Developing Suggestions

Developing Suggestions

This section is for presenting and reviewing suggestions which have not yet been submitted and are still being worked on.

Nothing on this page will be archived.

Further Discussion

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

Please Read Before Posting

• Be sure to check The Frequently Suggested List and the Suggestions Dos and Do Nots before you post your idea. You can read about many ideas that have been suggested already, which users should be aware of before posting what could be a dupe: a duplicate of an existing suggestion. These include Machine Guns and Sniper Rifles.
• Users should be aware that page is discussion oriented. Other users are free to express their own point of view and are not required to be neutral.
• It is recommended that users spend some time familiarizing themselves with this page before posting their own suggestions.
• After new game updates, users are requested to allow time for the game and community to adjust to these changes before suggesting alterations.

How To Make a Suggestion

Adding a New Suggestion

• Copy the code in the box below.
• Click here to begin editing. This is the same as clicking the [edit] link to the right of the Suggestions header.

• Paste the copied text above the other suggestions, right under the heading.
• Substitute the text in RED CAPITALS with the details of your suggestion.

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

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

Cycling Suggestions

• Suggestions with no new discussion in the past two days should be given a warning notice. This can be done by adding {{SDW|date}} at the top of the discussion section, where date is the day the suggestion will be removed.
• Suggestions with no new discussion in the past week may be removed.
• If you are adding a comment to a suggestion that has the warning template please remove the {{SDW|date}} at the top of the discussion section to show that there is still ongoing discussion.

This page is prone to breaking when the page gets too long, so sometimes suggestions still under discussion will be moved to the Overflow page, so the discussion can continue.

Suggestions in Overflow: No suggestions currently in overflow.

Please add new suggestions to the top of the list

---

Suggestions

Nerf Mobiles

Timestamp: Necrofeelinya 05:25, 24 July 2009 (BST)

Type: improvement

Scope: mobiles

Description: I'm just gonna float this and see what people think. The problem with groups is that they're organized on boards, not in-game. Noobs don't understand them, ferals don't want to waste the extra time with them, they circumvent the rules for AP use for speaking, broadcasting, using mobiles, all communication in-game, because people arrange for unlimited communication out-of-game with no AP cost. I propose a change that will ease communication in-game, promote in-game group organization and be usable directly from the player's interface so even noobs realize they can do it. I suggest implementing a Private Messaging system for contacts in-game. Here's how it would work: 1. PMs cost no AP to use, but do create a server hit and so count against your IPs server hit restriction. That means no more than 160 per day, max. Characters would be limited, but should be more than the current restriction on broadcast characters. I've never used a mobile, so I don't know what the restriction is on those. 2. Survivors can PM any survivor in their contacts list. Zombies can contact any zombie in their list. No survivor/zombie, zombie/survivor PMing. This is, however, negotiable since I know so many of you love your Life Cultists. 3. Zombie PMs would be in plain english, not Zombese. This is to facilitate in-game organization, not roleplaying. 4. You should have the option of blocking PMs from anyone you want. This basically reduces the need to organize groups on other forums, and allows even small groups to organize effectively in-game with minimal effort. It makes it possible for even noobs to do what experienced metagamers do all the time. I could see restricting it to only a handful of contacts, maybe 5 or 10, to try to encourage microgroup organization and discourage large hordes, but the goal is basically to focus the metagaming community's activity on UD itself rather than on a bunch of other boards. It facilitates zombie communication in-game in a way that encourages ferals to participate with other players while not forcing them into large hordes, and it immediately allows noobs and baby zombahs to create effective groups through their UD interface rather than having to join a group and check in at Invision or Barhah.com regularly. Fire away.

Discussion (Nerf Mobiles)

First thing to start you off - perhaps should only work for mutual contacts so people you don't know can't spam you. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 05:36, 24 July 2009 (BST)

Yeah, that's not a bad idea, though I did mention that you should be able to block PMs from anyone.--Necrofeelinya 06:09, 24 July 2009 (BST)

Extremely abusable. Someone could log in via a proxy, send 160 messages, then use their standard IP and play the game. It should cost AP. While that doesn't solve the problem, it limits it somewhat. - User:Whitehouse 11:52, 24 July 2009 (BST)

How would zombies text each other? O__O --Rahrah^{Come join the #party!}11:54, 24 July 2009 (BST)

Nerf? Don't you mean buff mobiles? No zombie texting... please. It's just so out of character/genre -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 15:38 24 July 2009 (BST)

No, he means it's a nerf because there's a better system.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:46, 24 July 2009 (BST)

I've always wanted a Nerf-o-mobile. --Midianian 17:31, 24 July 2009 (BST)

---

Groan Improvements

Timestamp: Sorakairi 23:04, 23 July 2009 (BST)

Type: Improvement

Scope: Zombies

Description: My latest Groan Identification is now Groan Improvements. Firstly, you can identify Contact-Listed Groans as a Zombie. When you hear a Groan from the Groaner, you will get the message 'You hear (type of groan), which you recognise as (Groaning Zombie).' You can only identify one groan at a time, because of your decayed state, so if you hear another Contact-Listed Zombie groan, you will get a 'You heard several recognisable groans.' Secondly, you can now choose your type of groan. The Groans you can choose from are: Normal, Blood-Curdling, Mumbling, Sad and Happy. They still have a volume depending on how many survivors are there, (insert volume info here), just a different way of groaning, perhaps used a message sytem between Zombies attacking areas.

