Suggestion:20090421 Overgrown Parks: Difference between revisions
S1leNt RIP (talk | contribs) |
CaptainVideo (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
'''Spam/Dupe Votes''' | '''Spam/Dupe Votes''' | ||
#'''Spam''' - ''Tonight on Urban Ground Force: Alan Titface goes on about flowers, that builder bloke puts in yet more unneeded decking to retain his money from garden centres and Charlie shows us her Dimmocks.'' -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 16:06, 21 April 2009 (BST) | #'''Spam''' - ''Tonight on Urban Ground Force: Alan Titface goes on about flowers, that builder bloke puts in yet more unneeded decking to retain his money from garden centres and Charlie shows us her Dimmocks.'' -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 16:06, 21 April 2009 (BST) | ||
#:Are you drunk? -[[User:CaptainVideo|CaptainVideo]] 00:48, 23 April 2009 (BST) | |||
#'''Spam''' - Anything that can be used for a hiding spot other than a safehouse is spam in my eyes, regardless of whether you can cut the grass down or not. --[[User:Fujiko Mine|Fujiko Mine]] 16:58, 21 April 2009 (BST) | #'''Spam''' - Anything that can be used for a hiding spot other than a safehouse is spam in my eyes, regardless of whether you can cut the grass down or not. --[[User:Fujiko Mine|Fujiko Mine]] 16:58, 21 April 2009 (BST) | ||
#*'''Re'''This is no worse than any random ruined building gameplay wise, except all you have to do is move into the square instead of wasting an AP "entering" the park. | #*'''Re'''This is no worse than any random ruined building gameplay wise, except all you have to do is move into the square instead of wasting an AP "entering" the park. |
Revision as of 23:48, 22 April 2009
20090421 Overgrown Parks
A Big F'ing Dog 14:58, 21 April 2009 (BST)
Suggestion type
Improvement
Suggestion scope
Parks
Suggestion description
Humanity may be dying but the parks are still alive. I suggest that as time goes on parks becomes more and more overgrown with weeds and wild bushes. The practical effect of this is that when a park is heavily overgrown, it would be impossible to see if anyone is in the park from outside (nor for people in the park to see those in adjacent squares).
Every 3 days left unattended a park would become one level more overgrown. A park would have three possible levels, marked by location descriptions commenting on the amount of growth, and the color of the square as seen on the 3x3 map. The colors in order of increasing weeds would be light green, normal green, and dark green. The effect:
- Light green: Has no effect. Allows people to see in and out of the park.
- Normal green: Blocks views in and out, but still allows binoculars to view into the park from tall buildings.
- Dark green: Blocks views in and out, and also blocks binoculars.
Survivors would be able to clear the overgrowth if they have a fire axe or a knife. It would cost 1AP to trim the growth by one level.
Overgrown parks would have uses for both survivors and zombies and shouldn't overwhelmingly help or hurt one side. Zombies could use them to hide, but so could stranded survivors. And while maintaining parks would serve as a small AP drain on survivors, that's balanced by the fact they can control them to allow binocular scouting. In the end, everyone is helped, everyone is hurt, and parks become more interesting. They become alive.
Voting Section
Voting Rules |
Votes must be numbered, justified, signed, and timestamped.
Votes that do not conform to the above may be struck by any user. |
The only valid votes are Keep, Kill, Spam or Dupe. If you wish to abstain from voting, do not vote. |
Keep Votes
- Hell why not, who dosent like gardening? --Pvt human 15:12, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- This sounds like fun. Wish I thought of it myself. --A Big F'ing Dog 15:17, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- Keep/Change - Increase the AP cost to trim growth to 10 AP or so, and no knives; only the Axe can be used (or a Machete if those were introduced...)--Zombie Lord 17:53, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- Keep - Zombies may not need a place to hide, but a hiding place isn't as valuable when it's maintained by the very people you're hiding from. In other words, more strategy gets thrown into the game. In other words, I like it. --LaosOman 20:15, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- Keep - As zombie lord --OrangeGaf Talk! 22:44, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- Keep- As OrangeGaf. Sorakairi 22:51, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- Keep - As zombie lord. But this will help new zombies from shotgun wielding headhunters. Mail2345 05:46, 22 April 2009 (BST)
- Keep - Something of value to both sides, with flavour to boot. Let's see it happen. --Maverick Talk - OBR 404 06:28, 22 April 2009 (BST)
- Hell yes - the dead take back the city from the living, and the plants take back the city from the dead. -CaptainVideo 06:49, 22 April 2009 (BST)
- Keep- I like it, and though the ramifications wouldn't be apparent until after it were implemented, I doubt it would be anything game-changing. And it adds flavor of course.--S1leNt RIP 22:19, 22 April 2009 (BST)
Kill Votes
- Kill - This is a straight up survivor buff. Zombies don't hide (they're zombies for fucks sake) and survivors don't really need any extra places to hide, especially one that is created by them sitting around and doing nothing at all. It gets repeated enough on dev sug and on voting sections, so I'm sure a few more times wouldn't hurt here. ZOMBIES DON'T NEED A FUCKING PLACE TO HIDE. ZOMBIES DON'T NEED A FUCKING PLACE TO HIDE. ZOMBIES DON'T NEED A FUCKING PLACE TO HIDE. ZOMBIES DON'T NEED A FUCKING PLACE TO HIDE. ZOMBIES DON'T NEED A FUCKING PLACE TO HIDE. ZOMBIES DON'T NEED A FUCKING PLACE TO HIDE. Ah, I feel better. Oh, alright, one more time. ZOMBIES DON'T NEED A FUCKING PLACE TO HIDE. --Johnny Bass 16:43, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- Re You can't see any value in a newbie zombie without ankle grab avoiding a headshot? And that hordes would find no value in hiding it's presence so survivors don't know to run from the 10 