User talk:Katthew/Zombie Improvements

LOL YOUR A GIRL RITE

Yeah, your zombie looks awesome. And so do your suggestions. I have 3 characters, one a zombie and two survivors (even tho one is zombified). Even tho the zombie is by far my favourite one, the survivor who is searching for revives is a PAIN to play. I'm thinking of dumping him and creating a new Civilian instead.

Your ideas should all be implemented. ~m ^T! 01:02, 9 October 2010 (BST)

I know, right? I'm fucking kickass. Most of the scrubs on here won't even admit that, though. --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 15:41, 12 October 2010 (BST)

Good Ideas

I must admit, you have some interesting ideas here, I'd love to see them added to the game. Hell, I may tend to be pro-survivor, but the fact that playing as a zombie is boring's WHY I'm pro-survivor...it should be FUN to play the bad guy. Then again, I might just enjoy using those new zombie skills against other zombies...I can see it now, a giant blood smear on the wall of a ruined building, warning ferals of the horrid things I'd do to them...heheh.--volt 21:04, 12 May 2008 (BST)

@#$% yeah! I love all your ideas! I play dual natured and think the game is initialy broken for zombies. Every thing on the page is perfect.Turtleboy412 21:03, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Two Cents

If Derma Mortis and Recomposition were instituted in the game tomorrow I'd kiss your feet for presenting them. Because of the vilification of The Dead it can be difficult to actually get a revive without having to change your ID tag, something that's pretty low to begin with.

My only problem with Derma Mortis is that survivors still have to find that flak jacket first, something that can be very difficult considering the overbarricading of most PDs in green and yellow zones. I'm not too sure how to fix this, maybe make it a "lasts for X AP" effect that costs 3 AP to use, echoing the search that a survivor would have to go through. What does everyone else think? Rudiger Jones 11:11, 19 April 2008 (BST)

Even the two survivors I created during the initial March of the Dead managed to find flak jackets within a day or so. Far faster than it would take a beginning zombie to gather the requisite 100XP. By the time a zombie gets 'old' enough to gather the 100XP easily, a similar survivor will long have purchased Freerunning. Plus, of course, a newbie survivor that gets in to a PD can search in relative safety, whereas the newbie zombie trying to get XP for the skill may very well have to spend an extra 15AP a few times while trying to gather the XP.--DoohickeyBones 16:34, 19 April 2008 (BST)

Yeah great suggestions, I also wish there could be some kind of buff to the RNG if there was more than 50 Zombies around you, kind of a horde bonus. This would really make zombie players work together, and make playing Zombie characters logical for people that want to play as a team--Glovey joe 19:28, 19 April 2008 (BST)

That would make a certain amount of sense, but it would require that the survivors got the same sort of buff. While that would bring an amusing level of complexity to raid planning, it would hose the solitary zombie trying to break in to a building, or the solitary survivor trying to scoot through a burb unnoticed. It also rather shoots the KISS principle square in between the eyes.--DoohickeyBones 15:22, 21 April 2008 (BST)

Maybe it isn't simple, and maybe it is a bit of a shit idea, but it would be nice to come up with some ways to make zombies different from survivors, as opposed to suggesting improvements which are just alterations/variations of existing human skills. Perhaps like an expansion of the infection skill which means it becomes contagious among survivors, or an ability which allows zombies to eat the brain of the survivor, which means the character cant be revived for 24 hours. I know i may not be keeping it simple but hey, I think it would be cool.--Glovey joe 16:57, 22 April 2008 (BST)

The brain eating idea sounds so destined for Zombies. It also sounds a lot like Katthew's Headcrush suggestion. ((Though, I prefer the eating brains thing, because, well, brains and zombies.)) Back on topic, though, toying with the RNG wouldn't have to be so obvious on the backend. Maybe there could be a zombie skill that increased the chance to hit with all attacks by 10% when with 10 or more zombies. Of course, doing it that way seems like it would present problems because it would benefit higher level zombies more than the level 1 dudes. As it is, I found it incredibly hard to get my first few levels as a zombie. Even if there were an option to increase my hit rate when with other zombies, I doubt I would have taken it before Lurching Gait, Ankle Grab, or the hand attack improvements.--TagUrIt 22:44, 22 April 2008 (BST)

Well thats fine, Im not concerned about it only helping higher level zombies because if you really think about it, you only get skills by going up in level, so every currently existing skill benefits higher zombies more than lower zombies. I would just like to see a few suggestions that were completely original to zombies, "Headcrush" being an answer to "headshot". I would think the zombie would be more appealing if it had a completly different style of game, as opposed to two types of characters that can do the same thing. Let the survivors have "radio" and the bility to search for and wear armour, but give zombies the ability to walk into a building, rot in it, and leave a cloud of pestilence meaning that any survivor that goes into it gets infected, or something. That would be cool right? maybe not, but it is original!--Glovey joe 16:41, 23 April 2008 (BST)

That would be really sweet. Maybe it could be a secondary effect ((requiring more skill points)) to the "Deathly Torpor" suggestion. Actually, it would be really strong, being the only area attack in the game, but damnit, it would be sweet. --TagUrIt 17:44, 23 April 2008 (BST)

Lose Digestion

I've been thinking about this, Katthew. I think that Digestion as a skill really needs to be removed.

