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.
• If you decide not to take your suggestion to voting, please remove it from this page to avoid clutter.
• 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 your 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.

Please add new suggestions to the top of the list

---

Suggestions

Screwing with Generators!

Timestamp: Cookies and Cream 12:52, 4 October 2009 (BST)

Type: Multiple

Scope: Everyone

Description: This is a multiple part sugestion. Part 1: Different buildings have different Generator lasting times. I suggest: Offices 100 Hours; Necrotechs 60 hours; Hospitals 60 hours; Motels 100 hours; Schools 80 hours; Malls 40 hours; Forts 50 hours. If I have missed any, or you want different times, place in discussion. Part 2: When the Generator gets on low fuel, the lights should dim and be less powerful, therefore reducing Search Rates and. Standing outside a Dim building would be: You can see dim lights flickering in the building. Inside would be: The lights are dim. If you dont like it, FLAME IT!

Discussion (Screwing with Generators!)

I don't like the different fuel times, but I do like the idea of additional flavour text. Having the "dim lights" stuff when the generator is running low on fuel would be a nice touch. 13:18, 4 October 2009 (BST)

I agree with the above mentioned gentleman. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 13:25, 4 October 2009 (BST)

Great idea. Not so keen on the suggestion listed here, but Misanthropy's idea sounds like it'd be a quality change (I think this is the third time I've agreed with him in the last 48 hours...). —Aichon— 14:00, 4 October 2009 (BST)

---

Flak Jacket Apparel

Timestamp: Foxtrot 22:05, 3 October 2009 (BST)

Type: Balance/Flavour

Scope: All Players

Description: Whilst one is in posession of a flak jacket, they do not automatically wear it. One must enter the "settings" page, and equip the flak jacket in the "wearing" section. The flak jacket uses the "jackets" slot. Despite the statement underneath the "wearing" section of the "settings" page, You have a flak jacket. will be added if true. For example: Some buildings will allow to you change your clothes, but this one has nothing of use in it. You have a flak jacket. In that situation, only the "jacket" slot would be shown and only the flak jacket would be available. When viewing a user's page, you can now also see that they are wearing a flak jacket, just like clothes. For example: Wearing: a pair of sunglasses, a black baseball cap, a ripped black tie, a black short-sleeved shirt, a flak jacket, a pair of black jeans and a pair of black boots The flak jacket takes damage like all other clothing, but does it's state does not affect it's effect. By that, I mean the flak jacket can become bloodstained, ripped, tattered, etcetera... Clicking your flak jacket in your inventory will show the message: To use you flak jacket, equip it on the "settings" page.

Discussion (Flak Jacket Apparel)

Not a fan. Takes the mystery out of things, and is an extra hoop for new players. This will only affect newer, low level players who would possibly overlook this added step and wonder why their jacket isn't working. 22:09, 3 October 2009 (BST)

Added a bit to the end, might solve that problem. And I like mystery, just not mystery that should be obvious. If I can see that someone's wearing some dog-tags, I should be able to see the big flak jacket they are seeing. It seems like a reasonable (though remember small) buff to survivors. - Foxtrot 22:13, 3 October 2009 (BST)

It's still a strange mix of flavour and function, in a way that hurts both. It would force players to choose between extra survivablity or style - why not have both? Don't get me wrong, I'm a die-hard PKer and I can see the tactical advantages of seeing who is and isn't wearing a flak jacket, but I just don't see this as a good idea. 22:16, 3 October 2009 (BST)

Just stupid. Why would a person carry a flak jacket and not actually wear it? Needlessly complicated. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 22:21, 3 October 2009 (BST)

Misanthropy, you've said that there are tactical advantages, so why don't you think it is a bad idea? And Maverick, why would a person carry a shotgun and shells and not actually load the shotgun? - Foxtrot 12:47, 4 October 2009 (BST)

So now I'm forbidden from wearing a jacket, other than a flak? Stupid.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:34, 3 October 2009 (BST)

Yeah,... because you know,.... you couldn't just walk in wearing a trench coat over the top of it or anything! Just my two cents!! -Poodle of doom 22:52, 3 October 2009 (BST)

Yonnua, only if you want to wear the flak. Like Misanthropy said, style or survivability. Also, Poodle, the coat is a different slot. - Foxtrot 12:47, 4 October 2009 (BST)

Then why don't we say that when you get 100XP, you can have either a clothign slot or a skill? Because that would be stupid. You know, like this.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 13:33, 4 October 2009 (BST)

Seems like overkill for a simple problem. If PKers want to be able to see who is wearing a flak jacket, why not just have it display as an additional message at the end of the information about clothes? E.g. "Wearing: a pair of glasses, a blood-flecked dark purple blouse, and a ripped dark blue jacket. Also wearing a flak jacket." No sense in complicating things unnecessarily by changing behavior and moving default choices to the settings page. As Misanthropy said, this just hurts newbies (though your recent addition does help, it's just a patch on the problem, rather than a fix) and it would also serve to frustrate or annoy other users. —Aichon— 01:26, 4 October 2009 (BST)

Because you shouldn't be able to wear two jackets. - Foxtrot 12:47, 4 October 2009 (BST)

That answer ignores the larger problem I brought up regarding the complication of a simple issue. And who says you can't anyway? I've seen plenty of cop shows where they don a normal jacket over a flak jacket. Inevitably the guy that does it is the one that gets shot (and saved by the flak jacket), but that's besides the point. —Aichon— 14:06, 4 October 2009 (BST)

Yeah, I dunno. I might take it down. Hmm... how about have the text (Un)Equip next to the flak jacket as an item, allowing you to quickly equip it? - Foxtrot 12:47, 4 October 2009 (BST)

Grow a pair. If you want to know who's wearing a flak jacket, shoot them. Yeah I know it's scary thinking you might not have enough AP to bring them down completely, and then they'll come gunning for you, but that's the risk you take being a PK. --Mold 14:24, 4 October 2009 (BST)

---

Remember last item dropped

Timestamp: ♥ Moonie Talk Testimonials 22:10, 3 October 2009 (BST)

Type: Interface

Scope: Everyone

Description: When dropping an item you have multiple of instead of the drop menu drop down box defaulting back to ------ nothing on page load it keeps the same item you just dropped in focus (like attacking). e.g. you drop a pistol (0) then upon the next page load where it says you have dropped your pistol pistol(0) is selected in the drop down drop menu. May be a dupe i didn't bother checking.