Discussion (Groan Improvements)

The first bit would get you nice and shiny dupe votes, and the second bit is flavor that... probably wouldn't see a whole lot of use and cause more confusion than help. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 23:28, 23 July 2009 (BST)

---

Scent Chemicals

Timestamp: Sorakairi 23:04, 23 July 2009 (BST)

Type: Skill

Scope: Zombies

Description: Scent Chemicals is a new addition to the Scent tree, obviously. It is a sub-skill of Scent Trail, allowing you to follow the Scent of a Survivor recently revived or FAKked in the same block as you, not just one who has done something to you. You would get a message in your news saying 'Survivor X has a strange scent on them (4N 2E First Aid Kit/Syringe).'

Discussion (Scent Chemicals)

What does this suggestion actually accomplish, though? It's not as if there's a raging demand in the zombie community to know where the person who revived or scanned someone else has moved to, and it would make attempting to scan a zombie in a large horde virtual suicide unless the scanner was prepared to run quite a ways. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 23:10, 23 July 2009 (BST)

obviously? Also, unneeded. Wouldn't be used by anyone. --Rahrah^{Come join the #party!}23:26, 23 July 2009 (BST)

So if I am reading this correctly, when survivor A is healed/revived by survivor B, you can follow survivor A. First of all, how often is a survivor healed in front of a zombie? Also, this, unlike scent trail, is activated by someone else, so you would have no control over whether or not this would be in effect on your character. This is especially true if you are revived, in which case you have just lost 10 AP and are probably infected and then, on top of that, you have to escape the zombie hoard that surrounds you, many of whom can track you. Which leads to the next question, how far is this effect's range? You might want to limit its effect to the survivor that used the FAK/syringe (in the above example, survivor B).--Uberursa 00:41, 24 July 2009 (BST)

---

New Strain Needle

Timestamp: Sorakairi 23:04, 23 July 2009 (BST)

Type: Item

Scope: Humans And Zombies

Description: Scientists, realising that the older zombies have entered a later state of decay, have formulated a new Revivication Syringe, known as a New Strain Syringe, to cure it. This new syringe can do what no other can: Revive a Brain-Rotted Zombie.Scientists, realising that the older zombies have entered a later state of decay, have formulated a new Revivication Syringe, known as a New Strain Syringe, to cure it. This new syringe can do what no other can: Revive a Brain-Rotted Zombie. Fortunately for the Rotters, these syringes are extremely difficult to make, requiring a powered Necrotech, and 30AP. Even then the New Strain is not entirely secured, as there is a 25% chance that you will fail at making the New Strain, resulting in a spent 30AP and a normal Syringe. The New Strain cannot be found. If you succeed at making a New Strain Syringe, you will get a message 'After much time and effort, you have created a New Vaccine for the Zombie Virus.' If you fail you recieve the message telling you 'All your time and effort has gone to waste, as you have only managed to recreate a normal Syringe.' Even though some of you will say 'You are an idiot. This totally nerfs Brain Rot,' it doesn't. At least not to me. After all, you will most likely go AP negative trying to create one of these, and the Zombies will target Necrotechs more because the lights on in there could mean people trying to create the New Syringe.

Discussion (New Strain Needle)

"Even though some of you will say 'You are an idiot. This totally nerfs Brain Rot,' it doesn't. At least not to me."
Hint: It does. Not only that, but this is 100% abusable by zergs. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 23:13, 23 July 2009 (BST)

I'm not a raving fan of brain rot per se, but I can tell you that this definitely nerfs it. For just 10 extra AP, you're giving a syringe maker the power to revive a rotter from any location; multiply it times a billion and you'd have whole masses of scientists just sitting indoors, collecting rot needles, and then going on reviving sprees. Furthermore, if this doesn't nerf rot, then it has no point; since it certainly doesn't buff rot, it's either a nerf or useless. Sorry mate, them's the breaks. Also, >.< Edit Conflicts! Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 23:17, 23 July 2009 (BST)

"It can do what no other syringe can do: revive a brain rotted zombie" = Not a Brain Rot Nerf. Hmmm... It doesn't quite piece together to me. --Rahrah^{Come join the #party!}23:24, 23 July 2009 (BST)

Change this so the 'failed' syringes still appear to be the improved variant and I might be tempted to vote keep... but only if its use required a successful scan on the target rotter 1st. I would expect a chance for normal syringes to fail against rotters inside powered NT's as a quid pro quo type deal though. --Honestmistake 00:21, 24 July 2009 (BST)