Digestion as a means to heal is completely unfair. It gives you only a 30% - 40% chance to heal 4 points. Survivors get 100% chance to heal at least 5. There is never a FAK failure, but with the RNG bites miss all of the time. Since there is no real penalty for a zombie to die having to heal is moot anyway. If the means to heal themselves is going to be implemented it should be 100% chance for success otherwise what is the point?

As it stands right now it is just an extra 100 XP that a zombie must spend to get to an actual useful skill Infectious Bite. If the desire to make Infectious Bite cost more then why not either add another % bonus to bite bringing it up to 50%? Survivors have many weapon skills that are 50% - 65%. Zombies max attack is 50% and for much less damage. They should have 2 attacks at 50% to "balance" with the survivors multiple attacks at 50-65%. --DCC 21:41, 5 April 2008 (BST)

Infection isn't much better considering FAKs are the easiest thing to find in the game, the only way it ever pays off is against newbies who get revived and can't find a hospital fast enough. Digestion is just meant to be a secondary bonus, if the goal is strengthening bites the goal should be making infection harder to heal so the 30% to hit is actually worth it for anything other than a very weak variance attack.--Karek^maps?! 04:09, 6 April 2008 (BST)

Karek stop being a faggot that I agree with and go back to just being a plain ol' faggot. As soon as I figure some way that Digestion/Infectious Bite can be fixed or improved, I shall update my awesome page. In the mean time, peace out and gtfo my page カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 23:57, 7 April 2008 (BST)

Headcrush

Not a bad idea, tho i would suggest it to be only on killing bites. - Pardus 08:26, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Why? Headshot isn't restricted, you can punch someone and it'll work. Survivors can use guns and have a 65% chance to Headshot, and you want zombies to be restricted to a mere 30%? I've already watered it down like Hell, there's nothing more I can do without it being ineffective. --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 09:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

It wins on flavour, giving bite a real use and slipping it past the survivor whiners. - Pardus 09:58, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, well, in that case still no. --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 10:18, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Head crush looks realy good. Why don't you put it on the suggestions page? If you put it in as a suggestion and it doesn't get though then at least it's still recorded as a suggestion. Otherwise it's just going to float around here and not get noticed. Oh, and I would have thought it would be easier if anything for a zombie to crush someone's head with its hands than with teeth.--Seventythree^Talk 10:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Because the suggestions page is full of mongoloids who will go "ARGH NOT ANOTHER ZOMBIE BENEFIT, SURVIVORS ARE SO UNDERPOWERED" and bitchkill it as fast as they possibly can. Having that happen wouldn't benefit anyone, so I'm just going to keep throwing the link in people's faces until Kevan eventually notices how Goddamn great I am. --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 11:38, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I have a feeling it will get noticed here. Or, someone who care enough to go through suggestions will try it and have it kill voted.--Karek^maps?! 11:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Headcrush -- while a zombie *should* have a head-shot ability, your listed ability is a bit overpeored. Also, headshot requires ammo. Plus, infections carry over to survivors. Along with these other new skills, "Headcrush" or anything similar isn't needed (for now). Midnight Reviver 19:10, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

BZZZZZT WRONG. Headshot does not require ammo. If you have the Headshot skill, then any killing blow will do it. You can punch a zombie and it will work. So fuck your stupidity. I've already watered it down so damn much - if your precious survivor has Digestion then you can not only instantly cure itself but also do damage to THE ENEMY at the same time. The DNA scanner will notify anyone what needs to be done so you don't have to go "WAH WAH HEAL ME". Any more wussifying and it won't even be worth adding into the game. Goddamnit why are you pubbies so fucking stupid?! --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 19:40, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

OK then junior, that's a problem with the survivor class. It can be fixed by taking away from the survivor class not by slathering more skills (to either class). Thanks for adding healed with a first aid kit or digesting someone. That would make it balanced (but the survivor Headshot still needs to be fixed).
And here's a tip about pubbies. Fix us, put up with us, or GTFO. If it doesn't work with your mirror, it won't work here. Midnight Reviver 21:59, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

haha oh pubbies why are you all so retarded カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 00:43, 4 April 2008 (BST)

It actually might not be that incredibly terrible if a survivor had to be infected to be headcrushed since they'd lose the infection by being healed before revived so the headcrushing zombies would still have an incentive to infect those they were going to kill. Any "finishing shot" mechanic is retarded as hell, though. --Riseabove 17:39, 22 April 2008 (BST)

IMO Butts.

