Developing Suggestions: Difference between revisions
| Line 138: | Line 138: | ||
You might go with a CHANCE of it happening, not automatic.--[[User:Pesatyel|Pesatyel]] 05:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC) | You might go with a CHANCE of it happening, not automatic.--[[User:Pesatyel|Pesatyel]] 05:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC) | ||
No need to change needle mechanics, they work just fine as it is --[[User:Diablor1|Diablor1]] 22:50, 1 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
---- | ---- | ||
Revision as of 22:50, 1 February 2009
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.
- With the advent of new game updates, users are requested to allow some time for the game and community to adjust to these changes before suggesting alterations.
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.
- The following suggestions are currently on the Overflow page: No suggestions are currently in overflow.
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
Show How Long People Have Been In Their Group
| Timestamp: | A Big F'ing Dog 21:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC) |
| Type: | Improvement |
| Scope: | Everyone |
| Description: | I suggest that profiles show not only a person's group, but when they last switched their profile to that group. Wouldn't it be pretty neat to see that someone has been a member for two solid years?
The way to display it would be to have a second box far to the right your group name in the unused space, like so: Group: Ninjapirates of Malton Member since 7/15/08 Switching groups would reset the start date, so if you want to temporarily switch your group you'd have to be ok with losing your original displayed date. Since there's probably no record of when people joined groups for everyone currently in a group would it say "Member since before" rather than "Member since" and it would display the date this suggestion is implemented. Comments? P.S. As a side note, this would also allow info to be added to the stats page showing the average length of membership of a group. |
Discussion (Show How Long People Have Been In Their Group)
Not a bad suggestion, It might put those people off that change group tags alot to PK others which probably is not that many people but still Its helpful! Plus it would be nice to see how long people have been with thier groups. --mo ヽ(´ー｀)ﾉ MCM MOB DB 21:34, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
How would you know, looking at a guy, that he's been a member of group X for so and so long? It doesn't make sense, flavour-wise. --Midianian|T|DS|C:RCS| 22:09, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- Well you know how many times a person (in zed form) has died by looking at their profile and that make no sense either so I cant seem the harm nor the point. --mo ヽ(´ー｀)ﾉ MCM MOB DB 23:01, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- It also doesn't make sense you know how long they've been in Malton, what skills they have, or for that matter, what group they're in. If we're willing to accept people can see how long they've been in the city, and what group they're in, why not how long they've been in that group? --A Big F'ing Dog 23:17, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- Well, flavour-wise, everyone has been here since the beginning of the quarantine (even characters that don't yet exist). Except maybe soldiers, can't remember if it says you were dropped in recently or something like that. The "Joined" bit is just when you started playing the character and doesn't really have much to do with your in-game character.
- You have to put the group tag there yourself, and you can be a member of a group without it. Your character simply has written it somewhere; their sleeve, forehead, one of those "Hello, I'm ______" things, whatever.
- Skills then... you're not sleeping the whole time you're logged out, you're doing stuff; eating, perhaps fixing and cleaning your equipment. You can deduce a lot about how someone behaves and the items they have. I don't really think skills should be visible, but then again, some of their inventory should. Hmm... maybe I'll suggest that.