Discussion (Remember last item dropped)

I... think I followed what you were trying to get at. Seems rather unnecessary. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 22:55, 3 October 2009 (BST)

I'm trying to make sure I have this right. You mean, if you want to drop multiple items of the same type, after dropping the first, the next one of the same type is automatically pre-selected in the drop-down menu when the page loads to show you've dropped the item? If so, it seems nice in theory, but with differently-loaded pistols I can see it being a mess - unless it's accompanied by a function which sorts your guns in the menu from lowest-load to highest-load. 23:02, 3 October 2009 (BST)

There are some edge cases that could use addressing, as Misanthropy pointed out, but on the whole, I really like the idea. If you overstocked on syringes or FAKs (not sure why/how you would, but let's just say) it'd be a pain to remove them individually. This would make it that much easier. As for guns, my suggestion would be to select the one with the least remaining ammo, given the choice of multiple guns to choose from. —Aichon— 01:19, 4 October 2009 (BST)

---

Flak Jacket Nerf

Timestamp: Kamikazie-Bunny 18:06, 3 October 2009 (BST)

Type: Balance/Flavour

Scope: All Players

Description: Inspired by the suggestion discussion below, anthropometrics, mechwarrior and probability and statistics. Currently: Flak Jacket Grants a 20 percent damage reduction against attacks that deal 5 damage or more. Proposed Change: Body Armour Has a 60% chance to grants a 20 percent damage reduction against attacks that deal 5 damage or more. If a kill shot occurs (even when the body armour has an effect) the effects of body armour are automatically ignored. Effects: No more players wearing body armour on their heads. You can still cause maximum damage to a player by hitting an extremity/ weak point e.g. arm, leg or head. Although body armour increases survivability flesh rot is now more appealing to zombies (and more effective). Body armour covers a range of defences including flak jackets/bullet-proof jackets/plate mail... Considered increasing the % to 80 but looking for input first.

Discussion (Flak Jacket Nerf)

Oh dear. *runs away from flame war John Ibans 18:16, 3 October 2009 (BST)

I'm going to raise two obvious points here:

1. Nerfs Flack Jackets
2. Why?

Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 18:23, 3 October 2009 (BST)

Actually it doesn't nerf anything. It doesn't DO anything.--Pesatyel 18:28, 3 October 2009 (BST)

Yes it does, it basically makes FJs only have a 60% chance to work. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 18:41, 3 October 2009 (BST)

Oops, my bad. CNR. I was looking at his kill shot thing not the fact he reduced it from 80 to 60. I'm just curious what makes him thing ANYONE would go for this.--Pesatyel 18:51, 3 October 2009 (BST)

From 100 to 60.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:55, 3 October 2009 (BST)

You DO realize what your suggesting is pointless, right? Think about it. You said KILL SHOT. Let's say you have 8 HP and a flak jacket. If I hit you with a shotgun, you die and I earn 20 XP. First, the remaining 2 HP "lost" to the flak jacket are irrelevant as you are STILL DEAD and you can't be at "negative HP" as, when you stand up you will be at full. Second, I earn XP on the damage of the weapon, NOT the damage sustained by the target.--Pesatyel 18:28, 3 October 2009 (BST)

Everybody is going to vote kill on this. It completely kills the flak jacket, for no real reason. User:Armpit_Odor/sig - 18:35 3 October 2009 (BST)

Suggestion:20070902 Flak Jacket Change Raises similar issues, and with Flesh Rot becoming more common, the people this most hurts are dual natured players and those trying to avoid PK'ing. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:40, 3 October 2009 (BST)

So, if I'm to understand the "issue" correctly, some flavor text suggests that people wear Flak Jackets on their heads, so we should change the mechanics of Flak Jackets to make Flesh Rot more appealing to zombies? Sounds like a logical fallacy to me. I don't have a problem with making Flesh Rot more appealing, but this isn't the proper way to do it, and no other valid reason is proposed here for nerfing Flak Jackets. —Aichon— 18:47, 3 October 2009 (BST)

Yeah, I'd be opposed to this. It's an unnecessary change that won't make a big enough difference to be worth the hassle, the coding and the added random factor. 18:59, 3 October 2009 (BST)

Ditto what Misanthropy and Aichon said. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 19:13, 3 October 2009 (BST)

---

More details

Timestamp: John Ibans 21:39, 1 October 2009 (BST)

Type: Flavour, greater detail

Scope: Available to all

Description: It seems that zombies wandering the town have two attacks, "crush shoulder", and "bite shoulder". While I sure don't mind that, I would like more detail, such as "You flail at USERNAME's chest, causing 3 damage" or "You bite USERNAME's back, causing 4 damage, they become infected". The simple statement is that I would like more zombie attacks (randomly selected) that all do the same amount of damage, but attack different body locations (even striking the head would be cool) In addition, I think this can also be expanded to survivours, wuch as "you strike a zombine in the chest with your fire axe, causing 3 damage" or "you fire at a zombie's leg, causing 10 damage. Their rotten flesh absorbs 2 damage". Mechanics: Well, randomness. I don't know exactly what language Urban Dead is written in, but I imagine that broadening the extent of described attacks would take a bit of monotinay away from constant crushing and biting shoulders. This proposal would not change damage or anything else, just the text.

Discussion (More details)

So, basically adding some additional, random flavor text for zombie attacks? I like the idea. Seems simple to implement and adds a bit of variety to an assault on a survivor. —Aichon— 22:13, 1 October 2009 (BST)

Why does putting a pistol round in a zombie's face do the same damage and level of injury as shooting his foot? Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 22:35, 1 October 2009 (BST)

Why does every firearm ever fired automatically hit a flak jacket? Urban dead is a game of such questions. I enjoy the flavour, as long as its zombie only. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 22:46, 1 October 2009 (BST)

Classist. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 22:54, 1 October 2009 (BST)

Entirely. Surely all you survivors are aiming at the head anyway? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 08:43, 2 October 2009 (BST)

You shoot Bob the Zombie for 5 damage. Their flak jacket absorbs 1 point of that damage. They take a Headshot and die.

Obviously, flak jackets cover every part of your body. ?:I --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 19:30, 2 October 2009 (BST)

Somewhere on the wiki theres a long page about how zombies wrap flak jackets around their heads. Anyone? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:33, 2 October 2009 (BST)

I see only one issue, and it's kind of minor. If this is giving random body parts, it'll be using the same mechanic as the hit rate %. If you know about Groove Theory, that might be a problem. If people see that Head hits are more successful that leg hits, then they may find out what the current interval is. --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 07:06, 2 October 2009 (BST)

The other issue I see is that while some of us like the added flavour, how many people pay that much attention to the damage messages beyond confirming whether or not you actually hit your target? Don't get me wrong--I'd vote Keep if this goes to voting--but I feel that it would be wasted programming for all the appreciation it would get from the average UD user. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 07:19, 2 October 2009 (BST)

You mean that, for instance, if the current interval is 8 seconds with a window of 1 second, there's the possibility that "head" hits would occur during the first .5 seconds of the window and "leg" shots would occur in the second .5 seconds, clueing the player in to where they are landing within the window? Seems kinda unlikely to me, and is certainly a minor edge case, as you said. More likely is that people who try to use Groove Theory would only see the same flavor text over and over again while they're in that groove, which isn't really an issue since using grooves is not supported gameplay practice. —Aichon— 08:25, 2 October 2009 (BST)

According to kevin, it's patched anyway. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 18:28, 2 October 2009 (BST)

Kevan just changed the system by which it works. He didn't completely erase the potential for abuse. if you read to the bottom of the talk, there's conjecture about a new groove.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 19:11, 2 October 2009 (BST)