I like everything here, but zombies don't have enough exp options to make any of these achievable without great pain. --Gregarious Instigator 02:31, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I like everything here, but zombies are not antipathized here in the wiki. Some of the pages you quoted, like MIC and the Suburb Danger Map are really neutral on that matter. I'm saying that because i was the one who designed this tools and i am pro-zombie... and wouldnt allow such tools to be against my kind ;) --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 11:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

As I said on the page, "If you disagree, you're wrong and will be mocked." You are wrong and you will be mocked. The wiki and the game in general has such an anti-zombie boner it's ridiculous. I guess I could patiently explain, but you're an admin and therefore utterly blind to the numerous flaws of this wiki and the admins who run it. --Katthew 13:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I dont mind being mocked, as i mock myself eventually :D And you are wrong about the utterly blind part. I try to always listen when people have a problem with the way things are run in here, as you could clearly notice if you followed our policy discussions. If you really have a problem with how things work in here, feel free to explain these things to me... you can use my talk page for that, i will hear you as long as you keep the conversation civil. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 14:11, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Trying to have a civil discourse with you people is like asking a brick wall to move - it'll accomplish nothing and also you're thick. In your eyes, Something Awful is "the enemy" and out to shit up the wiki and ruin the game and raaarrgh where's my mod colour. Plus the last time I tried to do something to illustrate the complete and utter shameless hypocrisy showcased openly by you tin pot wikiphiles I got banned and then re-banned after some "mod discussion" that amounted to "who objects to me banning Katthew again oh nobody well that's that". The only people who have an issue with that are my friends from SA because of this stupid "SA = bad" thoughtvirus you've got around here, so you'll ignore them because they don't count.

You're so deeply ensconced with protecting your own private little kingdom from the various wicked villains your paranoia supplies you that you're not liable to listen to reason. You've wrapped up the administration of this wiki in layers of ceremony and red tape so that it's a fuckin' chore to just get your voice heard. If I want to take issue with one of you for doing shit, I've got to deal with a page full of rules and the fact that you people are one big incestuous circle. An attack on one of you is an attack on all of you. I couldn't possibly address my issues with you people and your sheer incompetence without having every last one of you out to fuck me, unlubed, in the ass until it bled. Fuck, I'm probably going to get banned just for saying that.

I know your type, I've dealt with you before. You've gotten into a position of power and even though that power is slight, you love it. You rationalise protecting that power with the notion that you know what's best for everyone. You think that changing the way things are done isn't right, unless it's something you approve of. Something to obfuscate what you're doing, to put a veneer on things. You present this pretence of being a just and benevolent authority, but you're just another bigot exercising what power he can to oppress a minority.

So here's an idea, why not make it so all goon votes on page deletions and other matters only count as 3/5ths of a pubbie vote. --Katthew 15:21, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Get off the cross, you're just someone who decided to commit vandalism as an easy way to "get your voice heard". Everything else is you complaining because you got punished for it and don't want to take the one very easy step that has been pointed out to you and your "goons" many many multiple times now to address any abuses of power. You're choosing to be ignored and then complaining about it because you have nothing better to do.--Karek^maps?! 16:11, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll take it as willful ignorance that you ignored my point that you jackasses stick together and defend each other. Case in point, you step into this conversation to back up your buddy hagnat when the honour of the admins is besmirched. Kinda ironic that you just wound up proving my point, eh? Also most of my "vandalism" involved editing my group's page because it redirected to a page full of lies that could only be edited by admins.

Monroeville Defence Force, Monroeville Police Department, Monroeville Fire Department, Fire Control Corps, ABR, Army of Darkness, Dirty Nor'easters, Bread and Pasta, Nasioc, TGSN, ZomCon, Pink Metal!, Geriatric Zombie Revolution, Renegades Of Funk, UBCS Merc-for-Hire, JOS, Czech Survivor Squad, =420th=, khaos, Profile Police, Freelancer, ZombieFark, The Dirty Dozen, Evolution, QBH... all groups from the stats page that don't have wiki pages. Why aren't admins making pages for these groups? Why aren't admins locking those pages so the groups can't edit them? Why aren't admins banning these people for attempting to edit their own pages? What's the deal with airline food?

Would it be okay if I just posted a membercount and some stolen images on these pages? Then they could vote to delete the page and then I could recreate that page as a subset of User:Katthew and make the first page a simple redirect to it, then you could ban them if they deleted that redirect because it's vandalism.

Oh, wait! Silly me! They're not from Something Awful, so obviously they'd cream their jeans at the chance to have a wiki page because that's all a girl could ever dream of. Unnnngh God I'm getting so fuckin' wet at the thought of having a wiki page oh Christ mmm yesssssssss, how could I ever have believed that having one would be a colossal waste of time?! Oh wait, it could be the fact that this entire wiki is about as useful as pissing into the wind because the only decent admin it ever had was me. And, for the record, I would have deleted the page and honoured the group's decision to stay off-wiki. Because I was and will always be a better admin then you could ever dream of being.

