this one would only help survivors, and would always be the best option unless you sleeping in a mall with a lot of PKers running around or in immediate danger of being overwhelmed by zombies. -- Spiderzed▋ 23:57, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Peer Reviewed Dupe. Also, I fixed your accidental deletion of the suggestion at the bottom. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 00:07, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Sleep is already a function of the game. Survivors with 0 AP are asleep. Read the game text again. 13:20, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

---

NecroTech adrenaline shot

Timestamp: BlackDragon2026 22:11, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Type: new item

Scope: survivors

Description: Another product created by NecroTech, this needle contains chemicals, hormones, and other fun stuff that opens up different synapses, and gives the user 5 AP's. However,each use of the shot degraded the persons health( -5 HP) and when it was discovered that overuse could lead to death, the FDA insisted that NecroTech install a simple blood reader on all adrenaline shots. The blood reader will see if the user has taken the shot in the last 12 hours, if so, then the item will not allow the shot to be administrated to the user.

Discussion (NecroTech adrenaline shot)

Why do people never think of death-cultists when they propose health degradation as trade-off for AP boosts? Cultists want less health and moar APs all at the same time. -- Spiderzed▋ 23:55, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Rejected and possible Dupe. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 23:58, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Explain why the FDA are tinkering with English products. 13:21, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

---

THE JOURNEY BACK

Timestamp: Laffayette 01:51, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Type: Skill Change

