Suggestion:20100927 Barricade Frenzy

20100927 Barricade Frenzy

 Swiers 06:05, 27 September 2010 (BST)

Suggestion type
improvement

Suggestion scope
Zombies who are at buildings they feel "drawn to enter".

Suggestion description
The recent game update institutes a mechanic where zombies are directed to specific buildings and feel "drawn to enter" them once at that location. I suggest that when attacking barricades at that location, the zombie has a 10% chance of not expending an AP (similar to the benefit granted to survivors who act inside their scouted safehouse)- they are simply in a frenzy trying to enter the building! There are two typical cases where this would come up- either you've used "Scent Trail" to follow a survivor to a safe house, or a zombie groaned inside a building and the building was subsequently barricaded. Either way, it makes sense that your zombie would be abnormally motivated to get into that building- he's convinced there is food inside!

Voting Section

Voting Rules

Votes must be numbered, justified, signed, and timestamped. # justification ~~~~ Votes that do not conform to the above may be struck by any user.

The only valid votes are Keep, Kill, Spam or Dupe. If you wish to abstain from voting, do not vote.

Keep Votes

1. Keep/Change - A lesser percentage would be more balanced, but yeah a small anti-cade measure would be tasty. 19:55, 27 September 2010 (BST)
2. Keep/Change - As Misanthropy. --^A_O^R_D^M_O^P_R^I _! ^T 21:47, 27 September 2010 (BST)
3. Keep I don't see how the balance of Scout Safehouse has anything to do with this suggestion. It's like comparing radios and feeding groans; Sure they're similar, but you don't use the rate of fuel consumption as a complaint about bellow. This suggestion really wouldn't even do that much. Zombies would just smash 0.225 [0.275] levels of barricade per swing, rather than 0.25. At least it gives some reason to follow instincts, seeing that the building is usually either ruined or EHB when you get there. --VVV ^RPMBG 01:00, 28 September 2010 (BST)

   Pretty much my reasoning. You are right- it doesn't really compare with scout safehouse (better or worse) - it just uses the same "AP saving" mechanism. I think your math is off though- it effectively bumps barricade bashing up to .275 per AP, vs .25 for normal bashing.--—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Swiers (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.

   <.< --VVV ^RPMBG 23:43, 28 September 2010 (BST)

4. Fuck Yeah - Fair and Balanced. (The exact percentage could be varied with the state of the game in much the same way as search odds and barricade interference are currently.) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 07:49, 28 September 2010 (BST)
5. For a horde this would be a tiny buff. For a feral zombie following the groan to a building that has been rebarricaded this would save 1-8 AP on average. - User:Whitehouse 23:20, 30 September 2010 (BST)

Kill Votes

1. Kill - no doubt this will get a cascade of keep votes because of the author, but here's my say- I don't think this is necessary or as balanced as Kevan's safehouse implementation was intended to be. Here we have survivors expending 30AP just so they can get an AP benefit at a safehouse, and here all a zed has to do is walk up to the place and claw at the barricades. The zombie won't even need a skill, unlike the survivors. Sure, it's only for barricades whereas the survivors get a 10% chance on all actions, but multiply this by a million and you get a furthering of the annoying anti-seige inducing gameplay that cade blocking created. Again: forcing survivors to either kill or run in a seige rather than cade and heal is part of what is killing UD atm, and IMO the current situation of cades is the only thing keeping the game a fraction of how good it was before cade blocking, this would ruin (no pun intended) that IMO. Zombies need buffs, but not in this department. Never thought I'd have to say this to you swiers, but: dude, DS. -- LEMON #1 06:21, 27 September 2010 (BST)

   This is unpopular, not undeveloped. Given the paucity of suggestions of late, its hardly a problem having a few that are likley to get killed.  Swiers 21:41, 30 September 2010 (BST)

   Replying on talk page. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 07:53, 28 September 2010 (BST)