Yeah, it's not fixed at all. In truth, I can confirm that it's working and is fairly simple to abuse. Since I became aware of the concept last week, I've already figured out the interval for FAK searches and for zombies using Claw (e.g. I went about 19/20 and 22/24 in successfully finding FAKs in my last two restocking runs), and am hoping I can come up with some reproducible results that I could pass along to Bug Reports or Kevan at some point soon. I'd love to see the RNG fixed, to be frank, since I know that there are others who have doubtless researched this at length and are capable of abusing it to the extreme. In the meantime though, and speaking from a small bit of experience, I don't think that the flavor messages would have much impact on people abusing Groove Theory, though I could very well be wrong. —Aichon— 23:28, 2 October 2009 (BST)

Well, the simple thing would be to just NOT include "head" in the random target flavor text. "Head" already has a special mechanic (headshot) which would supercede this flavor text (unless the headshot mechanic changes). The main problem with the idea is that it isn't JUST "flavor text". If I attack you and hit your hand, it could (and probably would) be argued that it should have some "effect" beyond just doing standard damage.--Pesatyel 01:59, 3 October 2009 (BST)

And along the same lines, "foot" and "hand" just wouldn't be included in the random text. John Ibans 15:01, 3 October 2009 (BST)

Your missing the point then. "Hand" was just an example. If I injure you ANYWHERE on the arm or leg it would have essentially the same effect. People would argue that a leg wound would slow you down. WHERE on the leg wouldn't matter.--Pesatyel 18:16, 3 October 2009 (BST)

I think a better system would be to ignore body parts. You gouge... or You tear, Claw, Swipe, rend, scratch grab. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:36, 3 October 2009 (BST)

---

Ingame-Event Email Notification

Timestamp: ZuS 21:52, 27 September 2009 (BST)

Type: A way to choose to be bothered with ingame events while not logged in

Scope: Available to all players

Description: I just logged in to a familiar scene: 3 messages with "Lights go out in..." and one involving <Spy Name> destroying the generator in my building. Awesome. So what was I and 20 other survivors doing while some random guy entered and smashed the single most valuable possession in 4 adjacent buildings, including the one I was in? We were catatonic. The suggestion is very simple: allow players to choose to receive an email if one of limited range of events occur. Mechanics: It should be a single ONE event per day, it should be specified before you log off (or else the email is not sent), and should be something obvious to your character, like someone blunting the axe on the generator or chewing your leg. It could be a drop down menu with options as simple as: "Guard <item(barricade,genny,radio)/person/yourself>" if you are a survivor, or "Sniff <human/zombie/new arrivals to area>" if you are a zombie. Naturally, someone guarding the barricade would not notice a Free-runner comming in, destroying the generator and leaving. And someone guarding the generator would not notice zombies eating everyone present alive. It is the ONE option that you chose, onlye ONE email per day and only IF the event actually happens. Of course, the developers could chose to have some fun with this and allow a % chance of sending you a random vivid nightmare, because you dozed off at watch. Content of the email: The email could contain something like: "While you are picking your nose, <PKer Name> enters the building, takes out 3 pistols and a shotgun and starts emptying them into <Victim>. You watch as blood and brain tissue are plastered on the walls. You wait in suspense to see if you're next!" The text could be less informative as well, maybe generated from a number of different messages depending on the event itself. "You hear banging on the door." might be the only content of an email sent to someone who was Guarding the door, in an event of a zombie breaking in or a player trying to enter a too heavily baricaded location. But we will be doing nothing but sending emails then! It's only one email per player per day, and only if they choose to set it at log-off AND the event actually happens. Worst case: 70% of the population is logged off and the other 30% of population manages to trigger ALL the events - a completely impossible scenario - you have to send 25k emails during that particular day. If that is too much, maybe consider just one per week or make the option cost some AP. The "remember to play the game" effect is more than worth the trouble. Implementing something like this would engage players more in the real-time environment. I personally like the idea of possibly being detected as I approach a group of 20 zombies and start shotgun-blasting one of them. And I certainly like the idea of noticing someone smashing my stuff or friends and giving him a piece of my mind together with some buckshot.

Discussion (Ingame-Event Email Notification)

If someone is asleep then someone is asleep. Our characters go to sleep when they run out of AP, and are effectively asleep when we log off. If they're going to wake up due to some in-game reason, then it needs to make sense...and having someone wake up for a genny being attacked but not for a horde storming through the door does not make sense. I just see this as being the wrong approach. It's arbitrary (users are forced to select only one choice from among several, why?), complicated (how would an interface for this work?), and doesn't make in-game sense (zombie hordes breaking through the barricades are louder than GKers doing their dirty work, so why hear one but not the other?). All of that said, the idea does seem intriguing, and might be more feasible if it had a bit of a different twist.

What about something more like an intruder alarm or a motion detector? Make it an item that could be found, installed, and destroyed in a manner identical to that of a Transmitter. If a breach in the barricades occurs, a single e-mail could be sent out to all active survivors inside the building. A single checkbox on the Settings page could handle opting in/out of the notifications. And then rather than assigning some arbitrary rate on the number of e-mails sent per day, the survivor should instead receive one e-mail with a notification, and should be informed in that e-mail that they will not receive any additional notifications until they log back in (essentially, it would work identically to the way that many message boards handle notifying users of new posts in topics that they subscribe to). This ensures that people get notifications exactly as often as they act on them and that the server doesn't send unnecessary e-mails, while also ensuring that only a subset of the population is illegible to receive the e-mails at any given time.

That said, I'm not sure that I would even support my own idea if someone else put it up as a suggestion (if someone else wants to run with it, by all means, do so, since I have no intention of pursuing it), but it's just there as a demonstration of what this suggestion might look like if the layers of arbitrariness were removed. All I mean to say is that the current suggestion makes little sense in or out of the game, and isn't a very elegant solution to what appears to be a minor problem. —Aichon— 23:54, 27 September 2009 (BST)

I like the concept of it being possible with an item, similar to a radio transmitter. This would mean that you could only have one in a location at once, and it could be destroyed. There would have to be the opt-out option in settings, and I think it should only affect barricades. That being said, I have no intention of pursuing it as a suggestion either because I don't think it is needed. Either you're on UD and you're watching the 'cades by refreshing your page every so often, or you're offline. I don't want pseudo-players. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 07:24, 1 October 2009 (BST)

Instantaneous response to break-ins is severely overpowered, and this is a crapload of bandwidth spam that you want Kevan to handle out-of-pocket? How about no. 25k a day, or even 25k a week, is patently absurd. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 23:57, 27 September 2009 (BST)

Yeah, I know. And boy do I like to abuse it when I get the chance. FAK, FAK, FAK, FAK woah, that guy has 300hp! --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 04:37, 28 September 2009 (BST)

Ew. No thanks. As nice as it would be for pro-survivors to have this kind of thing, they're already in a strong position and need no more help against zombie break-ins at all. 00:16, 28 September 2009 (BST)