- Anyway, "It's already broken" isn't a good reason for breaking it more. --Midianian|T|DS|C:RCS| 23:54, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- I don't think it's broken. First, this is really more of a stats page kind of thing than a roleplaying thing. The stats page isn't divination, it's just that as game players we know things characters would not know. Second, why not apply your reasoning as to why they can see your group? The person has something on their sleeve showing their rank, or a memento from a battle the group fought last year, or something else that clues you in to their duration of membership. --A Big F'ing Dog 00:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- "broken" might not have been the best word. Let's say "there are already things that don't make sense" isn't a good reason to add another thing that doesn't make sense. The problem with your explanation is that those probably wouldn't mean much to an outsider, and could be faked rather easily. With this you couldn't fake it. --Midianian|T|DS|C:RCS| 01:18, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- I don't think it's broken. First, this is really more of a stats page kind of thing than a roleplaying thing. The stats page isn't divination, it's just that as game players we know things characters would not know. Second, why not apply your reasoning as to why they can see your group? The person has something on their sleeve showing their rank, or a memento from a battle the group fought last year, or something else that clues you in to their duration of membership. --A Big F'ing Dog 00:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- It also doesn't make sense you know how long they've been in Malton, what skills they have, or for that matter, what group they're in. If we're willing to accept people can see how long they've been in the city, and what group they're in, why not how long they've been in that group? --A Big F'ing Dog 23:17, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
The sole use I can see for this would be to suss out PKers who change their group affiliation, or who falsely claim membership in a group. While the former is annoying and the latter downright dastardly, neither is technically illegal in any way shape or form. So, basically, it's a stealth PKer nerf. --WanYao 04:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- I guess it would make it harder for PKers to pretend they've been a member of a survivor group for a long time, but people wouldn't be inclined to kill someone just because they joined a group recently. They could be a genuine new recruit! I doubt PKers have to fear deaths that way, what group would want to kill potential new comrades? Also, if a PKer doesn't display a group it doesn't display a date. So if they want to go undercover they can still do that just by removing their group name. I don't think there's any real tactical advantage to pretending you belong to a particular group anyway. Most survivor groups heal and revive everyone, not just their own members. --A Big F'ing Dog 10:15, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- Most groups maintain some sort of roster located somewhere along with some kind of PKer list so it's not like they could easily impersonate a group for more than a few days, not really much of a nerf IMO. --Diablor1 22:47, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Cars
| Timestamp: | Allan Smiles 11:50, 31 January 2009 |
| Type: | Cover |
| Scope: | Survivors |
| Description: | Wait! Before you put down that this suggestion is under the frequently suggested ideas, read this. I don't think this is a dupe, but tell me if it is, please.(I am NOT suggesting that you should be able to drive cars!)
I think that in a city, it is silly to think that there wouldn't be any cars parked in streets or carparks. So, my proposition is that cars should be implemented into the game. Their purpose could be a short-term use for cover. Say that you are lost and running low on action points. You could collapse at any moment with fatigue. A car is perfect for that little boost of APs. If there is a car on the street where you are or the carpark, you can attempt to enter it. Once inside, you are free to rest a few hours. My idea is that the punishment cars can take are sort of like barricades for buildings. There are a few different types of cars I thought up. A Pick-up Truck-Pretty good damage, probably about the equivalent to a very strongly barricaded. A Sport Utility Vehicle-Can take the best punishment of all the cars, probably the equivalent to very heavily barricaded. A convertable-Pretty weak, the equivalent to lightly barricaded. (The weaker the car, the more common it is to find on the street.) If the doors to the car aren't locked, then zombies with the memory of life skill can open the car doors. If, by chance, zombie(s) get into the car, either by bashing it until it is open or merely opening the unlocked doors, they must drag the person out of the car to attack them. When you are looking at a car, when you are ingame and a car is on the same street as you, it'll look somewhat like this: "You are on (whatever street you are on) you notice a Sport Utility Vehicle/Convertable/Pick-up Truck. If you are a survivor. It costs 1 AP to approach the car, 1 AP to try the handle, 1 AP to enter and 1 AP to lock the doors. If a survivor is inside the car and it is locked, you will get a message after trying the doors saying that the doors are locked. Alternatively, if a survivor is inside the car and it isn't locked, you can use 1 AP to pull the survivor out of the car. If you are a zombie. It is pretty much the same, except if the door is locked, you have to bash it until the car is no longer able to keep the survivor safe, then it costs 3 AP to pull them out. You can notice if you approach the car and it is damaged enough to not be able to protect survivors. If it is, possibly a person with construction can repair the car to full hitpoints for 10 AP. I apologize for the length. This seems pretty obvious, so if it is a dupe, I again apologize for waisting your time. |
Discussion (Cars)
It is a dupe, sorry. But I CBAed to find it. --WanYao 20:22, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Hell I had the idea a few months ago.--Pesatyel 05:42, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Contaminated Needle
| Timestamp: | I AM TARA 18:09, 31 January 2009 (UTC) |
| Type: | equipment |
| Scope: | revivers and people getting revived |
| Description: | Using a revive syringe that was found instead of manufactured comes with a risk of giving the revived person an infection (assuming they weren't already infected when they died). I've been on hiatus for a while so I'm not sure if has changed, but I used to search for needles instead of making them myself so I guess this would deter this kind of action. |
Discussion (Contaminated Needle)
Kind of makes sense, but this is just too harsh, especially to newbies. It could be reasoned that the syringes are hermetically sealed (including the found ones) and are taken out only when you use them. Besides, it's not like you're finding them in the streets, you find them in a lab environment. --Midianian|T|DS|C:RCS| 19:00, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- What he said. Creative, nice idea in theory. But I think it's too cruel in practice. --WanYao 20:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
You might go with a CHANCE of it happening, not automatic.--Pesatyel 05:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
No need to change needle mechanics, they work just fine as it is --Diablor1 22:50, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Free Running Edit
| Timestamp: | Chuckiferd 04:00, 31 January 2009 (UTC) |
| Type: | Rule Change |
| Scope: | Survivors with Freerunning |
| Description: | I propose that survivors be *unable* to freerun out of ruined buildings, as currently they can.