2. Kill - The Scout Safehouse skill requires substantial AP expenditure. Allowing zombies a similar buff without the AP expenditure would be like allowing survivors to gain "free" searches without having to use the Scout Safehouse skill. --~ 06:22, 27 September 2010 (BST)
3. Kill - So survivors pay 31 AP for a safehouse and zombies just come up and tear it down, but more efficiently, for nothing but 100 XP, if that? Barricades are fine just as they are. Avalon 07:34, 27 September 2010 (BST)
4. Kill - As DDR.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 08:13, 27 September 2010 (BST)
5. Kill - Also as DDR...he put it brilliantly really, not much more needs to be said -Dezonus- ^(talk) 08:24, 27 September 2010 (BST)
6. Kill Ever since safehouse was introduced the survivor ratio has gone down and down. As outlined elsewhere I believe safehouse only encourages stupid survivor behaviour, it doesn't need tweaking, it needs removing. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:43, 27 September 2010 (BST)
7. Kill - As Aichon, just far weaker. There definitively needs something to be done about cades, but not in such an awkward way, based on a mechanic that wasn't sensible or good in the first place. -- Spiderzed▋ 22:12, 27 September 2010 (BST)
8. Nice to see you back, Seb. But I have to go with Aichon on this one. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 23:57, 27 September 2010 (BST)
9. Kill - DDR said it best. --Damien falcon 04:05, 28 September 2010 (BST)
10. Kill - As Aichon and DDR. --Thadeous Oakley 10:08, 28 September 2010 (BST)
11. Kill - Stop with this anti-siege frenzy... At end the game will be really ludicrous as it's going. Soon new players will learn the word "siege" by reading dusty history books. --DiSm ~ T 21:10, 28 September 2010 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam - Bellow already has the potential to draw four suburbs worth of zombies to your location. A 10% chance of not expending AP when attacking barricades is equivalent in strength to nearly another half suburb worth of zombies. Also the flavor you mention doesn't work out for UD, the ingame text shows that zombies don't have adrenaline so it doesn't make sense for them to be 'in a frenzy' or otherwise excited about anything. --Aeon17x 06:42, 27 September 2010 (BST)
2. Spam - This is massively overpowered. Barricades are the means by which the zombies are kept in check, and are designed to be an AP sink. To give some quick numbers for contrast, survivors have to expend 31AP apiece in order to use Scout Safehouse. In the case of 10 survivors using Scout Safehouse, you're looking at a 310AP initial investment, and an additional 3100 collective AP being spent before it begins to pay off for them, for a total of 3410AP before the break even point is reached for those 10 survivors. Once it starts to pay off, they'll benefit at a rate of roughly 50 collective AP per day. In contrast, in the most likely scenario with your suggestion, a single zombie needs to expend 1AP for a Feeding Groan, and an infinite number of zombies that are in range can benefit from it immediately. As long as the barricades are up, they collectively benefit at the rate of (NUMBER_OF_ZOMBIES * 5) AP per day, and break even after a mere 10AP is spent collectively, in contrast to the 3100AP the survivors had to spend. Not to mention the fact that they can be drawn to locations days or weeks after the last groan/bellow took place or even if they are killed. —Aichon— 10:10, 27 September 2010 (BST)

   Reply moved to talk page  Swiers 21:29, 30 September 2010 (BST)

---

Voting Rules

Current Suggestions Advice to Suggesters Adding options to your suggestion is not good practice. Others will not vote on the options, only the main body; please don't ask them to do so. Once you have posted your suggestion, it is considered complete. Altering the suggestion mechanics after voting has begun nullifies existing votes, and is considered an abuse of the suggestions system. Doing so will result in your suggestion being removed from the voting system to removed suggestions, where you can work out the details and resubmit later if you desire. It is preferred that you remove your own suggestion and resubmit a new version with changes, if changes are needed. "Notes" added for clarification purposes, and correcting spelling/typos are permitted. When considering adding a clarification note, it is often better for all parties involved, for the author to remove the suggestion and resubmit it with the clarification included for the voters who have already placed their votes. Advice to Voters You are voting on Suggestions, not Users. The text of your vote should not personally attack or denigrate the user who has submitted it... no matter how ridiculous the idea. Flaming and/or Trolling will not be tolerated. Before voting please read the Suggestions Dos and Do Nots and Frequently Suggested Ideas Page to read about concepts that have been generally considered unworkable in the past. You do not need to follow the guidelines on these pages but they are worth consideration before casting a vote. One vote per user. No exceptions. You cannot use multiple wiki accounts to vote on a suggestion. To Vote, use the [edit] button at the top of the voting section, then enter your vote in the the proper format to the end of the relevant section (keep/kill/spam). It is strongly recommended that voters (especially in the kill/spam sections) justify their vote to help others understand the reason they disagree. Feedback helps new suggesters get a feel for what the community does and does not want included in Urban Dead, and a deeper understanding of the balance needed for a workable suggestion. Votes must include a signature in order to be considered valid votes. To sign a vote, use --~~~~. Please remember to sign your votes! Unsigned votes will be deleted after 30 minutes or when found. Each Suggestion will be open to voting for two (2) weeks, measured from the suggestion's Timestamp, unless it is a Dupe or Spam. If, at the end of that time, there are two thirds (2/3) more Keep votes than Kill votes, the Suggestion will be moved to the Peer Reviewed Suggestions page. Otherwise, the Suggestion will be moved to the Peer Rejected Suggestions page.