But what do you really get out of it in the end? Either you're nerfing rot, which screws with other people's skills, or you're having no net effect, which is pointless. This fills no gaping gameplay hole, and has no constructive end result. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 00:27, 24 July 2009 (BST)

While I agree with Honestmistake, there is only one place I can see this coming into effect: getting rid a rotter clogging up a revive point (which I don't mind at all). Of course, it is only a temporary fix, because they can just commit suicide and get back in line. Other than that, the cost of making one of these really stops it from being a full on rot nerf, just through sheer amount of AP necessary to make and use one (120 AP on average to make one+ 10 AP to use=130 AP to revive rotter without chance to fail on-site) and if the changes that Honestmistake suggested are put into effect add the AP necessary to successfully scan the rotter (which is in my limited experience about 3AP). If anything, it will be underpowered to the point of uselessness. My suggestion would be to change it to 50% success rate and don't tell whether or not it is really the right syringe(60 AP to make+20 AP to use both the new one and the failed attempt+6 AP to scan the rotter(s)= 86 AP, with 25% chance to fail on-site). --Uberursa 01:03, 24 July 2009 (BST)

Just butting in to point out that it says 25% chance that you fail to make the improved syringe Not 25% chance that you succeed. --Honestmistake 09:11, 24 July 2009 (BST)

But at the end of the day, what's the point? Before we try to lower the number of reasons why we shouldn't do something, we should first find at least one why we should. Either a rot nerf or useless overcomplication, that still stands. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 01:06, 24 July 2009 (BST)

I can think of a few points if my additions were made part of it... the 25% chance that your improved syringe is actually just a normal one means you could well be wasting about 45AP for no good reason... thats actually a buff for rot should people make a habit of using these to clear revive lines. On the other hand this would give survivors an instant (if not certain) way to clear Rotters from any where they need to... the uses in taking back malls, forts etc is pretty obvious here which is why I also say it should be further balanced by a percentage chance for rotters to have developed enough resistance to normal syringes that even powered NT revives are not certain.--Honestmistake 09:19, 24 July 2009 (BST)

You are an idiot, this totally nerfs brain rot -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 15:45 24 July 2009 (BST)

---

Road Flares

Timestamp: Uberursa 21:46, 21 July 2009 (BST) Edit: --Uberursa 21:39, 22 July 2009 (BST)

Type: Item

Scope: All unpowered buildings

Description: Location: Auto Repair Shop (6% with lights;4% without lights; 1% in ruins) Fire Stations (5% with lights; 2.5% without lights; 1% in ruins), Mall Hardware Stores (6% with lights; 4% without lights; 1% in ruins),Police Departments (10% with lights; 5% without lights; 1% in ruins) Can be used to make it appear as if a building is lit on the mini map. This does not include when a survivor uses binoculars (the magnified vision allows them to see that it is not actually lit). These are LED flare lights, and thus do not have flames or fumes as a traditional road flare would. When standing outside the building the message There is a light flickering from inside the windows appears in the building description, when inside, the message There are road flares in the windows. If there is a generator in the building, the building's external description will ignore the flares as long as the generator is running. The internal description will indicate both the flares and the generator. They can also be lit and dropped on streets and outside buildings with the message There are lit road flares here. The flares will not be visible on the mini map when placed on the street, as they are hidden by low-lying debris. If someone lights a flare, the message XXX placed a flare behind the windows or XXX placed flares on the street appears (depending on the situation). The flare lasts 48 hours once lit. They can be taken down and subsequently destroyed or disabled (removing batteries, smashing, etc.). NO OTHER EFFECTS. The interior of the building will remain the same as if it were not lit, except for the message that there are flares in the windows. A flare on the street can also be destroyed/disabled. Destroying flares provides 0 XP to survivors and 1 XP to zombies.

Discussion (Road Flares)

I'm not entirely clear on the search system in UD, and the wiki was little help due to the amounts of conflicting/out-of-date/generally confusing information (and the fact that I'm lazy), but I felt the above ones were fairly reasonable. Any help from someone with a clearer understanding of that system would be appreciated. I just feel that it needs to be said one more time, in bold lettering, to ensure no confusion exist about the fact that this will not improve search rates or hit rates in any way --Uberursa 21:48, 21 July 2009 (BST)

I'm not big on misrepresentation or decoys, especially when they can't be removed for a fixed period of time. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 22:12, 21 July 2009 (BST)

I could change it so that someone could destroy it with a weapon, or just throw it in the street next to them.--Uberursa 04:20, 22 July 2009 (BST)

Also, who would want to do this. The only time I can see lights coming in to play are when zombies are looking for targets, and no survivor (the only person who can use this) would want to make their building a target. The other situation is for suburb reports, which this would mess with. Messing with suburb reports for newbies is not good.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:17, 21 July 2009 (BST)