It is hard to tell, but from what it SOUNDS like reading it more than once, if [event] occurs, I get an email sent to me, the player. Assuming I check my email every minute, I then have to log in and "respond". Is that about right?--Pesatyel 04:19, 28 September 2009 (BST)

(There are ways to be notified of e-mails instantaneously, e.g. e-mail program in the system tray or idling, mobile e-mail alerts. If warned like I have been before through IM chat, I can respond in ten seconds or so) --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 05:07, 28 September 2009 (BST)

That doesn't alter what I said. You play the game and "set" this before leaving. Then, Sometime within the next 25 hours (the normal time in which people wait so they can maximize their ap with each play), you get a message (via email or IM or whatever) that "something happened". The whole suggestion rests on the idea that most of us players spend all our waking moments checking emails (or have immediate access to a computer if via some other form like phone message) and such where this would be useful. As I said, you'd have to be checking your email every few minutes and, if your going to be doing that, your online and you might as well just be logged into the game itself so you could react immediately.--Pesatyel 07:25, 28 September 2009 (BST)

That doesn't alter what I said either. I don't have to check my e-mail, I have Thunderbird open all the time and get a pop-up and fancy beeps the moment I receive anything. I don't have to check, it's automatic. Same with the phone, and phones have browsers too. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 16:06, 28 September 2009 (BST)

I think this is the big issue. Between push notifications on my iPhone (which has a nice browser with UD bookmarked) and background processes on my desktop, I can, without my active involvement and at any time of day, get notified within one minute when something worthy of a notification occurs . Effectively, it'd be the same as if I was logging in and refreshing constantly, except that I wouldn't actually have to do that (which also means I'd be able to circumvent the IP hit limit conveniently). —Aichon— 17:59, 28 September 2009 (BST)

Ok, so you get your message....then what do you do? You have to log into the game, right?--Pesatyel 04:35, 29 September 2009 (BST) You know what? Nevermind. My point was that something like this would only be useful for the small handful of players that have immediate access to the game at a moment's notice (when the message arrives). Most players can't (which is one of the reasons AP suggestions always fail, but I digress). If you have access to the game that quickly, why would you bother with emails or texts or other messages when you can be IN the game constantly?--Pesatyel 04:38, 29 September 2009 (BST)

Two reasons: first, you don't have to waste IP hits by refreshing to see how things are going, and second, it takes no action on your part (i.e. it's entirely passive). —Aichon— 09:43, 29 September 2009 (BST)

I forgot about the IP limit. But it isn't entirely passive. You still have to log in and respond. It isn't like the suggestion is saying you have an "auto response" to the event.--Pesatyel 03:25, 30 September 2009 (BST)

Right now, someone wanting this sort of functionality has to engage in two actions: refreshing regularly, and then responding when a condition is met. With this suggestion, the refreshing part is cut out, hence my reference to it being passive, but I can see where you're coming from, and I think we're just talking semantics at this point. Sorry for the confusion. —Aichon— 05:29, 30 September 2009 (BST)

Probably. No big deal. The author's primary argument is that a character should be able to react when something happens and the player is not logged in. I'm not sure an email message would help much (or, more to the point, only those that have quick access would have the advantage). Instead, what if a player who wanted to "react" when they weren't online could do so by allocating AP for it? Say, for example, he allocated 5 AP to "guarding" the generator. The 5 AP would be deducted immediately then, when the player is logged out, the next 5 times someone attempts to attack the generator, the "guard" would respond (attack the gker). If there is a 6th attack, well tough, your out of allocated AP for guarding. Just a rough example idea, but it wouldn't be an auto-attack because you would be spending the AP on it (ie. not a free ability). And if nobody attacks the generator? Your still out the AP you allocated.--Pesatyel 06:55, 30 September 2009 (BST)

I think most people understood the proposal correctly. A couple of thoughts on the first some posts :)

1) I don't buy the arbitrary nature of the suggestion as an argument against it - it's available to both humans and zombies as a general awareness of stuff you just can not sleep through. A % chance of not being alerted is not impossible to implement, if the event can forego unnoticed.

2) Zombies can't use motion sensors, but they might be able to hear/see/smell a human entering their area and emptying 5 shotguns into the zombie they stand next to.

3) It is only one event per day because of email limit and a potential to have people cooperate with different alerts, thus promoting community play - wee.

4) It's perfectly fine that someone would notice a generator being smashed, but not the barricades and vice versa, because the generator might be in the basement. Same goes for zombies standing in the same block of the city, they can choose to actually roam together or a few streets apart.

5) If you respond to an email in 10 seconds, I don't know what to say to that really - if you have 10 people resonding in 10 seconds, yea in that case it's overpowered. But most people are not your kind of crazy, and sending the mail when it's convenient for the server might be more than a minute away as well. I think for most people this would be a curiousity and something that reminds them to log on like 4 days after they logged off, maybe even help get them hooked - not a bad deal for UD in general. For me it would do 3 things: give me a chance to release my frustration with cross-teaming characters leveled solely for the purpose of helping the other team do stuff usually impossible for them - it would at the very least leave their name in my inbox; a chance to coop with perfect strangers about little stuff in the game, like splitting the choirs of sleeping next to the door and the generator; and the excitement of attacking a zombie that is potentially going to awaken and attack me back - I think that would be awesome.

6) Yea, the bandwidth might be a problem, depending on the server config. For my personal computer 25k emails(don't get mind-stuck with this number, it's the worst case that can happen only in my wildest dreams) would take a minute.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by ZuS (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.

"I think for most people this would be a curiousity". Well, clearly not, because I don't see a single positive review of this suggestion. --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 07:38, 28 September 2009 (BST)

I like it but I see a lot of problems, mainly because a lot of people have roaming internet through phones/laptops etc and they can be set to give an alert when you recieve an e-mail. however i doubt if many folk have access to that all the time as, well, people do sleep. All said and done though I would prefer to see this as a new "perk" for donations... not many people are going to find this useful and those who do can damn well give Kevan a fiver for the slight edge it would give them. --Honestmistake 08:20, 28 September 2009 (BST)

I must say I'm intrigued. However it would provide some terrible power to zerg sentries who could hang out in various buildings and just monitor whatever is going on. Also, if you check a box to send alerts it should by default become unchecked within 24 hours, that way people who create characters and abandon them aren't contributing to server load with endless email requests. Finally, Honestmistake has a decent idea about it being a donation perk.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 11:38, 28 September 2009 (BST)

*Bravely climbs the wall of text.*...Nope, won't work. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 18:48, 28 September 2009 (BST)

---

Encumbrance change (Yes ZL your comics had an effect on a pro survivor)

Timestamp: Devorac 04:38, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Type: Tweak