Rules for Discussions Votes are NOT the place to discuss Suggestions. This page and archived suggestion pages only to be used for the Suggesting and subsequent Voting of these suggestions. If you wish to discuss the suggestion or vote here, please use this page's Talk page (Suggestion talk:20100927 Barricade Frenzy). Suggestions do not have to be submitted in order to discuss them. Developing Suggestions can be used to workshop possible suggestions before they are submitted.

Valid Votes Keep, for Suggestions that you believe have merit. Kill, for Suggestions that you believe do not have merit. If you need to discuss a rule fix, use the discussion page. Spam, for the most ridiculous suggestions. Suggestions can be removed with Spam votes as described on the cycling suggestions page. If the criterion described there are not fulfilled, the suggestion must remain for the whole two weeks. Spam votes are not a "strong kill", they are simply here to prevent the utterly ridiculous from clogging up the system. If you do not like the idea, and it's not some crazy uber power or something else ridiculous, VOTE KILL, NOT SPAM. Spam votes will be counted as Kill when votes are tallied. Dupe, for Suggestions that are exact or very close duplicates of previous suggestions. For a Dupe vote to be valid, a link must be provided to the original suggestion. Dupe votes can be used to remove suggestions as described on the cycling suggestions page. Dupe votes will not be counted when votes are tallied. Humourous, for suggestions that are obviously intended to be satirical, or of comedic value only.}} Suggestions can be removed with Humourous votes as described on the cycling suggestions page. If the criterion described there are not fulfilled, the suggestion must remain for the whole two weeks.

Invalid Votes Server Load and Programming Complexity are NOT very good Kill reasons. You are voting on the merit of the suggestion and whether or not you think it belongs in the game. Server load/complexity issues are up to Kevan to decide. X should be implemented first is not a valid reason for a vote. You are voting on the merit of THIS suggestion, not how it compares to others. Votes that do not have reasoning behind them are invalid. You MUST justify your vote.

Comments Re may be used to comment on a vote. Only the original author and the person being REd can comment. Comments are restricted to a single comment per vote, and it is expected that Re comments be as short as possible. Reing every kill vote is considered abuse of the Re comment. A Re does not count as a vote, and any subsequent discussion not part of the Re comment should be held on the discussion page if there is any extended commenting. Note is used by System Operators to invalidate trolling-based votes. Only Sysops may remove troll-based votes and they do so with a strikeout <s></s> in order to preserve the trolling removal for posterity. The voter may contest the strikeout with the Sysop that struck their vote out on the discussion page. Only a System Operator may remove a strikeout.

All Caps Try to avoid YELLING, writing in bold, or using italics, except when emphasizing a point which has escaped other voters.

VOTING EXAMPLES Keep Votes Keep - I am the author and I am allowed to vote once on my own suggestions. --MrSuggester 05:01, 11 Nov 2005 (GMT) Keep - Best. Suggestion. Evar. --Bob_Zombie 04:01, 11 Nov 2005 (GMT) Keep - Good sugestion. no signature --FakeSuggester 07:39, 15 Nov 2005 (GMT) Kill Votes Kill - This is a terrible idea, but you can totally fix it up. --NegativeGal 06:01, 12 Nov 2005 (GMT) Re - Please be more specific about how to fix it on the discussion page. --MrSuggester 14:01, 12 Nov 2005 (GMT) Re - Sure, I have detailed my proposed fixes here. --NegativeGal 23:38, 12 Nov 2005 (GMT) Kill - You will eat my poopie and love it! --PooEater 11:12, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT) Note - Inane vote removed. Defend in discussion. --DaModerator 11:13, 13 Nov 2005 (GMT) Spam/Dupe Votes Spam - Kung Fu CB Mama on Wheels is an inappropriate Survivor Class. --NoFunAtAll 09:01, 12 Nov 2005 (GMT) Dupe - Duplicate Suggestion --AnotherSuggester 05:01, 14 Nov 2005 (GMT)