As far as who would want to, a lone survivor in a ruined suburb could use it to make a decoy, on the flip side, the moment the zombies in the area realized it was a decoy (due to the description) they would search the surrounding ruins for a survivor. The fixed period of time is relatively short (in Malton terms, assuming a player logs in once a day on average) so they couldn't have gotten too far, depending on how long the building was ruined and to what point it is 'caded. It could be changed so that binoculars could see them as flares, thus the status reporter helicopter could see that they were flares.--Uberursa 04:20, 22 July 2009 (BST)

I'd consider rethinking this item as a weapon. Road flares look nothing like either incandescent or fluorescent light, and nobody ever uses them inside (they put off chemical smoke). Also, they only last for 30 minutes to an hour. No, I'd suggest you consider their possibilities in a more active role - perhaps a dangerous weapon that only works for a brief period of time. -George Zip ^◆◆◆ 01:11, 22 July 2009 (BST)

No one can see in or out of a building (for whatever reason), so saying that it could be mistaken for a light at a distance isn't too much of a stretch. I got nothing for fumes aside from "it is the zombie apocalypse, not real life" (bad excuse), or one could use their imagination (like with free running). As for a weapon, it could be essentially a melee flare gun. Any thoughts on that? --Uberursa 04:20, 22 July 2009 (BST)

You don't need to use your imagination with free running. It's a real thing.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 11:01, 22 July 2009 (BST)

Good luck.--Agunin_Anoven 04:25, 22 July 2009 (BST)

Don't make it a weapon... it will get shot down :) As for a light source, it might work if you drop its duration down to 24 hours and call it a chemical light. Those things can glow for hours and produce no smoke. They are pretty light and increasingly common. --Honestmistake 10:08, 22 July 2009 (BST)

You're probably right as far as a weapon goes, it would just be another flare gun. It could be changed into a LED light signal, those things are pretty bright and could last longer than a standard road flare. Not to mention it wouldn't present the whole "toxic fumes" problem that was brought up by CaptainVideo. If I did change it to 24 hours, there would be a good chance that no one would see it, and by the time this is finalized, they will be able to be removed. In fact I'll just do that right now. --Uberursa 21:31, 22 July 2009 (BST)

As per your changes, what does this even do? I see nothing, other than the pointless building decoy method you previously mentioned, which no smart survivor woudl do. All I see that this would do, in a very rare situation, is a PKer/ Death cultist putting one in a ruin that survivors are hiding in to alert zombies.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 11:10, 23 July 2009 (BST)

Actually I think a lot of survivors would use these in an attempt to decoy zombies so my main concern would be wasting zombie AP... on the whole though I think there use as "bread crumbs" to lead zombies to easy targets would balance it out. --Honestmistake 14:24, 23 July 2009 (BST)

The "bread crumb" use was part of the whole point of this. Yes, a death cultist could use them to alert zombies to a survivor presence, or they could be used as a signal that a building was taken and needs a genny, or could be used to draw zombies from a more important target. They could be used to make a zombie player think that no one was in the building at all and check the surrounding ruins for a survivor that is not there. This would especially play a role in a siege environment so that survivors could draw in zombies and slow them from reaching the core of a 'burb, but the zombies would be pounding at their doors, and they would have the no access to the advantages of a genny. The uses of the item are endless, however it is not imbalanced in one direction or the other, because it simply alerts those outside that there is a flare in the window, and zombie players could figure out that it is a decoy, turning their attention pointedly away from it and towards other targets. It lights up a building without the need for 30% encumbrance, but that comes at the price of having all the attention of a genny, without the light granted by it.--Uberursa 21:36, 23 July 2009 (BST)

No, it's uses aren't endless. It can be used as a decoy, that's it. Rather ineffectively too. If you want a cheap decoy, give a building a quick 2ap repair, and zombies will flock to it. As I'm presently repairing a ruined suburb with my main account, I can tell you that i would never use this.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 21:59, 23 July 2009 (BST)

Plenty of players never use the radio and consider it nothing but useless span. A lot of folk ignore flares and groans as pointless. Many, many players never bother with clothing (or indeed descriptions... the lazy fucks!) However just because a lot of players wouldn't find use in this (or any of those others) does not make them useless. I would use these, I would use em even more if they were colored but thats a different matter, and I suspect may others would use em too. Question really is; would you vote kill or even spam just because you wouldn't use em? --Honestmistake 23:05, 23 July 2009 (BST)

---

Over encumbered

Timestamp: Kakashi on crack 21:26, 20 July 2009 (BST)

Type: game mechs

Scope: survivors (and zombies... kinda sorta)