So I'll get off the fucking cross the moment you stop fucking nailing me to it, you fucking retard. Posting anything in "Misconduct" seems like a sure-fire way to get the fire-hose turn'd on my uppity negro behind. --Katthew 16:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

These pages were never created. They made it to the stats, and no one took the trouble of creating pages for them... mostly because they are not notewhorty enough to have one. Your group, in the other hand, managed to hit a record in player numbers... that is indeed notewhorty enough to deserve a simple line or two written about it. You want to create a page for these groups you cited ? Go ahead... as long as you stick to the facts about that group it will be ok. Rudeness will be charged as vandalism, and i think you know that. And what lies are that you say were written by conn about your group ? The image i can't be sure, but all facts that were written in the page he created for you guys trully represent most of the known facts about the deads... no lies included. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 16:43, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll take the "notewhorty" typo to be you suppressing the urge to refer to me as "whore". In any case, it's been policy since time immemorial that group pages are edited by the people in those groups and not by other people, not even to clear up crappy formatting and lousy grammar. That's been established, that's the rules. And yet I get banned for "vandalising" my own group's page, by removing something added by someone who's not in the group. Except he's an admin so that makes it all okay. Maybe I haven't gotten it through your head, but if the only noteworthy thing about our group is that we have a lot of people in it then surely the stats pages explains everything you'll ever need to know.

The lies include... well, everything. Our goal is not "ransacking, killing, mayhem, and occasionally having fun", our leader is not JaundiceDave, our logo was not that logo (which means it should never have been used in that page), all (not "most") of our members are SA forumgoers, the group that hit Dunell Hills was not known as "the dead of Dunell Hills" during that time... fuck, I think the only remotely true fact is how many we have in our group, which is factually presented as "700+".

I'm not going to start any of those pages, though, because I don't believe that every group should have a wiki page whether they like it or not. I respect people's rights, unlike you admins. --Katthew 16:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm trying to give way for discussion, Katthew. you have a problem, let's talk about it. If you don't want to, that's fine. But you won't be able to say that we didnt gave you a chance to be heard if you happens to be punished for your actions. There is no need for us to go to A/A or A/M... i am not even linking to these pages... it can be my talk page, your talk page... keep a civil conversation and i'll surely discuss with you whatever issues you might have with this wiki current administration. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 16:36, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I think I outlined my problems pretty well - you've elevated the simple position of wiki admin, where you should just be going "quit that" on people's talk pages and banning people for being unrepentant assholes who replace a hundred pages with the word CUNT, to some kind of bizarre royalty. This is a publicly edited encyclopedia for a browser game and you treat it like the holy Koran. The fact you guys are such self-important dickholes makes that all the more pathetic.

It should be common sense that you shouldn't be doing half the stuff you're doing, but I guess it isn't for you people. Y'know, I instituted most of the sensible policies you have on this wiki - the NPOV section, for example - and founded the Suggestions page. Tell you what, just make me an admin again and I'll show you how things should be done. --Katthew 16:48, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I think i already said to you that i respect your work... what you have done for this wiki in it's early days is priceless, and we have plenty to thank you and those who contributed to this community in the past. But that's it... once you returned from more than a year away from this community (almost two years, in fact) you returned full force, shitting on other group's head, harrasing users for no good reason... that is something i fail to respect. You might have done a good job as an admin in the past, but this entire community changed while you were away. I do my job as sysop, but most of the times i am only a regular user... people choose to give more weight to my opinion because they respect me and what i have done in this place... not because i have more editing powers than they do. I am wrong sometimes, and have been punished for that several times already...

And since you have shown no interest in discuss your problem with the admin staff in a civil manner, i am not going to carry on with this discussion. If you ever yell again that we are unfair to you goons, i am going to simply point to this discussion. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 17:10, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

It's funny that you blame us for your problems. If Conndraka had never done his little bullshit tapdance, none of this would have ever happened and you would have been free to be King Fags of Cock Mountain. If you want to blame anyone, blame him. --Laughing Man 17:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Back when I was admin, I had people conspire to de-admin me for no reason other than they felt threatened by a loudmouth, cussin' girl be in a position of power. Not to go too feminist on your ass, but that was the exact reason. People around here and in the forums have always been intimidated by me, and that intimidation turns to loathing and fear. Even though I'm just one obnoxious punk brat who's got enough spine to support bigger tits than I've got.

However, if I'd had the brainwave to introduce all this "Arbitration" stuff, I could have gotten off with a li'l slap on the wrist for... well, whatever trumped-up allegations were levelled at me, I don't have a good memory for lies. As it stands, back in them days all it took was enough whining at Kevan to de-admin someone.

And I have shown a LOT of interest in discussing my problem with the admin staff, IF doing so wouldn't get me banned. Which it would. You can talk about my "contributions" to this "community" as if you actually respect me, but we both know the fact of the matter is that you and the rest would kill to get me permabanned from this place. That's why Kapek double-banned me like a bitch - anything to get me closer to that elusive indefinite ban.