Scope: Survivors

Description: I have recently been reading through peoples profiles and such, it is as informative as it is amusing most of the time. Most recently I read through a series ofComics written by Zombie Lord, most of them are fluff (funny fluff though), however one of them made me feel rather guilty about about my abuse of something that I have long considered to be on the edge of good taste to use. Now every moderately experienced survivor probably knows about this but I'm going to say it anyway, 100 Percent encumbrance is not the absolute maximum. A "smart" survivor can pack their inventory so as to extend space by up to 18%, doesn't seem like a lot, but think about it... That's 9 Clips/syringes/FAKs that you can carry if you pack in the right way. I discovered this little trick when I was level 4 and was stocking up on ammunition in a PD so I could gain a few levels. How it works is simple, you pack your lightest items in first and then work your way up in orders of weight, then when your at 98% encumbrance you pick up a generator, which puts you at 118% encumbrance. This works because the system only stops you from picking up items when you are at or past 100%, this allows you to abuse it in such a way that you can add almost one fifth to your inventory size. I say let 100% full be 100% full. No 102%, no 110%, and sure as hell no 118%. I've used this tons of times, but it really isn't right. Changing it won't wreck the encumbrance system, and it will only effect the older hands who know about the bug, no hurting the new blood. Let me know what you think

Discussion (Encumbrance change (Yes ZL your comics had an effect on a pro survivor))

I'm against it. Carrying a toolbox, flak jacket, knife and the obligatory FAKs and needles is heavy enough, this mechanic would require me to then drop stuff if I needed to replace a generator, then find it again, then drop it again when I need a new generator. Surely it's not too hard to rationalise a sudden burst of adrenaline giving someone a temporary boost to their overall strength while they lug something vital around before it's too late. 05:03, 22 September 2009 (BST)

"A sudden burst of adrenaline"... We are living in a city with zombies, who try to eat our brains. We are living in buildings that have been torn apart and rebuilt clumsily a hundred times, we sleep beside people who may kill us or we may kill every night. With all of that going on I don't think you will get an adrenaline rush because it's dark so you can carry a generator around if you are already carrying a flak jacket, a knife, a toolkit, 20 First aid kits, and 18 needles. Besides, it's not a temporary boost when you've gone to a mall to stock up, I have carried around 118% encumbrance across 4 suburbs because I had to go somewhere and I wanted to be prepared, that is neither temporary, nor can it conceivably be adrenaline when there is no abnormal (abnormal to the circumstances that is) pressure. Devorac 05:23, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Eh, I still see it as punishing the mule who has to carry all the vital pro-survivor stuff, when you should be targetting the guy who's got a few dozen shotguns in his 'pocket'. I can rationalise my over-100% encumbrance, as I still see it as that rush you get when you know you've got to lift something heavy (seriously, go grab your washing machine. I'll wait. You could lug it a bit but you couldn't take it with you forever, right? Well I'm only ever moving a genny a few blocks in-game), but if you want to fight the limit-breaking exploit, then increasing the weight of shotguns or pistols would be the best way to go about it. 05:33, 22 September 2009 (BST)

This just seems rather minor (and maybe a little petty). I can carry 6 generators if I want to. Realistically, obviously not. But how is carrying that one extra generator REALLY going to matter? At best, you might do better to allow those with Body Building to carry that extra 18%, but I think that might be a dupe AND probably moot as a skill doesn't dictate rarity.--Pesatyel 05:43, 22 September 2009 (BST)

118%? You're out by a few hundred of the highest encumbrance I've seen. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 05:44, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Yes, but that's with supply crates, right? They're hardly commonplace enough for eveyone to have opened one to take them over 100%.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 07:23, 22 September 2009 (BST)

While it does seem like a rather minor change, I think it's certainly a bug that probably should have been resolved a long time ago. If you're in a factory and you're already at 98%, finding a generator should give you a message, "You find a portable generator, but you don't have enough space to carry it, so you leave it here." --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 06:51, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Or maybe we shouldn't nerf survivors?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 07:23, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Yeah, but IS it a nerf? If yoru at 98% and you can't pick up that last generator or shotgun, oh no! Drop and/or use some shit.--Pesatyel 07:31, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Personally, I always do. I never leave my account with over 100% overnight, and I'll only go over 100% when I have to. But the thing is, I do have to. Survivors always have to, because that is what makes them level to zombies in the game. After purchsing skills, zombies have everythign they need to be as good, or even better, than survivors. Survivors, on the other hand, have to keep a good 80% encumbrance at all times if they want to maintain their potential. Personally, I never go below 80%, and I don't go in to this practice of keeping FAKs on me at all times. Hence, I die daily. I'm usually around 90%, and with a couple of syringes, I'm already getting close to the limit. If I need to provide a generator for a building, then I don't want to ahve to drop all of my necessary equipment, get a generator, take it to the building, go back, get fuel, take that to the building, then go search for all the stuff I dropped again.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 07:36, 22 September 2009 (BST)

The problem you're having there is that you're trying to do everything. Survivors should specialize, that's why survivors work in groups. If you're carrying a bunch of guns and ammo, you should only need 1-2 needles and 1-2 FAKs. You're not meant to be a one-person army. And considering the fact that most people consider this encumbrance issue a glitch/bug, the natural solution is to FIX IT. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 08:01, 22 September 2009 (BST)

I agree that it is unrealistic to go above 100% encumbrance. However, the amount of stuff survivors carry is crazy to begin with. If you were carrying a generator there's no way you could jump across a rooftop. Realistically 1 generator = 100% encumbrance. But the game should be fun, not real. In reality a single shotgun blast to the face should kill you and 10 syringes are not as heavy or cumbersome as a portable generator. The encumbrance is just designed to balance the amount of stuff you can carry, not to be real. And with 118% encumbrance you can't restock on other supplies so there's a trade-off.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 10:34, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Yes, but that has as much to do with survivor organization and the fact that supplies are unlimited. Eventually, your supplies are going to run low and you'll have to go searching again. It depends entirely on what "role" you play. There is, really, no "necessary equipment" that you can't spend a few minutes collecting so that argument is specious.--Pesatyel 03:59, 23 September 2009 (BST)

What suburb are you playing in?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 07:04, 23 September 2009 (BST)

What does it matter? If your talking "ruined buildings" that goes, again, to survivor organization. If not, no building is different from any other. A PD in East Becktown will have the SAME items as a PD in Dartside. I'm not the only one nor was I the first to argue that survivors need much better organization. I find it a little ironic that if you go by "normal" genre, survivors have EVERYTHING they need to survive...except teamwork and zombies have THAT when they shouldn't.--Pesatyel 04:38, 24 September 2009 (BST)

It matters because playing in a suburb which constantly has ~50% of its buildings ruined would completely destroy your theory. Therefore I'd assume you only play zombie, or have never played in a seiged suburb for more than a month.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 07:14, 24 September 2009 (BST)

Again, that DOESN'T counter the fact that survivors are, at best, half-assed at organization. Zombies can do it, so why can't survivors? And I don't buy the argument that "zombies have to" which implies that survivors don't. Control of an area is, for the most part, based on how organized the "team" is. I recently introduced a couple of friends to Malton and I'm helping them out (unfortunately, I'm stuck as a zombie while they are both living). How many players does it take to unruin a building?--Pesatyel 06:00, 26 September 2009 (BST)