My reasoning behind this is it would open up a new tactic for long term seiges, pro-survivor zombies could ransack adjacent buildings to help prevent parachuting zombies. Of course pro-zombie survivors could repair the buildings up, so it is not really that biased or unfair. Organized use of this tactic could make a "fort" out of any building or group of buildings. On the other hand, zombies could apply the same tactic to cut the survivors off from any help or support. |
Discussion (Free Running Edit)
Erm, you're saying people should be trapped inside buildings? As much as I'd like to support this given the current zombie-survivor ratio, it's really too much. --WanYao 04:23, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- -I am saying that they should be "trapped" inside *ruined* buildings. In any case survivors left after 5 ransackings would be an extreme case, and most likely the barricades would be down. But the real purpose would be to give survivors a tactic against zombies who will sneak in as humans, and give zombies an ability to cut areas off from outside support.Chuckiferd 05:26, 31 January 2009 (UTC) (could someone help me fix this, I can't seem to get it)
- How could you be trapped? A zombie can't ruin a building if there are survivors inside and if the building is ruined you can't free run into it. If the building is over VSB you can't enter it and if it is at VSB or below you can just leave. I've just woken up so I might have missed something, but it seems like if you could get inside, you could get out as well. You just couldn't use ruins as entry points. --Midianian|T|DS|C:RCS| 10:53, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- This makes no sense. Either Free Running simply doesn't function, and if you move you find yourself outside -- in which case it's not much different than the status quo, just adds AP to the process (and this is a dupe). Or, you actually are trapped inside, in which case you've created a death trap -- not a form of "protection" ... And a form of fucking with my AP, i.e., griefing... Ergo, totally spam... --WanYao 17:54, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- Also, what Midian said: buildings can't be ruined if there are survivors inside. Therefore, the only time this would even work is if a) the cades were VSB++ or lower (and why would you enter if you know you'd be trapped??) or b) someone makes a pinata and a revifying corpse who was already in there stands up. In either case, it's nonsensical suggestion that doesn't work within the game's mechanics. --WanYao 18:01, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, all the zombies would have to do is get the barricades at VSB and then send a parachuter in. I don't think parachuters are common enough to justify ever using this as a defence. This would cut off help for survivors and thus drastically shorten sieges, and break free running lanes much more severely than the current ruin does. --Midianian|T|DS|C:RCS| 10:53, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Gas Siphoner
| Timestamp: | Blake Firedancer T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T. 23:51, 30 January 2009 (UTC) |
| Type: | Skill + Item |
| Scope: | Survivors |
| Description: | This does two things to the game. Firstly, it adds Empty Fuel Cans to the game, with the same stats as a regular fuel can, only you can't use it to fuel up generators.