Since you'll never promise not to ban me just for airing my grievances, we have reached an impasse that you seem eager to cover over by saying that I refused your "generous" offer and now I'm going to get banned repeatedly until I'm gone forever. You people disgust me. --Katthew 17:25, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I can and am promising not to ban or warn you for whatever you have to say. You can create a header for yourself in my talk page (if you dont have one already) and say whatever you feel is wrong with us... be polite, be civil, and i'll make sure to listen to you. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 17:34, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe later, then. I know I've certainly got more important things to do this weekend than talk about browser game wiki politics. --Katthew 17:48, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd just like to go on the record as saying that Karek is a gigantic faggot and hagnat is one as well, though less of one, and that every wiki admin that thinks that their shit smells so good they could sell it should die in a house fire, yes, being a gigantic obtuse dickhead on an internet encyclopedia for an internet game does make you a bad person just because you're so fucking terrible at the one thing that gives your life meaning. Get bent. <3 Katthew. RIP patients. --Zambargh the Ravener 16:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Look, if no-one is going to do anything to do with misconduct or whatever maybe we should all just leave off on the arguments for now. It's not like we're solving anything after all, and all we're actualy doing is getting angry at each other. Maybe leave it a week, then see what needs doing with a clear head?--Seventythree^Talk 16:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

eat shit and die --Zambargh the Ravener 16:56, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah, fuck it then. You obviously just want a big show. Go ahead. I won't be part of it.--Seventythree^Talk 16:57, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't be a diplomat, 73. No one likes 'em. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 16:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I guess not. Oh well.--Seventythree^Talk 17:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

And thank you for the compliment, Zambargh the Ravener... i like being less of a faggot than Karek :D --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 17:00, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey look I found you, hagnat! --Katthew 17:06, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Naaa... i am a patois :) --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 17:13, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Blood Smear

To be useful as zombie tagging why not make it where you can type 2 characters instead of just a drop down box. The flavour text could say, "You can make out a TD in blood on the wall." There is no way zombies can write more than 2 letters. If you just want a smear or a hand print then use special characters like "-" or "!" to paint it the same way the paint "censors" bad language in tags.--DCC 09:44, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Awesome

Katthew, this page is fucking amazing and is 100x better than anything I've ever seen on the suggestions page. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF MOB pr0n} 07:11, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

You may not have been around when I was moderating the suggestions page with an iron fist, then. But yes, yes I am awesome. --Katthew 10:33, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I was. I remember when you were a mod and making fun of Daxx and Ludwig was acceptable. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF MOB pr0n} 15:06, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Acceptable and encouraged! The whole UD community has gone to pot. --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 15:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Yup. Can't start a good fight against anyone anymore because people here get pissy. Pedophiles and faggots are getting away with shit because the wiki protects them. Instead of being ran by sane people, the wiki is mob ruled by a bunch of 13 yr old trenchies and military wanna-be's. I for one welcome our new goon overlords. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF MOB pr0n} 15:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Case in point seen below. --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 19:44, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Many of these would be fun to see implemented, but a few I have some questions about --

Static Hiss -- just plain useless; I'd rather much read subtitles (zombies shouldn't have trouble understanding one another) or have more articulate "groans" (not actual sentences, but something like louder versions of the masic "MRH", "GRAH", et al.).

Hit rates are FINE. They're no better than survivor's at comparable levels.

No 10XP bonus for successfull infection. That is overkill.

"Feeding" would make zombies nigh-invincible during a seige.

Zombie antipathy? Really? Midnight Reviver 19:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Static Hiss is a "fun" skill. Survivor graffiti is useless, let's remove it entirely. Hit rates aren't fine, you're an idiot. Try making a level 1 zombie and a level 1 scientist and see who levels up faster. Again with the XP bonus thing - have you ever played a zombie beyond toddling off to the revive point? Moron. Oh, fuck, I won't even bother addressing any of your other "points" because you are an idiot and you are wrong. Get the Hell off this talk page. --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 19:43, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

At level 1 it is impossible to level up without it taking weeks to level 1-3 times. You're an idiot. Fuck off my wiki. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF MOB pr0n} 21:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

There's a reason why the highest level zombies in Monroeville are around 4 but the highest level survivors are nearing 8.--Karek^maps?! 00:50, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Shut the fuck up, karek. Zombies are overpowered. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF MOB pr0n} 02:22, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I think it's because most are rolling survivor first, seeing as death = permanent zombie. I'd rather see how long I can survive, rather than start off dead. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 03:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

If anything that should/would be slowing survivor leveling. --Karek^maps?! 01:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

You would be surprised to how effective whack your friend than heal him is. (Where did you come up with that stastic, by the way? I thought the stats from both cities were joined). --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 01:52, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

They've been seperated for over a week now. There's no listed Monroeville stats, it comes from my having communication with pretty much every major horde in Monroeville and having seen survivors of those levels.--Karek^maps?! 02:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Horde? Ha. Where are they? I'm seriously bored, I've seen 1 zombie in only a week. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 02:37, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Good Suggestions

You put any of these up and I'll vote keep. Unlike some folks I don't have a problem with balanced suggestions and these make sense (although I can't do a whole lot in regards to the mentality on the wiki... Maybe if you can come up with a visual example of what you are looking for?) Conndraka^{mod TDHPD CFT} 18:16, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Putting them up on the suggestions page may be super~ for you pubbies, but it won't get them put in the game. As for the wiki stuff... eh, I guess I'll put together some fine examples of your stupidity. --Katthew 10:35, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

For one thing he made worthless unasked for pages for a bunch of those groups you mentioned up being in the stats page. --Riseabove 13:11, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay that can be examples 1 through 20. --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 15:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

You put any of these up and I'll vote keep. Yeah right! Then he will go and get you banned again for spamming the suggestion page then go back and put them all up as his ideas! We've seen this trick before!