That's a broad interpretation with no basis. Saying that survivors have "No organisation", which, by the way, you spelt wrong, is just stupid. Earlier, I saw a group of about 3 survivors oust a good ten PKers from a dark building. The same is done with malls and NTs when it's zombies. Of course, getting rid of the PKers was made substantially more difficult by the fact that they had to run in and out of the building with generators and fuel, while the PKers destroyed the generators, and they had to get in odd attacks. This suggestion is just spam, it'll do nothing good.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 09:44, 26 September 2009 (BST)

(That's the American spelling. You should've pointed out his use of "your" for "you're" instead.) In any case, small groups managing to organize the retaking of a building isn't the point. The point is that survivors on the whole are widely uncoordinated. Survivors as a whole haven't done anything important for a long time. Remember when Dowdney held off the Big Bash? There were thousands of survivors there. Something on that scale hasn't gone down since, which is a real damn shame. RinKou 16:25, 26 September 2009 (BST)

"American spelling". Exactly, the wrong spelling. And just because survivors stick to suburbs, and don't move aroudn the map, that means that they should be unable to go over 100% encumbrance?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:02, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Organisation isn't the right spelling anywhere, and stop arguing on a dead suggestion pl0x. Devorac, feel like putting the lid on this drama nest? I have yet so see a single user take you up on your offer... Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 21:28, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Except for, you know, in England. You know, the country where the English language is from?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 21:39, 26 September 2009 (BST)

My bad; some idiot up there said it was the American spelling, so I assumed that it must not be an English spelling. We can has end DS spam pl0x? Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 22:21, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Wow. Spelling. *Yawn*. Guess that's all you got since I asked a legitimate question which you failed to answer. Which means your not GOING to answer (which is answer enough since your lack would prove my point), instead going into some spiel about "pkers". So don't bother, consider it closed and moot and rather pointless as this point.--Pesatyel 21:00, 27 September 2009 (BST)

I actually did answer, if you'd bothered to read. I said that survivors do, provided an example, and if you're too much of an asswipe to read that, then GTFO.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 21:06, 27 September 2009 (BST)

So your saying the answer to my question of how many survivors it takes to unruin a building is 3. Gotcha.--Pesatyel 04:12, 28 September 2009 (BST)

Wow, you're stupid.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 07:39, 28 September 2009 (BST)

Lol. I asked a simple question which you couldn't answer (even though you said you did). And I'M stupid? Whatever you say Master of the Game. Would you like me to repeat the question? HOW MANY SURVIVORS DOES IT TAKE TO UNRUIN A BUILDING? I even put it in bold it for you just in case you had were to miss it again. And grow up while your at it.--Pesatyel 04:30, 29 September 2009 (BST)

And, in response, "Whatever you say, your right, I'm wrong". end of discussion.--Pesatyel 06:43, 29 September 2009 (BST)

Indicate the location of this question, because I checked thouroughly, and couldn't see it. Oh, and I don't mean the references to it after you repeatedly told me that there was no answer given. If you haven't worked out what I'm trying to tell you right now, then that's your own fault. It takes several survivors to unruin a building, maybe even 10 or so. What it should take, is one. This would make it so that ruin was premanent, practically. Have fun playing with your zombies.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 07:08, 29 September 2009 (BST)

I put my original question in bold above. And you answered my question how I figured you would. Thank you.--Pesatyel 07:00, 30 September 2009 (BST)

Not broken. Like rising from a headshot with only 1ap, it's a quirk of the game that adds some interesting tactical considerations -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 11:31 22 September 2009 (BST) 100% should be 100%. I'd vote Keep.--Maps 18:16, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Agreed. Bring this to voting. --Matthewbluewars ^{/New City\} 20:51, 22 September 2009 (BST)

You know, it's usually practice to not put up spam suggestions.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:54, 22 September 2009 (BST)

What are you talking about? --Matthewbluewars ^{/New City\} 20:57, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Going over the limit is actually pretty useless except for during long periods of downtime. I have a Roftwood medic who used to top up on medkits before picking up a generator, reaching 118%; the problem with that approach is that I was then unable to resupply after a heal until I had dropped the generator or used 9 medkits. Going overweight has its own unique advantages and disadvantaged, and I see no serious reason to alter the game just because someone gets to carry an extra generator for a while... Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 20:36, 22 September 2009 (BST)

I concur. If over 100%, and you need to perform an action which requires a new item, you are forced to drop items, as if they'd been dropped instantaneously anyway.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:40, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Exactly. Having over 100% comes with its inherent disadvantages, and I think an extra 18% is fine. Who cares, and no, it's not a bug, it's just how the engine was chosen to work. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 04:10, 23 September 2009 (BST)

I'm not sure there's anything you could change here. Also, am I the only non-crazy person who actually likes ZL's comics? (really) --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 04:12, 23 September 2009 (BST)

At first I thought they were fucking stupid, but then I read them again and once I realised they were supposed to be read consecutively I actually understood them and thought they were funny, though I don't agree with their protests about game balance and views on the in-game community. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 04:21, 23 September 2009 (BST)

They're so biased, they're funny! :Ð --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 04:23, 23 September 2009 (BST)

Yeah! And I love the art style. :o --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 04:25, 23 September 2009 (BST)

The IRC sysops also know about the super secret comic series that was made in response to ZL's comic strip, we called it BAWWLS. Were you there for all that Boberton? I can't remember. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 04:27, 23 September 2009 (BST)

I can't decide if I should dupe this when it goes to a vote. Thoughts? -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 04:24, 23 September 2009 (BST)

Yes. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 04:25, 23 September 2009 (BST)

Given you have failed to understand the suggestions procedure in the past, to the detriment of other users on this wiki, I'll be ignoring your input. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 04:30, 23 September 2009 (BST)

Well, I will then, special. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 04:33, 23 September 2009 (BST)

Someone's going to. It might as well be you, Iscariot.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 07:03, 23 September 2009 (BST)

Duping things is an art, not everyone can do it ;) -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 07:28, 23 September 2009 (BST)

If dupign things is an art, then you're picasso.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 07:40, 23 September 2009 (BST)

-waves hand dismissively- No need, the arguments presented have swayed me, particularly the one that paralleled this tactic to ?rise meatshield tactics. While I still find it strange... it is now a sensible sort of strange. If anyone else wants to take up this suggestion feel free, simple delete my name from the suggestion head and replace it with your own signature, my thanks. Devorac 07:14, 23 September 2009 (BST)

---

World War Z

Timestamp: Matthewbluewars /New City\ 02:12, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Type: New city based on movie

Scope: ...Ummm...the new city...