Description: Pack Rats have been seen in buildings recently carrying too many things to even move, these have become easy prey to the phycotic maniacs and thieves throughout Malton... basically, Survivors who complain (rarely) about the encumberence levels can go above 100% items at some setbacks... 1. if they are above 100% they cannot move, this will leave them vulnerable to attacks... 2. if they are above 100% they get a reduced accuracy of 20% due to the heavy weight of all the items carried and the fact that they constantly get in their way hampering with their vision 3. if the survivor reaches 200% encumberence, they will start to loose 5 HP for every 10 AP spent 4. if the survivor reaches 300% encumberence, they are crushed by the sheer weight of the items and will die, losing everything they are carrying 5. A survivor who goes to search a building while they are over-encumbered has a 30% chance of having a random item stolen from their posestion (not really but it will disapear) (if this happens they will be informed that something seems to be missing when they search) 6. if a survivor becomes a zombie while encumbered, the weight of the items will slowly wittle away at their poorly supported structure (1 hp per AP spent) until they basically collapse (die) at which point they will lose all items weighing more then 5% encumberence

Discussion (Over encumbered)

Honestly?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:19, 20 July 2009 (BST)

Alright then, you asked for it. 300%? You do realise that 100% means "Complete", "Maximum", etc. You can't have more than 100%. It's illogical. Then, there's the matter of everything about this idea being completely insane.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:19, 20 July 2009 (BST)

Depends on how you want to define 100%. It could mean the maximum weight someone can carry comfortably without penalty. Or it could very well mean the maximum any one person can carry. Having said that, no I don't think we need Survivors being able to carry 300%, so I'd have to vote kill on this. Maybe if the author worked up a penalty system that worked within 100%. But Survivors would shit a cow over that so...probably dead in the water.--

| T | BALLS! | 22:41 20 July 2009(BST)

what the fuck is going on here?--Agunin_Anoven 23:15, 20 July 2009 (BST)

You're still on crack. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 23:33, 20 July 2009 (BST)

Still on crack, but that won't stop me from writeing a sugestion a day to keep the moderators away XD (of course I haven't got anything big planned, heh, maybe I should put project T.O.G. in here for the hell of it to see how everyone reacts XD --Kakashi on crack 06:45, 21 July 2009 (BST)

This idea sucks big time, go kill yourself.--Agunin_Anoven 07:51, 21 July 2009 (BST)

^ He's just hating cus I forgot to post a siggy and he won't let it go XD --Crazy Hobo Man 08:29, 21 July 2009 (BST)

Keep your dumb ideas off the wiki, this suggestion sucks so much ass. Not only are you on crack, but your fucking dumb. Take your computer and throw it out the window, PLEASE.--Agunin_Anoven 22:57, 21 July 2009 (BST)

There's no need to be insulting just because you don't like the suggestion. You're so badly overreacting that you just make yourself look like an idiot.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 14:15, 23 July 2009 (BST)

Ignoring the fact that we can't currently find anything once we reach 100% encumbrance, this suggestion seems contradictory in part. If you have a 30% chance of loosing an item once you reach 100% you are very unlikely to ever reach 300%. Stuff would be getting "stolen" as quick as you'd find it -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 22:24 21 July 2009 (BST)

According to this page, the average search rate is 20%. That means that with each search over 100%, there's a 20% chance of an item being gained, and a 30% chance of an item being lost. Over, that means that you are 1.5 times more likely to lose an item than you are to gain one.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:51, 21 July 2009 (BST)

However, in a powered mall with bargain hunting, the average becomes 50%. This means that you are 1.6 times more likely to find something than to lose something. Therefore, every 2 search would give you an item, whereas every 3(.33) would make you lose one. (For ease, we'll say that for every 10 turns, you lose 3 items, and every 10 turns, you gain 5). This means that in one 50AP day, you could gain 10 items. The average encumbrance is probably about 4%, so that would mean +40% in one day. From 100%, you could achieve 300% (and thus death) in 5 days.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:58, 21 July 2009 (BST)

That search odds page is woefully out of date. Regardless, given the nerfs that he kicks in at 100%, it's very unlikely anyone would sit there searching, unless they were trying to die. It's a needlessly complicated suggestion, that could achieve it's goal with one nerf... but given that we already can't find anything once we reach the 100% limit, it's all a bit pointless, really -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 15:56 24 July 2009 (BST)

Apart from the fact that if your encumerence is over 100% you can't pick anything else up. Which seems to be a major flaw with this suggestion. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 09:47, 22 July 2009 (BST)

I would assume that he's suggesting butchering that.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 19:03, 22 July 2009 (BST)

Leave Other People's Inventory Alone. This doesn't make the game more fun, no one would use it and it would just be a pain in the arse for survivors.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 14:12, 23 July 2009 (BST)

---

Item Giving

time: --Catachan 15:04, 19 July 2009 (BST)

name: [user: Catachan]

type: Player-to-Player interactions

scope: survivors

description:-- As the title suggests, players may give items they do not require to another person that can use the item. For example, a person who gets a toolbox and does not have construction may give a person with the construction skill his toolbox. It may also work if the player does not wish to have an item he can use, such as a weapon.

Doesn't really need a huge explanation, due to the fact the title pretty much gives you all you need to know.