With enough numbers...

Such as from, let's say, the UD regulars in the SA forums, you can get all of these through peer-reviewed. *wink wink* --Aeon17x 01:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

And if SA tried that, the votes would probably be struck before the suggestion closed voting. Oh, and great page by the way. I like quite a bit of it.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 23:45, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Why would they be struck? --Aeon17x 23:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Because SA votes only count 3/5 as much as pubbie votes because we are the GREAT SATAN. Don't you read the Admin pages?--DCC 00:22, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Pretty much the satan part. I think they'd get struck as "meat puppet" votes. That, and the fact that for some reason, everyone seems to hate the SA guys. I don't see why. I've dealt with much more shit on other wikis than what SA is unintentionally stirring up here. Yes, I said unintentional. None of this would have happened if they were allowed to run silent like they wanted to. I'm honestly having fun reading the stuff they say. Some of its quite creative.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 00:26, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

But you are not deceiving anyone. As long as you properly identify yourself, I don't see why they'd strike you out other than for pure hatred of your group. You're just using your votes as a player base (albeit a very huge player base) to influence how the game develops in the future. --Aeon17x 00:51, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

"pure hatred of your group". Haven't you noticed? A lot of people don't like them being here...-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 00:55, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

You can't just strike out a person's vote if you don't like the person, that's vandalism. As long as you play this right by justifying and signing every vote, and not giving in to the trolling attacks that might be hurled at your group, your votes will be counted. --Aeon17x 01:05, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

(Just in case you're a bit confused, I'm not an SA member. The way you're wording your posts seem as if you think I am) Meat-puppet votes have been struck before. And a lot of their votes would be considered meat votes, for the bit about being extremely new, and voting on only SA suggestions. Now, if they stayed afterwards, and contributed to the community, then the votes couldn't be struck as meat-puppetry. Its always possible for someone to strike them for one reason or another, and have a sysop say the strike was fair.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 01:21, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

(I know, the 'you' in my post refers to Katthew and the other SA members who might read this.) So what if they are new? They are still players of the game, they have a right to give their say as much as veteran people. Free speech and all that. --Aeon17x 01:37, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah yeah... free speech is nice, and we all like it... but when people have tried to rig voting processes in the past by creating new accounts to simply vote in their favor, well... the udwiki had to choose to forbid meatpuppetry and allow their votes to be struck. Sad story, but true. --01:46, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Can you kindly point me to the policy that says that? --Aeon17x 01:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

There is none. At least, no policy that says INDIVIDUALS (not new accounts made solely to vote for things, but individuals who play the game and suddenly decide to join the wiki) can't all vote for suggestions they like. In FACT, the whole idea of the suggestions page? Is that the playerbase of the GAME, not the membership of the -wiki-, is voting on what they'd like to see in the game. Being a wiki user doesn't afford you any special privilege, and someone who's been here for one day has a vote that's worth -just as much- on the suggestions page as anyone else's. The vote's only suspect if it's not substantive. In fact, if all 1500 of The Dead's players wanted to come to the wiki, and they were accused of being meat puppets? All they'd need to do is link to their character profile. That alone is proof that they're players of the game, and therefore THEY would be the "peers" to whom "peer reviewed" refers. Being a member of the wiki for a long time doesn't afford you any special status, that's the whole idea of putting suggestions to peer review: that anyone can review and anyone can vote. Any image of impartiality -requires- that votes by The Dead, and anyone else, count equally. As long as they really believe what they're voting for. And I think any member of The Dead would -honestly-, as people who play zombies and play them well, believe that these suggestions take care of some fundamental balance issues. I know I do.

Tl;dr version? If you want to shore up the numbers, The Dead will absolutely come, in force, representing a huge portion of the playerbase, and put these through peer review, I'm sure (anyone back me up on that?), but if Katthew doesn't wanna put 'em up, I can respect that because good suggestions SHOULDN'T need us to urge the people who like them to sign up to the wiki, they should do it on their own and press for inclusion of so very much of this stuff. The game's biased against zombies, it needs fixin'. These things would basically do that in one fell swoop. And that's worth shooting for, through every possible channel, in spite of pubbie tears. No, nay, BECAUSE of pubbie tears. Jerith 16:48, 19 April 2008 (BST)

I doubt I'll stick these on suggestions because pubbies killvote anything pro-zombie by principle and I doubt Kevan even looks at the suggestions page anyway. I mean, seriously. カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 16:08, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