Secondly, it adds the skill Gas Siphoner to the Civilian skill list. This does three things:
In-game messages would read:
|
Discussion (Gas Siphoner)
So, for ~10AP you can get a full fuel can regardless of the state of the suburb? Way overpowered. And aren't petrol stations Borehamwood-only? --Midianian|T|DS|C:RCS| 00:47, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- Technicality. There are plenty of locations where one would possibly find fuel: Auto Repair, Carpark, Junkyard, and Police Station. Possibly Factory, Fire Station, Fort, Power Station and Railway Station.--Pesatyel 03:34, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, I didn't know about the gas stations being only Borehamwood. I suppose for Malton and Monroeville that Auto Repairs would work in the place of the gas stations. As for the over-powered aspect, maybe I should up the cost to 20AP, just like the syringes? Oh, and I suppose the pumps might be knocked out of submission via. cutting the power.--Blake Firedancer T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T. 04:49, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
You'll want to have a large failure rate, so it's worth the risk on ruined suburbs, but pointless in smaller ones. Linkthewindow Talk 00:49, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- Maybe an increased AP cost will make searching more viable. --Blake Firedancer T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T. 04:49, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
What about the possiblity of, well, injury or getting splashed? If your physically sucking the fuel out of a car's gas tank, there is the possiblity of accidentially swallowing some or getting the gas on your clothes.--Pesatyel
- Good point. I suppose that failed siphoning attempts could coat the player in fuel. How about a 50% chance of failure with spillage? --Blake Firedancer T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T. 04:49, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
This is just retarded. Search Autos and Factories like the rest of us. --WanYao 04:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Comments above this line refer to version 1 of the suggestion. Version 2 is now up. --Blake Firedancer T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T. 22:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Jump from window
| Timestamp: | Dr Rosenrosen 19:20, 29 January 2009 (UTC) |
| Type: | Interface |
| Scope: | Anyone in a building |
| Description: | When a Survivor jumps out of a window it shows upon all the other residents interface. Just like "A Zombie brought down the last of the barricades" shows.
"Dr Rosenrosen jumped out of a window." or
"Dr Rosenrosen jumped out of a window and plunged to a certain death." or
"Dr Rosenrosen couldn't take it anymore and jumped out of a window." |
Discussion (Jump from Window)
Dupe. --Midianian|T|DS|C:RCS| 19:39, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Headphones
| Timestamp: | Robshadow27 9:07, 29 January 2009 (UTC) |
| Type: | Item |
| Scope: | Survivors |
| Description: | Spamming altogether has created an element of gameplay that some survivors are not fond of. Others wish for their younger children to be able to play, but choose not to because of constant radio broadcasts of vulgar language by those who wish only to annoy, and by passerby's harassing survivors huddling together in buildings. Therefore, I would like to propose an idea whereby survivors could mute the speech of other players by wearing headphones, which could be found at any mall in the Tech Store. Of course, like any other item, it would be necessary to search for the headphones, which would have a search rate of roughly 10 %.
Alternately, instead of a search function, headphones could be worn in place of a hat, in which a survivor would either A)not hear any conversation, or B)hear only muffles, equivalent to a groan being heard. The text could read "You see <insert name here> talking, but only hear muffles behind your headphones." This would eliminate the problem of encumbrance, if that were to become an issue. |
Discussion (Headphones)
Radio Spam is a pain in the ass but such an action to filter language for children who may play would deprive them of the many benefits talking has... In any event, any child mature enough to want to play a zombie game has probably heard more bad words in the playground than they will hear in game so I am not really sure that this is worth programming. --Honestmistake 10:07, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
- I see where you're coming from but the more i think about it the less useful it seems. What about offensive graffiti or profile names? --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 10:16, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
I actually like this. I think this is the first suggestion of the year that I do like. We have a benefit (removal of messages that may offend) for a downside (ability to hear helpful speech removed). I'd prefer the item to be an findable item rather than a clothing slot, only for the reason that all clothing slots should be flavour only, with no implied use.
The problem is where to find them. For their intended purpose they'd have to be found first, meaning the cute kiddies that this is meant to help would still be subject to the 'bad' words until they do find them.
The only foolproof way to manage this is to put an age bracket on the signup screen, giving all players 15 and under this as a bonus item automatically (players aged 16 and over would start as normal). The item could then be found by all players at certain locations in the game should they choose to gain the item. A small encumbrance penalty, say 2%, would be fair. Limiting it to mall tech stores is flawed, add in buildings, clubs and junkyards and this might actually work. -- 
.
. <== DDR Approved Editor 14:06, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
I find it disturbing that you're worried about "vulgar language" in a game that involves:
- lots of blood,
- zombies killing survivors,
- survivors killing zombies,
- zombies killing zombies,
- (and most importantly) survivors killing survivors (ie. MURDER).