Discussion (Item Giving)

This is a massive dupe. --ϑϑℜ 15:08, 19 July 2009 (BST)

As DDR. Sorry but mechanics for moving items in between characters have been suggested many many times before. --Cyberbob 15:12, 19 July 2009 (BST)

This could work really well.--xoxo 15:17, 19 July 2009 (BST)

lollllllll --Cyberbob 15:17, 19 July 2009 (BST)

This is going to face the usual opposition: abusable by zergs. - User:Whitehouse 15:20, 19 July 2009 (BST)

Giving is bad, m'kay -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 15:27 19 July 2009 (BST)

The problem is that this is easily abuseable (as pointed out above). Higher level characters can search, more easily, for the "good stuff" (syringes, faks, guns and ammo) to hand off to the player's lower level alts.--Pesatyel 19:38, 19 July 2009 (BST)

Why the fuck do you suggest this?--Agunin_Anoven 23:16, 20 July 2009 (BST)

Agunin, this is called a SUGGESTION page. It's for suggesting ideas. Now, I'm sorry this is a problem suggestion, but for christ's sakes, keep it nice in the future (aimed at Agunin_Anoven. Everyone else is alright).--Catachan 23:40, 20 July 2009 (BST)

To be honest i think this is the nicest i've ever seen such an dupity/bad suggestion get rejected. So be thankful! --xoxo 07:29, 21 July 2009 (BST)

Was AliM really needed? ;) --Rahrah^{Come join the #party!}21:21, 22 July 2009 (BST)

---

Factories have a new use

Timestamp: Kakashi on crack 07:30, 19 July 2009 (BST)

Type: Flavor

Scope: survivors/groups

Description: survivors have recently been searching factories to find words written on metal pipes and logos such as necro-syringes and claw marks etched into them, local pranksters have been hitting people with the said pipes to learn that the words etched in can remain on their face for up to a week before going away... this will basically add a bit of a "prank" weapon to the game that can be used like a metal pipe but has a 20% chance of breaking with each use to avoid people spamming them and the ability to create your own with a metal pipe, powered factory, and 20 AP plus 2 per letter or to find generic ones laying around with labels on them... the "brand stick" will be the letters/logod etched into a metal pipe that acts like a metal pipe but because of them being etched in, when hit with it they will have a 50% chance of leaving the mark on your head or other part of your body for a few days to a week, every day the subject who was hit with it can try and remove it (after 24 hours have passed since they were hit with them) for 1 AP at a 25% chance of removal... Zombies when they have a mark etched in, will have it stay forever, until they remove it at the cost of 1 AP (since their skin doesn't regenerate as fast) but they will be able to remove it immediatly after 24 hours with a 80% chance of removal since they have no problems clawing off their face as it doesn't "hurt" them. this could be used by zombies who wish to "tatooe their body with their group logo" (such as an RFF zombie) or by survivors who want to label zombies as a problem or a patient to be healed... or even other survivors as PKers or trenchcoaters (I personally find trenchcoaters amusign when they try to "stop zombies with wasted ammo" but this doesn't give zombies any rights Kakashi, don't they deserve a form of this? yes, zombies who have at least 1 skill that increases their chance of hitting with their arms will be able to make claw marks on others faces or into pipes that survivors could later find and zombies who have the skill flailing gesture or memories of life will be able to "graffiti" dead bodies with a dropdown list of certain things (such as a circle or a mustache) or with a certain letter if they have memories of life or death rattle how will this appear on someone? simple: if there is only 1 person with an insignia on them then the description will mention that "so and so/a zombie has a mustache carved into their face or a big L on their forehead" if multiple people/zombies have it, it will say that "a group of # people/zombies all have the insignia, PK or RFF on them, some in spots best not mentioned... I know I'm going to get a lot of negative feedback due to just being able to have a "custom" item making the trenchcoater populace happier but this is more for flavor and pranks rather then being serious and "labeling" people

Discussion (Factories have a new use)

This is a big suggestion and I'm short on time so I'll focus on how it would be displayed to other people. Do you mean for those description lines to be shown on the main screen or just in the profiles of people who have been marked? From the looks it seems as though you mean the former, which has the potential to end up being extremely spammy if there are lots of unique marks in a given crowd (which I would say is highly likely). --Cyberbob 07:36, 19 July 2009 (BST)

We don't need more ways to spam.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 13:47, 19 July 2009 (BST)

Because we really need immature idiots branding people with curse words and the like. - User:Whitehouse 15:16, 19 July 2009 (BST)

The biggest use for this would be as a griefing tool, as far as I can see -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 15:29 19 July 2009 (BST)

You're still on crack. You know why you're going to get negative feedback? (hint: it's not because of trenchies) It's because your ideas are incredibly overwritten and complicated with unnecessary effects. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 16:45, 19 July 2009 (BST)

---

Dual-Nature Names

Timestamp: Necrofeelinya 22:24, 16 July 2009 (BST)

Type: Dual-Nature Encouragement

Scope: All players

Description: Simple, really. When you create a new character, you can pick both a survivor name and a zombie name. When you're alive, your profile shows your survivor name along with your description, and that's how you appear on the map, as well as in people's contacts. When you're dead, you still just appear on the map as "zombie", but your profile and other people's contacts display your zombie name. If you want to always be known by the same name, just choose the same name for both your zombie and survivor name when creating your character. It might encourage people to play their zombies and survivors differently if they're distinguished by different names, that's all. It would make you feel like a different person when you become undead.