My opinion

With the exceptions of headcrush, I honestly like all of these suggestions. I have a question though, why haven't they been suggested in the suggestions page yet? The man 09:27, 20 April 2008 (BST)

Putting them up on the suggestions page may be super~ for you pubbies, but it won't get them put in the game.
snip
I doubt I'll stick these on suggestions because pubbies killvote anything pro-zombie by principle and I doubt Kevan even looks at the suggestions page anyway. I mean, seriously.- Katthew in a section or two above this one.--DCC 13:19, 20 April 2008 (BST)

I'd say he's just afraid the community won't like the suggestions...--xoxo 04:17, 21 April 2008 (BST)

You're gay! And on a serious note, why don't you read the fucking talk page. The only people who don't like these suggestions are stupid like you. --אֲבִיּוֹנָה 18:13, 21 April 2008 (BST)

More like she doesn't see the point. They are getting enough attention here it seems. She's just odd sometimes anyway.--DCC 13:50, 21 April 2008 (BST)

Damn i hate the whole gender thing, i think females on the wiki should be forced to have the female template on their userpage, sure its sexist but dammit it would make second guessing, well, not guessing at all. Anyway as individuals they would almost all get peer accepted and i reckon Kevan flicks through the good ones when hes not too busy making teh money off monroeville.--xoxo 13:58, 21 April 2008 (BST)

You're ultra gay! And I have personally read through the peer-reviewed suggestions page and they already have a number of these suggestions in one incarnation or another, not to mention a slew of other ones that would make this game a lot more fun. Anyone who thinks that there is any reason that most of those suggestions aren't in the game already, except maybe that Kevan doesn't enjoy the prospect of writing all that code, is a fucking jackass. Like you. --אֲבִיּוֹנָה 18:13, 21 April 2008 (BST)

You so funny. Also, i agree with you on the reason the ideas aren't in the game is that Kevan doesn't like adding code, if you think you're the only one smart enough to figure that one out, you really need to get out more. And in relation to your above comment, i do like most of these suggestions, i didn't say anywhere i didn't, :) .--xoxo 05:16, 22 April 2008 (BST)

Whoo!

Some of your suggestions have been implemented. Congrats.

Well, what do you fucking know? Goons do know their shit when it comes to UD. Who wudda thunk it? -- #99 ^DCC 02:38, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I remember this from way back when. Congrats on getting dermal armor through, though I disagree with removing Digestion as a skill. That should still remain and Hiss be included in all future zombies. (at least allow a Zombies-to-Zombie telepathy option; Death Rattle still remains a game-flavor skill for zombie crowds, humans and while I'm at it, radios as well.) Pakopako 03:05, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Good suggestions. Mostly. Maybe they'd have a better if you were less... what's the word... antagonistic?--Ryvyoli ^{Y R} 09:15, 14 July 2010 (BST)

Hi, you must be new here (also an idiot). --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 08:00, 19 July 2010 (BST)

Partially vindicated on Scent Life?--User:Yonnua Koponen/signature2 08:05, 6 September 2010 (BST)

Won't be happy until I'm 100% vindicated on everything because I'm right about everything and the longer this game goes without recognising what an awesome jerk I am is the longer this game sucks. --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 14:56, 24 September 2010 (BST)

Keep Up the rage

If you pressure him long enough, he'll cave. At least he didn't give you the idiocy of safehouse. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 17:42, 12 October 2010 (BST)

Dude takes a lot from me (with zero fucking credit I might add) but he somehow manages to miss the fucking point of what I'm posting. --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 23:19, 16 October 2010 (BST)

Concur. Some very good points coming through in your recent edits, keep it up and bump him every now and then I recon. -- LEMON #1 12:13, 18 October 2010 (BST)

I keep throwing this stuff in his face but he doesn't pay the slightest bit of attention - until he takes one of my ideas, makes it shit and then puts it in the game to try and "balance out" his latest survivor megabuff. Not to mention your typical UD player has no concept this page even exists, and if they did they'd just go "but zombies are overpowered" and walk into the nearest wall. I need a motherfucking big print edition of this page or something. --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 09:50, 19 October 2010 (BST)

We could always nominate it for good article status? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 10:20, 19 October 2010 (BST)

Ehhhhh... maybe if I give it a complete overhaul. I've made updates, but a lot of it's still based in the distant past. I mean, the problems are still there, y'know? But it's all different now, even if shit has stayed the same. Still, I guess I've got nothing fuckin' better to do this shitty weekend. --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 14:40, 23 October 2010 (BST)

Blood Smear (October 29 update)

Partially vindicated? -- Spiderzed▋ 12:57, 29 October 2010 (BST)

Only partially --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 13:22, 29 October 2010 (BST)

Goddamn it is so weird and crazy how he takes all my ideas. I better get some motherfucking royalties for this shit. In any case, I'm going to redo the page with a list of all the ideas he stole appropriated and how he fucked up implementing them. Should be entertaining reading as well as more evidence that I am fucking awesome.--カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 12:38, 30 October 2010 (BST)