To fix that, I'd suggest another item to complement the headphones: Candy-Lensed Safety Goggles. For the wearer they'd turn all weapons into Template:Wikipedia, melee attacks into hugging and kissing, infection into cooties, blood into lemonade, zombies into hares, and survivors into rabbits. Damage would be called "nuggets of joy" (as in: a hare hugged you for 3 nuggets of joy) and dying would be called "fainting from happiness". And the interface would be pink. And the game would be called Urban Lagomorphs. --Midianian|T|DS|C:RCS| 15:57, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'd play that game. --A Big F'ing Dog 16:25, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah... maybe 8 year olds shouldn't be playing UD. However, if you do have your children playing, and you're concerned about the content -- follow what all the advice on good parenting says, and play with your kids, don't leave them unsupervised -- and then try to nerf the game for the adult majority because you CBAed to supervise your kids.
- As for spam... sheeesh, who's making you read it? Why doesn't it bother me? Or, how about this: leave the safety of green wanker suburbs 00 which is where all the spam happens, anyway -- and go help where it's needed. Less spam. More impact.
- That out of the way... The mechanic of this does more to discourage survivor organisation and encourage the undirected, individualistic trenchcoater playing style than anything I have seen in ages. --WanYao 20:05, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Dupe of Ear Plugs specifically. Also Ignore Certain Types of Messages. As for the age thing, he just, perhaps, needs a disclaimer on the main page.--Pesatyel 04:11, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I actually don't have a problem at all with the radio broadcasts, and receiving all types of noises and communications. I enjoy the spamming for what it is. I really only felt like submitting this idea to actually get an idea out here, to learn the process, and because there are others in my group who are concerned for their children. I believe that it is really up to the parents to deal with the implications of playing a game such as this, as it does have a good deal of violence. I thank you all for your comments, and I will also think harder on these ideas for the next time. Also, thank you Pesayel for pointing out the dupe. That was my fault for not searching thoroughly enough.--Robshadow27 06:10, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
- It's not problem, that's the point of the page. Finding dupes isn't that easy and there is nothing wrong with representing an idea.--Pesatyel 07:01, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Flare Accuracy Increase
| Timestamp: | Yungblood 23:22, 28 January 2009 (UTC) |
| Type: | Zombie Hunter Skill |
| Scope: | Flare Gun Accuracy, which means survivors I guess |
| Description: | Decorated Malton survivors are now becoming more accurate when firing a flare gun at a target.
Logically, at the distance you have to be at to effectively hit a target with a shotgun, the proximity would have to be pretty close. So, shooting at you target with a flare gun wouldn't be too hard, but the room for error would still be large. My suggestion is simple, increase flare gun accuracy by means of a new zombie hunter skill: Flare Experience- Player gets +5% to hit with a flare gun. I chose 5% because i believe anything over 5% would be too overpowering. This wouldn't make a flare gun a primary weapon for someone to use, but it would make it a little more useful when ammunition is low and you happen to have a surplus of flares. P.S. I'm horribly at finding dupe suggestions, so I'm sorry if there already is one like this. |
Discussion (Flare Accuracy Increase)
Survivors already have really nifty things called Pistols and Shotguns. Flares are supposed to amazingly inaccurate, that's the whole point. However, they deal 15 HP of damage if they hit -- and 30 HP (!!!) if you hit someone with fuel-soaked clothing. Firearms don't need buffing, including Flares. --WanYao 00:38, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Flares are a novelty weapon-the point is that they are so amazingly inaccurate (as Wan said,) that they are useless except in a randomly find and then use environment. Linkthewindow Talk 11:23, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
- Actually for rank newbs, their high variance makes them better than firearms. For real. But, yeah, they'e not meant to be accurate, that's the point. --WanYao 04:26, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Find faces in a crowd
| Timestamp: | Linkthewindow Talk 05:13, 27 January 2009 (UTC) |
| Type: | Interface |
| Scope: | People in crowded buildings |
| Description: | It's logical to assume that it would be easier to recognize people you already know in a crowded building. In short, people who you have added to your contact list will appear on a separate list below "list names"-similar to the message that shows you recognize zombies in a horde. A quick check finds no dupes, but I'll be happy to be proven wrong.