Discussion (Dual-Nature Names)

What if someone's zombie name is someone else's survivor name? In general, everyone changing names quickly would be complete chaos. If you made this so that when a survivor died, their name became the same in zombie-speak, that would be better, but I don't really like the idea of changing names.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:41, 16 July 2009 (BST)

There'd be a lot of names, then... twice as many. And do old players get this option? If so, how does the profile database compensate? --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 22:42, 16 July 2009 (BST)

It explodes in fire and death. Or, it uses a specific name, either the one from the starting class, or the survivor, I would assume.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:48, 16 July 2009 (BST)

in addition to the chaos, this would negate the effect of contact lists. it'd destroy organised revive points. it'd make the random revive policy (which is nothing more than smatr play) obsolete. it'd be giantic buff for PKers and Death Cultists. as much as a part of me thinks this'd be fun on so many levels (bwahahahahahaaaa), it really is too much. --WanYao 22:52, 16 July 2009 (BST)

Having "AKA: <other name>" on a player's profile page so you could see their alias when on the other side of the life fence would remedy that. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 23:02, 16 July 2009 (BST)

All I'm suggesting is that characters have a zombie name as well as a survivor name. Yes, the number of names in use would double. No, names would not be possible to duplicate... a player could not use a zombie name for a separate survivor character. Contact lists wouldn't be that badly affected, the contact name would just change when the character dies. If you know that person, chances are you would quickly be familiar enough with their alter ego to recognize them on your list. Just the disappearance of their survivor name and the appearance of a new zombie name should clue you in. They even have the ability to write their survivor name in their profile's description area, so this wouldn't shaft organized revive points. And no, old players don't get this option unless Kevan decides to make it possible for some reason. Just make another character, for cryin' out loud.--Necrofeelinya 23:37, 16 July 2009 (BST)

I don't like it... add in BobBob's AKA part though and it might be workable. However I think it would have to be an automatic recognition thing.... ie you only get the contact name for whichever state they where in when you add them but get an in game message to say you recognize them when you 1st interact with them in their other state. Put simply you add "Bob" to your contact list while he is a survivor.... later he tries to eat you as a zed and you get the message " a zombie clawed at you and missed... you recognize it as Bob (aka "EVILDEADBOB") --Honestmistake 23:44, 16 July 2009 (BST)

It might encourage people to play their zombies and survivors differently...'. Can't/don't players do that already simply by the nature of what they are capable of in either mode? You have the gung-ho survivor who becomes a Mrh?-cow. Distinctly different, IMO. You have the revived dedicated zombie who offs himself as soon as possible, so I can't really see that as counting for anything. You have the Life and Death Cultists who modify the way they play because of the nature of the form. And you have the true dual natures who do it on their own. And, yes, Contact Lists WOULD significantly change. Your giving more information than a name change. Your giving every player the ability to determine the status of anyone on their contact list for free. Also, why SHOULDN'T older players get this?--Pesatyel 01:45, 17 July 2009 (BST)

Pesatyel, you can already tell whether a person on your contacts list is a zombie or not. I'm just saying that this would encourage people to play zombies as zombies, by giving a bit of different identity to them. If they want to just line up for a revive, fine... nothing's going to change that. And if older players want this, then they can start a new character with it. Or if it's easy for Kevan, then let older players have it too. Either way, I don't really care.--Necrofeelinya 02:25, 17 July 2009 (BST)

Based on the information from this wiki, I do not find ANY indication where you can deteremine a contact's status (whether they are alive or zombie). There is a listing for CLASS, but that is not the same thing as the contact list indicating whether or not a contact is CURRENTLY alive or zombie. Am I mistaken?--Pesatyel 07:40, 17 July 2009 (BST)

Class: Zombie = Dead, anything else = Alive. I think it may only properly update once the contact stands up (ie if a survivor dies and stays dead for a day it'll show them as "Military" or such until they stand as a zed. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 07:48, 17 July 2009 (BST)

Ok.--Pesatyel 07:58, 17 July 2009 (BST)

Oh, and really the benefit I see of this is that players can create a character named something innocent like "Li'lfluffybunny" and when it becomes a zombie its name would change to something like "Unholynibblingdeathterror". Or players could take a fairly normal human name, like "Jack Mehoff" as a survivor, and then use a more zombie-ish name for their alter egos, like "Namnamz Gutrupture". Or even something that would actually fit the character limit for names. The point being, survivor-ish names for survivors, zombie-ish names for zombies... all voluntarily, of course.--Necrofeelinya 02:58, 19 July 2009 (BST)