Scope: Brainrotters who wish to became fully human again

Description: The main goals of this suggestion are: To make brain rot reversible To do so in a way that does not trivialize this reversal To add fun game mechanics that help with 2 So, the suggestion: If a human with brain rot so wishes, he can go to a NT and receive a treatment (presumably, from a player with NecroNet Access) so that he can start a "quest" to lose brain rot The quest might be: Gain 500 XP points without dying (the ingame justification would be like Physical therapy for Alzeihmers: The guy is learning to make his brain work again) Kill 10 rotters without dying (the ingame justification would be some substance in the rotters brain, that the player is collecting, possibly with the help of a DNA extractor) Stay alive for 2 months (without inactivity) and find the doctor who started the treatment, so he can finish it (the ingame justification would be that this is the way treatment works. Would be way more fun if it wasn't possible to coordinate using other means) Some other fun idea After the quest is completed, the player looses Brain Rot, and Flesh Rot becomes inactive till he buys Brain Rot again } Discussion (THE JOURNEY BACK) Hate the idea personally. You buy the rot you don't go back, it is a commitment for a reason. Besides most players who get the rot have a survivor alt or at least one that doesn't have the rot.       05:44, 6 February 2011 (UTC) I like the idea of a quest system but not if the only reward is that I get brain rot reversed. Also, the tasks presented seem more difficult than actually going to RRPs when you become dead and want to be alive again. ~ 07:18, 6 February 2011 (UTC) Having a huge (perhaps disproporcionate) cost to get rot reverse is kinda the point. Laffayette 07:28, 6 February 2011 (UTC) Symbol Tag Timestamp: --Anarchomutualist says: The state is war, ⓐnarchy is order. 18:00, 30 January 2011 (UTC) Type: Flavor Scope: Spraycans Description: When graffiting "a bloodied eye" onto a wall in Borehamwood, an actual image of a bloodied eye showed up. And post-apocalyptic fiction includes examples of religious or political symbols in graffiti. Why not apply that to Malton? Spraypainting the following text will yield the following symbols: Someone has spraypainted a circle-a here. becomes Someone has spraypainted a large Ⓐ here. Someone has spraypainted a hammer and sickle here. becomes Someone has spraypainted a large ☭ here. Someone has spraypainted a crucifix here. becomes Someone has spraypainted a large † here. Any other ideas for symbols? Discussion (Symbol Tag) A better approach would be for some sort of tags (say asterisks) to cancel the italics in spraying - so "*a hammer and sickle*" would come up as Someone has spraypainted a hammer and sickle here. instead of Someone has spraypainted a hammer and sickle here. 19:06, 31 January 2011 (UTC) Ooo, ooo! You know, I was always curious about the bloodied eye, and now that I saw it I don't like it. Bummer. Neither do I like the other images, they comlpletely break the look of the game (even with UDTool running). I'd like smaller, black-and-green (or something else, similar to the UD look) symbols instead, which look like they were actually painted on the wall (like the circle-a). Misanthropy has a nice idea, too. I'm fond of spraypainting... erhm, 'something'... all around town, having it merge with the block description would be plain AWESOME. ~m T! 04:21, 1 February 2011 (UTC) Yeah, the pictures I did were a little stopgap. I would assume that a finalized version would include include more..."blendy" pictures. Or maybe ASCII characters? Like if you type in, "a circle-a" it comes up as Someone has spraypainted a large Ⓐ here. without the italics. I believe that there are ASCII crosses, hammers and sickles, and a variety of other political/religious symbols to choose from. ----Anarchomutualist says: The state is war, ⓐnarchy is order. 14:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC) That would win you an internets, sir. ~m T! 23:30, 2 February 2011 (UTC) Look what I found: ☭, †. Someone has spraypainted a large ☭ here. Someone has spraypainted a large † here. ----Anarchomutualist says: The state is war, ⓐnarchy is order. 17:26, 6 February 2011 (UTC) Yet another fire suggestion Timestamp: --Anarchomutualist says: The state is war, ⓐnarchy is order. 02:46, 27 January 2011 (UTC) Type: New feature Scope: Buildings Description: When a generator is destroyed, a fire starts. There are five levels for a fire, going from one to five. A building on fire has this message added to its description: There is a [minscule/small/medium/large/blazing] fire in the building. A building on fire cannot be scouted as a safehouse, for obvious reasons. Every action taken in a flaming building takes away 1 HP per level of fire (like a location-based infection; a level 3 fire would take 3 HP per action), except with Fire Safety (see below). Fire increases by one level every 30 minutes. Once the fire passes level 5, the building is ruined. The fire stops, and has a 12.5% chance of spreading to each adjacent building. A new item, Fire Extinguisher, would be found at Fire Departments, Mall Hardware Stores, and Fort Storehouses. Fire Extinguishers, when used, would have a 30% chance of reducing fire by one level. They are one time use only. Each successful use yields 5 XP. Firefighting (see below) would increase this change to 75%. The fire skill tree (Civilian class) would be: Fire Safety - negates all fire damage. Firefighting - increases fire extinguisher accuracy to 75%. And of course, the firefighting class would now get Firefighting on start. Discussion (Yet another fire suggestion) I'm sure building fire is a dupe. I'll see if I can find it... --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 02:56, 27 January 2011 (UTC) Yep, it's a dupe. Almost as old as the game itself. ~ 05:17, 27 January 2011 (UTC) Why thank you Vapor. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 06:04, 27 January 2011 (UTC) Yeah, I know. I'm trying to improve the concept by making a better version of Fire. ----Anarchomutualist says: The state is war, ⓐnarchy is order. 00:14, 28 January 2011 (UTC) How do the levels grow? 02:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC) Meant to add that. ----Anarchomutualist says: The state is war, ⓐnarchy is order. 00:14, 28 January 2011 (UTC) Does fighting fire grant XP? Fireman class already starts with axe profeciency. Don't take it away. How many uses does a fire extinguisher Have? Nail down the details and don't be too suprised if it is a dupe. I know for sure it has come up in DS before though it didn't leave it. I like the idea of burning buildings but this suggestion needs work. ~ 03:22, 27 January 2011 (UTC) Working on it. ----Anarchomutualist says: The state is war, ⓐnarchy is order. 00:14, 28 January 2011 (UTC) Great idea. But annoying to have to carry an extra inventory item - perhaps minscule/small fires wouldn't require an extinguisher. Any bigger and you'd be told that fire is too big to put-out without extinguisher, or whatever. Also, would prefer if extinguishers ran out in a similar way to spray-cans, rather than being one use only. Otherwise, even a skilled-firefighter would require many 'guishers to put out a large fire = annoying to search for, and carry. Stinguishers would be a nice melee weapon addition too. Also fire should increase in size much slower. Every 30 minutes would suck. Perhaps the same rate as ruin-repair. And 3AP to attempt to put-out a fire sounds shitty. Changing % of success surely better than costing more AP. Also what would happen to someone sleeping in a burning building? --  ▧  : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 12:07, 6 February 2011 (UTC) Suggestions up for voting The following are suggestions that were developed here but have since gone to voting. The discussions that were taking place here have been moved to the pages linked below. No suggestions from here are currently up for voting.