It would look a bit like this: You are inside St George's Hospital, dark corridors leading through abandoned wards. The floor and walls are marked with splashes of blood. The doors to the street have been secured. There is a crowd of 71 survivors gathered here. [list names]. You recognize Boots the Monkey, Mightyoak, Violet Begonia and mere bystander in the crowd. |
Discussion (Find faces in a crowd)
Tear apart when ready. Linkthewindow Talk 05:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
I hate you. Because you thought of this, and I didn't.... IMNSHO this is a fantastic idea! As long as it applies across the board to zombies as well, then I love it! And hate you... ;P --WanYao 06:07, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
This is great. Save the IP hits :) --xoxo 06:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
I was wondering why I couldn't but never put much thought into it. ■■ 06:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Simplicty itself. Of course, contacts you recognize among the survivors should be seperate from the contacts you recognize among the zombies. The two "recognition lists" should follow the total numbers of humans and zombies, respectively. --A Big F'ing Dog 07:05, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
How does this affect the order of precedence?--Pesatyel 07:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
I could have sworn I'd seen this before. Turns out I had, and it ended up in Peer Reviewed. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 10:19, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Not surprising-I was surprised I didn't find it in my search. Thanks. Linkthewindow Talk 10:24, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- No probs! I just searched the Suggestion namespace for "recognise". What can I say? I have search kung fu. ;) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 10:30, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Props
| Timestamp: | A Big F'ing Dog 22:53, 26 January 2009 (UTC) |
| Type: | Improvement |
| Scope: | Clothing |
| Description: | This is a clothing suggestion, but I'm posting it here because it's to suggest a new slot of clothing instead of a single garment.
Clothes are designed to act like costumes, correct? If you're a doctor wear a labcoat, etc. Playing soldier? Wear dogtags. But part of a costume is what you're holding. Since people can't see your inventory, I suggest adding a new clothing slot for a prop. What is a prop? It's something you hold. It could include stuff like: A purse. Guitar. Backpack. Flags. Walking stick. Cane. Flute. Boxing gloves. Flowers. Candy bar. Swiss army multitool. Mirror. Sleeping bag. Manila envelope. Polaroid camera. Etc. Props would be the same as clothing. You wouldn't search for them but instead add them to your profile in select buildings. Just like clothing they'd have no in game effect, and they'd get bloodied and damaged each time you're killed. There would be no props that overlap with actual items (so no fire axe prop). Zombies would be able to select one prop, but just like clothing after that they'd need to get revived to get new props. This seems like an obvious suggestion, so if you can find a dupe please let me know. |
Discussion (Props)
I'm not opposed to the idea, but there is a significant factor your neglecting. Most players have a weapon in hand. Would it mean you'd be able to see what weapon someone is using?--Pesatyel 03:20, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- No, weapons wouldn't be props. You wouldn't see anyone's inventory at any point. The idea is more about the thematic trademark possession your character might carry rather than weapons. Stuff like a cane, a cigar, or a purse. --A Big F'ing Dog 07:03, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
There are just so many possibilities to cover. Too many. Just put it in your character description. --WanYao 06:19, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Construction Worker
| Timestamp: | Corinthias 22:46, 26 January 2009 (UTC) |
| Type: | New class |
| Scope: | Survivors |
| Description: | There are many kinds of people that escape a post-apocalyptic zombiefied world, and no one has considered the working class. I suggest a new class of civilian, the construction worker, who starts with:
Naturally, this is a hard character to level up, as you don't gain experience with the construction skill. In itself, it balances out to being a skill that novice and beginner classes would have difficulty leveling up with, and experienced players would still have a rough time. |
Discussion (Construction Worker)
- The problem is that survivors could create lots of level 1 characters just to repair ruined buildings. All those 80+ AP ruins out there? A survivor could create a throwaway character to patch it up. I think this has been suggested before. --A Big F'ing Dog 22:58, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
This has been suggested many times before and spammed out for the above reason. --Papa Moloch 00:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- What the above two said-mostly zerging issues, and we don't need another useless starting class Linkthewindow Talk 01:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
First, there is this already in Peer Review. Then we had this and this. That was just searching for "constructio worker". The game really doesn't need new classes since th are all, roughly, the same by level 6 anyway. Plus, this is just zerge bait.--Pesatyel 03:40, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
