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

Rage in Malton

Timestamp: Spiderzed▋ 15:38, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Type: "New" Mechanic

Scope: Newbs outside of Borehamwood (whether corpses or zombiefied)

Description: The recent wave of whining about the game being dying and cycling some "current" suggestions got me thinking about ways to make the game more newb-friendly. Borehamwood had a neat little mechanic called Rage, which allows a zombie who a.) hasn't Lurching Gait and b.) is in the presence of a harman to gain that skill instantly without any XP cost. Applying it to Malton would make it a good bit easier for newbs (for who being a zombie is hard, whether voluntarily or by being killed), and it would also give some incentive to new dyed-in-the-wool pro-survivor types to follow feeding groans who otherwise would never consider to play a zombie. As that mechanic already exists for another map, it should be easy-peasy to implement.

Discussion (Rage in Malton)

Could probably even be beefed up by adding Ankle Grab and/or Vigour Mortis to the Rage grab bag, but that might be a bit extreme. -- Spiderzed▋ 15:41, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Note to the dupe faction on DS: There were also two other suggestions about softening the effect of dying, but I think they are sufficiently different from this one, especially as this idea is built around an existing mechanic from another map. -- Spiderzed▋ 15:41, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

To play devils advocate; Helps zergers. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 15:52, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

So does everything useful. 17:58, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

i just like saying the word "poop" it makes me smile.--

bitch 19:28 7 March 2011 (UTC)

---

Defiled Graffiti Change

Timestamp: Smyg 18:06, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Type: Improvement

Scope: Survivor

Description: I'm not entirely sure if this is just a bug or an overlooked point and belongs elsewhere, or if it has been brought up before, but when you clean up a piece of defiled graffiti and then spray something new over it, the flavour text reads You improve your work. Given that you've just cleaned off gore from the original piece, and seeing has how cleaning it doesn't require a spraycan, you haven't actually added anything of your own, no? Therefore, it's not your work at all and shouldn't be claimed to be so. And yes, I'm aware I'm probably not making much sense.

---

ATHLETICS

Timestamp: Superhero827 17:22, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Type: MISCELLANEOUS

Scope: SURVIVOR

Description: PLAYER GETS AN EXTRA 15% WHEN ATTACKING WITH SPORTS EQUIPMENT

Discussion (ATHLETICS)

First of all - all caps? Yeesh. Secondly - this is a way too limited skill, not much use to it. Plus, I'd say it's rather excessive to have both a bodybuilding skill and an atheltics skill. Smyg 17:46, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

No. There's zero need for it. You want fancy weapon kills, you work for them. 19:03, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Make it 10%. I don't want hockey sticks to be better than fire axes. --VVV ^RPMBG 05:28, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Something very similar was rejected just a few months ago. Not exactly the same suggestion, but close enough to incite Dupe votes. And sadly so, as I think it would be perfectly in-genre to bash someone with a hockey stick or a cricket bat :( OTOH, it makes attacks with such oddball weapons all the more stick out, which is good for PKers going to kill with style and exclusiveness. -- Spiderzed▋ 13:31, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

---

City overrun

Timestamp: Zarak Goldleaf 17:13, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Type: Map change

Scope: Malton Map

Description: This might be a bit of an unpopular suggestion, but here it is anyway. The map should be reduced in size by 1000-2000 rooms or so. At present, population trends show the population at a low, as a result density of players is at roughly 1.6 players per room. At times the density has been as high as 5 players per room. As the game continues to lose players, it causes the density to continue to decrease, resulting in less interesting action, and more time spent wandering around looking for someone to fight. My suggestion is that 10-20 suburbs be termed 'overrun' and closed down for awhile, in hopes of bringing the density back up and reviving more interesting play from suburb to suburb.--Zarak Goldleaf 17:13, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Discussion (City overrun)