Description: Template:Wikipedia by Max Brooks is going to be adapted into a movie. There is a supposed viral marketing website, itstartswiththeflu.com, which says it will come out September 8, 2010. So there should be a city based on WWZ, Template:Wikipedia (from the Battle of Yonkers). First of all, there would be no NecroTechs. Instead, there would be labs, hidden in random warehouses. They would contain: Improved Phalanx - cures Zombie Virus; can only be used with Virology. (Assuming they foun a way to make the Phalanx vaccine actually work) FAKs Tracking Chip - a DNA Scanner that can only be used once; requires Research. (Remember the underwater tracker guy?) GPS Units In powered Labs, you can "Scan Area" with the skill Computer Operation. This returns a NecroNet-esque effect, but also has a 10% of removing the chip from any scanned zombie. They recieve the message You hear a beep coming from under your skin, feel for it, and rip something out. There would be two scientist classes to replace NecroTechnicians: Radio Free Earth Broadcaster - Computer Operation, Radio Operation and Research. Lab Technician - Research, Virology, and one Improved Phalanx. And the new scientist skills would be: Research - allows you to use Tracking Chips. Computer Operation - allows you to Virology - allows you to use Improved Phalanx. There are now two types of infection: Zombie Virus Infected Wound Every Infectious Bite automatically causes Infected Wound and has ~10% chance of giving a Zombie Virus. To avoid the Yonkers city from becoming abandonded, players could reset their accounts after any type of death. It would not delete their accounts, but instead let them choose a new starting class and start again at a random class-specific building. All zombies would start out with Infectious Bite and Vigour Mortis. To reflect Brooks canon, doors would not have to opened (zombies could just bang them down), and each Headshot has a 10% chance of perma-dead (remember the Battle of Yonkers) and the revised zombie skill tree would be: Scent Fear, Scent Blood, Scent Trail, Scent Death, Infectious Bite, Vigour Mortis, Neck Lurch, Death Grip, Rend Flesh, Tangling Grasp, Feeding Drag, Feeding Groan, Ransack, Flailing Gesture, Lurching Gait, Ankle Grab Flesh Rot And on a side note, all poetry books should include Daniel 12; 1-13 (taken from a hidden message on itstartswiththeflu.com).

Discussion (World War Z)

As much as I like the idea of a new city, I'm not keen on both sides having a permanent death feature. One or the other would be better - either scrambling for revives to limit the time as zombies, which are vulnerable to headshot kills; or, far more preferable, keeping the zed population rising while the survivors dwindle. Both will just bring the map to a standstill, especially if one group gets organised enough to make big RTS massacres and wipes multiple players out of the game at a time. Plus, Romero's upcoming "Island of the Dead" would probably be a more interesting setting than another big city. 02:20, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Given that it's a year away, and every other tie-in city we've had has been within a month of release, how ridiculous do you think this is?

Also removing VM from the starting skill slot seriously fucks zombies rather than partially like the current system.

Where's Digestion gone?

The reset after death thing is hideously anti-zombie, who can't hide away behind impenetrable barricades like survivors. The reset idea will make no difference, what zombie player after struggling against the disadvantage of the mechanics and class is going to want to do it all over again because Rambo McTrenchie has jumped out from behind his Up-The-Arse level of barricades to shoot you, insult you and headshot you? It's like the old headshot, except worse.

There are people on this page who have played on perma death servers, some of us ran hordes on them, and we're all going to tell you the same thing. But you're not going to listen are you? You're just going to alter something slightly and ask us the same question again.

Let me explain it very simply: Don't suggest things for classes or play styles that you are not intimately familiar with.

Basic game fact: Survivors have massive advantages and are easy to level and play, zombies are hard mode. Don't make it harder for the few dedicated players that make this game worth playing, or they're all likely to leave and then you're playing Urban Tag-You're-It with PKers. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 02:52, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Made all the changes you requested. --Matthewbluewars ^{/New City\} 20:56, 22 September 2009 (BST)

You might want to take a look at the other cities for research. Why would this necessarily be different from them (as in permadeath or rearranging the skills tree)?--Pesatyel 03:28, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Infection is a pretty useless skill if your accuracy is 20%...--Orange Talk 03:38, 22 September 2009 (BST)

It's actually an abysmal 10% without Vigour Mortis. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 07:10, 22 September 2009 (BST)

I love World War Z. I actually think a text based zombie game relating to that book would be totally boss, but you'd have to REALLY mess with the UD engine to make it like WWZ. The real power of zombies in those stories is their infection, fearlessness, and persistence. You'd need the following game mechanics: zombie players don't fear death, infection = imminent death, and zombies can work through almost any barricade. This game would be totally different than UD but I'm willing to at least discuss the game mechanics if anyone can think of a way to make it work.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 10:54, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Most zombies don't fear death. as they can just stand up. Make infection incurable? Easily done, A survivor standing in a fully lit hospital could probably survive forever. And zombies already can work there way through any barricade. The only real change would be to players themselves. Saying that permdadeath cities are unsustainable by design. Monroeville especially. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 11:12, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Ever listen to the audio book? Too bad it wasn't unabridged. But I say, Urban Dead can be EASILY turned into World War Z. You just give all zombies to the following skills: Scent Trail, Infectious Bite, Vigour Mortis, Neck Lurch, Death Grip, Rend Flesh, Tangling Grasp and Feeding Groan (that is the one issue I have with Brook's stories). Make infection incurable, no NecroTech and, the clencher, make all zombies AI. It is that last factor, taking the player out of the zombie that will be the only way to do a "proper" version.--Pesatyel 03:43, 23 September 2009 (BST)

Remove - like, actually take away - player-controlled zombies? No thank you, not even a little bit. Also, explain "all zombies are NPCs" without having death for survivors be permanent. 03:59, 23 September 2009 (BST)

Death for survivors WOULD be permanent. Why would you think otherwise? And that's my point about making the zombies NPCs. The reason you can't have "normal" zombies (whether Romero, WWZ, or other) because they are player controlled. "Normal" zombies would NEVER stop. They wouldn't use horde tactics or retreat or anything else someone with a conscious mind or ability to think would do. They would attck and eat. Nothing more. Thus the only way to achieve that would be to make them NPCs.--Pesatyel 04:43, 23 September 2009 (BST)

That in no way sounds like a fun MMORPG. It sounds like a single-player video game, titled "Resident Evil". Permanent death and NPCs are not something Urban Dead needs at all. 04:52, 23 September 2009 (BST)

That's my point. Suggestions like this crop up from time to time, as if the authors seem to forget that not only is this a game it is a multi-player game. Borehamwood and Monroeville are good examples of the flaw in a suggestion like this.--Pesatyel 06:35, 23 September 2009 (BST)

Giving people infectious bite is dumb, it doesn't aid in XP gain at all so the rare times they see a human, it'll be impossible to get XP. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 11:14, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Unless the infection is made incurable and the zombie who infects recieves kill xp when the victim dies. However to make this even slightly feasible headshot would have to be a % based chance rather than automatic and the zombies should start with Vigour, Infectious bite and Digestion... lurching gait should not exist rfor this theme. --Honestmistake 12:42, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Actually neither should free running.--Honestmistake 12:42, 22 September 2009 (BST)

That, OR, you could have a fun game... Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 20:40, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Point taken. It would be a serious challenge to implement such sweeping game changes and have a fun game. And the game would not be like UD, aside from the interface. I believe it is possible but it would take serious consideration from a group of people and an open environment of constructive criticism. Good luck on that.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 10:32, 23 September 2009 (BST)