I think it could be nice flavour but I don't like the huge effect it would have on the metagame - I'm thinking of anything that involves highlighting names here like the contacts list function and UDTool. It's all well and good to have an AKA tag on their profile page but nobody is going to click through every single name in every single horde or building just to find the one person they want. --Cyberbob 07:43, 19 July 2009 (BST)

Makes people much harder to recognise for dubious role-play/flavour reasons -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 15:33 19 July 2009 (BST)

Aren't zombies fairly anonymous anyway? In addition, doubling the number of names on the server wouldn't be a good thing, making the number of cohesive names drop until there are twenty "Larry"s each with a different string of randomness afterwords (i.e. larry1102, Larry1, larry2.0, etc.) Personally I vouch for Bob's "A.K.A." idea. --Uberursa 23:10, 20 July 2009 (BST)

---

Light Barricades

Timestamp: Rogueboy 19:08, 15 July 2009 (BST)

Type: Improvement

Scope: Barricades

Description: Ever get in a siege and you try to raise the cades to a higher level like EHB but fail about six times in a row? And spending your remaining AP trying to do it? Only to wake up and find yourself on the side walk while zombies are pointing and laughing? This suggestion is intended to reduce the percentage chance of failing to cade a building when the lights are on, since if the lights are on it should be easier to find materials to cade a building. I haven't worked out the percentages but I feel to half it seems fair 40% failure when cading HB would now be 20% failure. Some may say well how does this benefit zombies? Truth is it doesn't, some might say why not lower the chances in an unlit building? Because that would become far too problematic since the majority of buildings are unlit and in the past months survivors have won fewer and fewer battles, hopefully this will try to raise that to at least a decent ratio.

Discussion (Light Barricades)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active discussion. It will be removed on: July 24 at 10:52(BST)

Hm. Lets see. The implication that light helps barricades is already in the game, because its harder to cade in the Dark. A three level system, with say dark (halved chances), normal (-5%) and lit (+5%)? Don't think it would be too difficult to code. We already have varying chances of success. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:17, 15 July 2009 (BST)

That makes more sense than just a +%, reduce the non-lit % to balance it and you'd have my vote. --Kamikazie-Bunny 21:16, 16 July 2009 (BST)

Cades are fine. If anything, they should be either harder to build or easier to take down. Making it easier for trenchies to put up everything to EHB will also encourage the idiots out there to overbarricade an entire suburb. --Papa Johnny 22:29, 15 July 2009 (BST)

From a zombie point of view I don't want survivors being better at cading, as destroying cades is dull and feels less like an accomplishment than killing a survivor. From a survivor point of view, while this could be beneficial, the last thing I want is more overcading. The current system is more than good enough for survivors. Moderate cades equal low cost and accessibility. High cades equal high cost and screwing over other survivors. Trust me, you're better off not reducing that cost and making it easier for people to screw each other over. Besides, your argument that zombies have been winning more battles doesn't reflect the games population. Make it harder for those zombies who are fighting hard as it is to maintain their side, and we might just see this game losing more zombie players, not exactly what we need in my opinion. - User:Whitehouse 00:19, 16 July 2009 (BST)

I have little to add to what everyone else has said. Except that if zombies have been "winning all the time" (which isn't true) it's because survivors have gotten lazy and stupid (lazier and stupider, even, than before!). --WanYao 15:15, 16 July 2009 (BST)

It's because it's summer, and (from what I gather) there are far more dedicated zombie players, who are still willing to check on during summer. Survivors are, as you said, lazier, for some reason, and don't seem to log on as much. Weird, but truish.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:35, 16 July 2009 (BST)

I wouldn't say it's because they're lazier, they're probably going outside and doing stuff and just not as bothered because they're filling their day with other activities. In the winter your more likely to stay indoors with less things and sit in front of a screen. The reason the zombie players are more active is probably because they have a much better on-line community which draws them back. --Kamikazie-Bunny 21:10, 16 July 2009 (BST)

It's the hunger, I don't know how to explain it but there is a hunger in my mind, the dope receptors just go crazy for namz.--Bonghit420 21:42, 16 July 2009 (BST)

I always forget the zombie community. Yeah, that'll be it.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 10:52, 17 July 2009 (BST)

I could not support this. Why make it easier for survivors to jack up the cades to extreme levels? Unbalancing.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 23:54, 16 July 2009 (BST)

---

Suggestions up for voting

Groan Identification

This suggestion is now up for voting. Its discussion has been moved to its talk page.--

| T | BALLS! | 09:33 13 July 2009(BST)

Place on Altar

This suggestion is now up for voting. Its discussion has been moved to its talk page. --Blake Firedancer ^{T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T.} 09:49, 8 July 2009 (BST)

---