Should probs categorise the page under Category:Implemented Suggestions ;D -- LEMON #1 15:48, 30 October 2010 (BST)

Technically they're not suggestions. More, I don't know, screaming demands. KEVAN I STILL WANT MY GOTHIC LOLITA CLOTHES --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 17:18, 30 October 2010 (BST)

Empty Buildings

How do. Just reading through your suggestions, and there's a slight tweak I'd like to suggest. Instead of using your nose to be told "This building smells empty", how about using your zambah's ears instead ("You can hear movement inside" or if there's more than 25 survivors, "You can hear lots of movement inside"). Cheers, ~~ Chief Seagull ~~ ^talk 14:17, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

All the other zombie skills for locating things are smell-based - Scent Death, Scent Life, and whatever - so forgive me for sticking with the theme. --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 10:56, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Bellow

It's IMHO hardly worthless. 10AP might be a steep cost, but it alerts zombies in a 21x21 blocks area. That's 441 blocks. Assuming an average spread and working off the current stats page, there should be 0.78 zombies per block, meaning there are ~344 zombies who hear your call. Let's be pessimistic and say that 95% of them don't follow, because they are Mrh? cows, inside buildings, are already in front of the bellowing target, or can't otherwise be arsed to check out the bellow. That still means that 17 zombies will shamble over, making it a lot of easier to topple the building in question.
Compare to the groan, which just covers 13x13 blocks, or 169 blocks. Let's double the rate of following zombies to 10%, because they have much less blocks to move. That will just net 13 zombies - which might not sound like a lot, but still nets 200APs less to attack the building.
In practice (both from the zombie and survivor POV), I found the difference between bellows and groans much larger, especially in wars of attrition over time. Particularly ferals have become more dangerous due to it. -- Spiderzed█ 13:31, 17 April 2011 (BST)

I'm having a horrific moment imagining how truly terrifying it must be to be as fucking retarded as you. How do you even breathe? --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 13:46, 17 April 2011 (BST)

That is some crazy fuzzy math you're using there. --Laughing Man 13:49, 17 April 2011 (BST)

You're assuming that zombies are perfectly evenly distributed throughout Malton and even if that's true, that all active zombies want to kill survivors. A great deal of them are freshly killed survivors waiting for a revive. Never mind the fact that a zombie without lurching gait will use a great deal of their AP even getting to the bellow if they're near the edge of the bellow radius. Now take into account the fact that the vast majority of characters will not be at full AP. Bellow is fucking bad. عبد الريحم بن حسين بن عبد الرحمن العراقي المصري‎ 14:00, 17 April 2011 (BST)

17.199 zombies. --SprCobra 14:03, 17 April 2011 (BST)

I have taken dead pro-survivors into account, by flatly assuming that 95% of all zombies within range won't follow because they are Mrh? cows, inside buildings, are already in front of the bellowing target, or can't otherwise be arsed to check out the bellow. ("Otherwise be arsed" would include lack of APs, no Lurching Gait, not logging in in time, and all other reasons I wouldn't explicitely lay out.) And that is an _extremely_ pessimistic assumption. You are more likely to get something like 20% of the zombies moving over, especially with repeated bellows. (And SprCobra, look again at the stats page. 7828 standing zombies.) -- Spiderzed█ 14:06, 17 April 2011 (BST)

No you fool, dig UP! --モッズはホモです 14:21, 17 April 2011 (BST)

Its even worse than that. In those sad times when The Dead aren't here the chance of the survivor numbers needed for bellow are highly unlikely to be near large zombie clusters. They sit in their malls and forts and assume everything is fine. Hardly any of them know what wyke hills even is. This is in addition to the fact that a zombie faced with a groan or a bellow will normally pick the closest one. Bellow is pretty redundant. Its not as bad as the stupdity tax that is scout safehouse, but its still never worth 10ap. --Rosslessness 14:26, 17 April 2011 (BST)

Let's face it, the most profitable tax in Urban Dead is going to have to be a stupidity tax. --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ) @ 15:03, 17 April 2011 (BST)

Zing! --Rosslessness 15:07, 17 April 2011 (BST)

Speaking a player that runs feral zombies exclusively, I have noticed that Bellow does have a positive effect on reinforcements. As Ross says though, 10 AP is too much. Zombies with the Bellow skill should just automatically Bellow for 1 AP if they press the Groan button, if the required numbers of Survivors are present, of course.--

| T | BALLS! | 15:04 17 April 2011(UTC)

Bellow goes a way towards improving the situation for feral and small group zombies. A way to coordinate without the metagame or the spam that survivor communication engenders -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 11:28 18 April 2011 (BST)

The only purpose Bellow actually serves is marking large groups of survivors and even then the same thing can be achieved, and historically always has been, by groaning multiple times to make it clear there's a lot going on in a place. It's worthless.--Karek^{maps 2.0?!} 02:30, 19 April 2011 (BST)

Just like to say

You are the standard all other goons must compare themselves to. Keep living the dream. --Rosslessness 13:12, 2 May 2011 (BST)