zombies next door? Also, zombies have a tool to reveal hiding survivors to those in adjacent squares: feeding groan. If a survivor can survive a night outside in a park that's more a stroke of luck than an imbalanced victory. --A Big F'ing Dog 17:13, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- Re No, I can't see the value of that for a horde because hordes don't encompass the majority of the zambahz in the game. Personally, I want other zambahz to be able to see a shit ton of us gathered somewhere. It serves as an indicator that something is going on. Hell, I don't mind the survivors knowing that there's a group of 30 gathered nearby because I doubt that the survivors would last long enough to organize a proper ZOMG RUN AWAYZ in the time it would take for the zambahz to recover the AP from their travels. Would it help the newer zambahz? They're told to hide amongst a large group of zambahz right when they sign up, so I don't think it would be all that helpful when a better option is already available. --Johnny Bass 17:49, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- I like the idea of having to be afraid of the stealthy undead. While zombies are not renowned for their stealth, it's pretty common for at least one in a film to sneak up on a survivor. -CaptainVideo 07:03, 22 April 2009 (BST) Non-author reply struck. --Midianian¦T¦DS¦SP¦ 11:34, 22 April 2009 (BST)
- Re No, I can't see the value of that for a horde because hordes don't encompass the majority of the zambahz in the game. Personally, I want other zambahz to be able to see a shit ton of us gathered somewhere. It serves as an indicator that something is going on. Hell, I don't mind the survivors knowing that there's a group of 30 gathered nearby because I doubt that the survivors would last long enough to organize a proper ZOMG RUN AWAYZ in the time it would take for the zambahz to recover the AP from their travels. Would it help the newer zambahz? They're told to hide amongst a large group of zambahz right when they sign up, so I don't think it would be all that helpful when a better option is already available. --Johnny Bass 17:49, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- Re You can't see any value in a newbie zombie without ankle grab avoiding a headshot? And that hordes would find no value in hiding it's presence so survivors don't know to run from the 10 zombies next door? Also, zombies have a tool to reveal hiding survivors to those in adjacent squares: feeding groan. If a survivor can survive a night outside in a park that's more a stroke of luck than an imbalanced victory. --A Big F'ing Dog 17:13, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- Kill - The trees are zombified and do not grow anymore. --Midianian¦T¦DS¦SP¦ 17:06, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- Kill - We don't need any more hidey-holes. --Bob Boberton TF / DW 17:07, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- strong kill you are suggesting that a once neat bit of parkland which almost certainly would consist of grass for sporty types to run about on could turn into the densest of amazonian jungle in a little over a week... do you have tree's where you live? If this was gradual (say 1 buff per week with 10 levels to go between stages) then I might be convinced to change my mind but even that would be akin to the army watering the fucking places with baby bio!--Honestmistake 18:07, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- Re This is assuming time in real life isn't 1 for 1 with Malton time. I mean, a click that takes one second can repair a rotted weed infested building that's been decaying for weeks. Or a person can walk across two suburbs in a matter of seconds. So what counts as three days in the real world isn't necessarily 3 days in the game - the game has no days, just AP. --A Big F'ing Dog 21:51, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- Kill - I find it nice in Shartak, but not in UD :/ --Janus talk 23:09, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- Kill - As above, zombies don't need a place to hide. Making parks hide people is just silly. --ScaredPlayer 23:14, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- Let's stay with a city-based apocalypse, rather then a jungle based one. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs (status:Mudkip!) 01:11, 22 April 2009 (BST)
- Kill - If survivors can't maintain barricade levels that will allow others to get inside, I don't want an additional place available for them to hide. An issue is how difficult it is to be a feral zombie; this will hurt ferals looking for prey. --Winton 05:47, 22 April 2009 (BST)
Spam/Dupe Votes
- Spam - Tonight on Urban Ground Force: Alan Titface goes on about flowers, that builder bloke puts in yet more unneeded decking to retain his money from garden centres and Charlie shows us her Dimmocks. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 16:06, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- Are you drunk? -CaptainVideo 00:48, 23 April 2009 (BST)
- Spam - Anything that can be used for a hiding spot other than a safehouse is spam in my eyes, regardless of whether you can cut the grass down or not. --Fujiko Mine 16:58, 21 April 2009 (BST)
- ReThis is no worse than any random ruined building gameplay wise, except all you have to do is move into the square instead of wasting an AP "entering" the park.
Voting Rules | ||
Advice to Suggesters
Advice to Voters
| ||
Rules for Discussions
Votes are NOT the place to discuss Suggestions. This page and archived suggestion pages only to be used for the Suggesting and subsequent Voting of these suggestions. If you wish to discuss the suggestion or vote here, please use this page's Talk page (Suggestion talk:20090421 Overgrown Parks). Suggestions do not have to be submitted in order to discuss them. Developing Suggestions can be used to workshop possible suggestions before they are submitted. | ||
Valid Votes
| ||
Invalid Votes
| ||
Comments
| ||
All Caps
Try to avoid YELLING, writing in bold, or using italics, except when emphasizing a point which has escaped other voters. | ||
VOTING EXAMPLES
Keep Votes
Kill Votes
Spam/Dupe Votes
|