I like the idea of this, and indeed the game could use a density boost to keep things interesting. However my concern is that at current levels of survivors, shrinking the map might force an endgame situation where zombies just steamroll the city and survivors have nowhere to scatter. I'm not sure if that would necessarily happen, but it does seem possible. What do you think?--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 17:41, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't like it at all. People are rather fond of their city as it is. I'd say it would be better to create a separate map (á la Monroeville and Borehamwood) that is smaller. Smyg 17:46, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I suggested something similar a while ago. People just couldn't work out what to cut. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:33, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Restructure the suburbs individually. Remove a lot of the open space (streets, parks, etc), keep the buildings more clustered. Bringing all the burbs down to 9x9 cuts 19 blocks off of each one, and that's 1900 less blocks overall, isn't it? That seems to be a fifth of the overall map but that can't be right, can it? Still, it doesn't actually sound as difficult as the results would suggest. 19:07, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Restructuring the suburbs sounds like a solid idea. The main idea is just to increase the density of players in the world to increase activity and encourage players to stay playing. It has become increasingly annoying wandering around looking for action and just finding empty streets and buildings.--Zarak Goldleaf 03:21, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

My spin-off version: With the density of hungry undead and resistant survivors decreasing, the external military is now beginning to reclaim Malton, one block at a time. Every day, at server midnight, one of the blocks adjacent to the border is deleted, becoming part of the border. Complete destruction of the city would take 10,000 days, which means it would finish in late 2038 if it started today. Kevan could speed up, slow down, pause, or even reverse (the border becomes overrun, and a previously deleted building returns (repaired, but without cades, machinery, etc.)) the trend to fit with population change. All characters, active or otherwise, who are at a block when it is reclaimed would receive the message Military forces killed you in a hail of automatic fire. Your body has been moved away. They would become a dead body in one of the adjacent squares. If there are no adjacent squares (if all those around them have been reclaimed, and they were trapped in what would essentially be a separate city) they are moved outside a random strongly barricaded building, much like a newly spawned character.

This is better than hacking off chunks of city because it would be much more gradual, and we could see the effects before committing to a potentially game-destroying change. It would slowly herd fearful players ('If I sleep on the border, I could die!') into a smaller area, rather than suddenly uprooting entire regions. --VVV ^RPMBG 05:24, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

I really like this suggestion.--Mallrat ^{TSI TKS CTD} 12:21, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

---

Eliminate the Scout Class

Timestamp: -- | T | BALLS! | 20:05 28 February 2011(UTC)

Type: Improvement

Scope: Class Change

Description: The Scout class should go. It's terrible for XP gain anyway. The only real use for this class is for quick and easy spying/meatsheiding that can ignore cades upon creation. I don't think it's any coincidence that the game population never really changes but we still have around 4000 "new" level 1 characters created at almost all times. These aren't new people for the most part but old players just making an alt and exploiting it. No, it won't stop it all but the Scout class is just too ready made for making alt-abuse/zerging that much more useful while in and of itself is a lousy choice for real new players. Tell me I'm crazy now.

Discussion (Eliminate the Scout Class)

You're crazy. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 23:37, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Cut military classes entirely. Cameron's cutting the defense budget, surely paradrops into Malton are first to go. 23:38, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

I used to use the scout as my starting class. I was slow to level up, but it was better than getting EHBitched out of everything. ----Anarchomutualist _says: ^{The state is war, ⓐnarchy is order.} 23:50, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

I use it for getting a new alt to somewhere quickly, but it's such a small convenience overall that I don't mind ditching it for the game's sake. 23:52, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

You may very well have a point. It can't be co-incidence that i see so many lvl 1 scouts. --Honestmistake 00:18, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm with Axe Hack. My survivor started as a Scout, I'm clearly NOT a zerg, and it would be a cryin' shame to give the EHB greifers their final victory over new players. I'm clearly doing well for myself and I think getting rid of this class would not curb the greifing as intended. It would make it worse. --Espemon333 01:28, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

	No EH-bitching
	This user/group does not support barricading over Extremely Heavy without a good reason. Remember: overbarricading kills. Literally.

----Anarchomutualist _says: ^{The state is war, ⓐnarchy is order.} 22:35, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Seems fair. Maybe we could replace it with a survivor class with construction. What? No? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 22:43, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

We need a new scientist class, but suggesting an Engineer would be a dupe. ----Anarchomutualist _says: ^{The state is war, ⓐnarchy is order.} 02:26, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

If anything, there should be a focus on civillian classes, since that should really be the largest human demographic in one of these situations. 19:08, 6 March 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.