Isnt this just monroeville all over again?--Imthatguy is on the wiki looking at ur pagez 11:49, 23 September 2009 (BST)

Imthatguy, I never played monroeville so perhaps someone else could speak to this with greater authority but as I understand it the permadeath in monroeville made it so that zombie players had to hide from survivors lest they be given a swift headshot and their playing experience ended. This goes against the idea that zombies have no fear.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 11:01, 24 September 2009 (BST)

Yeah, that was at the beginning. Now, zombies own. I've been travelling the map with my zombie alt, and I've seen 5 or so zombies, but only one survivor. --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 07:14, 25 September 2009 (BST)

I think that has to do with the fact it is easier to kill a survivor than it is for a survivor to headshot a zombie. Does that make sense?--Pesatyel 06:05, 26 September 2009 (BST)

I don't think permanent infectious bite is imbalanced, but it makes it less fun for survivors. Why not make survivors have 'lives'? Say, after 10 pokes of a Revivification syringe, your body becomes immune to healing the zombie infection and you then have perma death? Might make things fun, dunno. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 11:58, 23 September 2009 (BST)

How about two types of infection: Infected Wound (curable) and Zombie Virus (incurable). Evey Infectious Bite automatcally gives an Infected Wound, and has a ~10% chance of causing Zombe Virus. --Matthewbluewars ^{/New City\} 20:54, 29 September 2009 (BST)

The Quarantine 2019 zombie game uses a somewhat similar mechanic. They have a chance of infection with each zombie attack (somewhere in the 1-9% range, depending on the zombie's skills), and only specialized items used by skilled survivors are capable of curing the infection. You could do something similar here, with a basic infection taking a FAK to fix, and an advanced infection taking a special item. —Aichon— 21:29, 29 September 2009 (BST)

---

Ballistics Training

Timestamp: Misanthropy 15:02, 19 September 2009 (BST)

Type: New skill

Scope: Humans

Description: Anyone who's been searching for ammunition knows the situation - multiple guns with one or two bullets in each, and a few spare clips/shells. In theory, you should be able to reload all your weapons, but due to the way the bullets are distributed amongst them, you can't. Ballistics Training would be a Military class skill, to reflect the real-life practice of manually loading a magazine. Acquiring the skill would add a button to the interface on the game (alongside the 'barricade', 'enter/exit' type action buttons) reading "Sort ammunition". Using this button would cost 1 AP per partially-loaded pistol, and would reshuffle the ammunition in your guns so that it fills as many as possible, leaving only one (or none) partially-loaded. For example, having six pistols with two bullets in each would mean the "Sort ammunition" button would leave you with 6 less AP, two fully loaded pistols and four empty ones. It'd be a life-saver for people who tend to stock up on ammunition one day with the intent of going shooting with full AP another day, and would also lessen encumbrance for those who do so. Due to the low-capacity nature of shotguns, this would only affect pistols.

Discussion (Ballistics Training)

This sounds pretty good. How would it work if you had a mix of shotguns and pistols? Would the shotguns be loaded as well? Also, is there an option to only sort some of your ammo if you want to ration your AP or is it an all or nothing proposition?--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 15:25, 19 September 2009 (BST)

It says no shotguns, and I'd wager that there's no way to do some. All or nothing.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 15:29, 19 September 2009 (BST)

PR_Weapon#Redistribute_Ammunition --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 15:31, 19 September 2009 (BST)

That was way back in 2005 but it is still a good idea... I actually think this version is better. The higher AP cost and the not working for shotguns make it a lot more balanced given how useful it would be not having so many half loaded pistols. --Honestmistake 17:38, 19 September 2009 (BST)

Yes, the AP cost was a consideration. Basically, I see the only efficient uses for it to be stocking up before leaving for a while, so the AP cost is negated by the whole "stock up now, spree in a few days" mentality; or when encumbrance is getting to be a serious concern which is deemed worthy of spending half a dozen AP to ease. It's a streamlined, narrower and more balanced version of the earlier idea. 18:23, 19 September 2009 (BST)

I'm still wondering why Kevan hasn't implemented a system like Jorm used for NW, where you could unload weapons and create individual bullets. When you had enough bullets, they automatically became a new clip. Shotguns would work in basically the same way, only you can unload them now. There really isn't anything to change in that regard, since each shell is loaded individually. RinKou 19:32, 19 September 2009 (BST)

Complexity, server load and the fact that weapons aren't exactly rare in UD like they are in NW. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 19:45, 19 September 2009 (BST)

Weapons are anything but rare in Nexuswar.... unless you are talking about the magical ones.Basically I think it boils down to being a change that Kevan never got round to and just hasn't really paid attention to rather than it being overcomplicated, unbalanced or server killingly code heavy, --Honestmistake 01:49, 20 September 2009 (BST)

Weapons are rare unless you're trading with player that have been levelling for months or in a group that has a safe full of crap. I'd be happy to try an experiment with you, I'll create a UD character, you create a NW character we'll disallow joining groups and receiving gifts and we'll race to see who can find 5 shotguns fastest. Do you want to see where weapons are harder to find? -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 01:58, 20 September 2009 (BST)

Pretty safe to say that you will find em faster in UD than NW but that still doesn't make em rare. I am willing to bet that I could find at least one in my 1st day and a good few more by day 3 or 4. --Honestmistake 23:30, 20 September 2009 (BST)

Why would it be a skill? It isn't that difficult to unload/load bullets (hence why the suggestion has been in PR for 4 years).--Pesatyel 03:38, 20 September 2009 (BST)

Grab a few pistol clips, empty them out, fill them up again and see if they work right. It's not reloading guns, it's refilling clips in a way that doesn't jam the gun. 21:35, 20 September 2009 (BST)

The skill should be under the Basic Firearms Training tree. [-NOT SIGNED-]

I think this skill is different enough from the one that passed PR to warrant a vote. I agree that it should not affect shotguns at all, and the increased AP cost was going to be my first suggestion before I read it (glad you thought that far ahead!). I think this is pretty solid. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 07:10, 22 September 2009 (BST)

I'm all for this. Anyone that's ever used firearms knows how irritating it can be to have a bunch partially filled pistols. I've wished for something like this for awhile now. I'm particular about how my supplies are ordered, I prefer that my guns be fully loaded if possible and it irks me to see a bunch of partially loaded pistols that could be combined into a few fully loaded guns in real life. The fact that this will be a purchased skill and cost 1 AP per partially loaded pistol makes it balanced. For those worrying about the practicality of this in a real life situation I would say that the rule of thumb in shooter games is to always reload and the same is true of real life. Why would you carry a dozen partially loaded pistols when you could take cover, reload and walk around with 4 fully loaded pistols? Goribus 23:01, 26 September 2009 (BST)

I Like this. Why would anyone carry around multiple half-full pistols when you could just combine the bullets into the minimum amount? A simple and sensible suggestion, especially as shotguns dont need to be covered. Urgggggggh 10:24, 28 September 2009 (BST)

---

Suggestions up for voting

Filter racial slurs

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