Developing Suggestions

NOTICE

The Suggestions system has been closed indefinitely and Developing Suggestions is no longer functions as a part of the suggestions process. However, you are welcome to use this page for general discussion on suggestions.

Shortcut:
DS

Developing Suggestions

This section is for general discussion of suggestions for the game Urban Dead.

It also includes the capacity to pitch suggestions for conversation and feedback.

Further Discussion

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

Resources

• The Frequently Suggested List
• Suggestions Dos and Do Nots

How To Make a Discussion

Adding a New Discussion

To add a general discussion topic, please add a Tier 3 Header (===Example===) below, with your idea or proposal.

Adding a New Suggestion

• To add a new suggestion proposal, 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.
• The process is illustrated in this image.

{{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.
• 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 month may be cycled without notice.

Please add new discussions and suggestions to the top of the list

---

Suggestions

Urban Dead Go!

Timestamp: A ZOMBIE ANT 12:25, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Type: Engine adjustment

Scope: Everyone

Description: A new app for your smartphone, Urban Dead Go! Or just UDG! for short, will implement Augmented Reality to turn your town into the new Malton. Fight across the world for survival against the undead scourge. Urban Dead will thrive on this new platform, where looking through your camera phone will open your eyes to the real world before you: those playing the game as survivors will appear dishevelled and alive, those playing as zombies will look dishevelled and grey. Those around you that aren't playing the game will appear on your phone as office desks and vending machines that you must rummage through to get items. Combat will be faithful to the game, that is, sticky and illogical. Whereas you attacking in UD by clicking, you will attack in UDG! by... clicking. You hold your phone out, aim it at your foe so he appears on your screen, and at melee range, tap the screen.. Just imagine 10 "zombies" surrounding a "survivor", aiming their phones at him while tapping away while the survivor squeals in virtual pain! Using real buildings promotes trespassing, so UDG! will use virtual buildings as displayed on augmented reality. Just think of being in the middle of Central Park with a hundred other shaking, poor and twitchy survivors, all huddled in an imaginary area crying while surrounded by hundreds of groaning zombies, swiping with their phones at the "doors" in what will appear to an outsider to be a flashmob of mimes. This kind of activity will surely catch on in the hundreds of millions. This future implementation lends perfectly to my last Developing Suggestion, the Micropayment suggestion, as well as all the interesting additions to that suggestion the UD community kindly promoted in a great effort to bring UD to a new glory. Let's be real, these two suggestions combined will no doubt make absolute bank for Kevan. Please provide all your thoughts on how this game could work in the real world, I will compile them all for my elevator pitch to Mr Davis himself. Thank you all for your time and I look forward to working with you.

---

unlimited AP weekend

Timestamp: JoshCz (talk) 04:05, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Type: All day UD marathon

Scope: all players

Description: This addition would bring 1 weekend/1 day if that is too much where players have unlimited AP. It would be more costly but if we started a donation drive we could potentially pay for the weekend of free play we could make it work. This would bring players back to the game as it would allow people to play together for an extended period of time. Again if a whole weekend is too much, a single day on a weekend would be great. I know I would spend the entire day on UD in a siege or something. And after the people come back to UD and are reminded of how great a game it is, we could maybe have a discussion with Kevin or something about where the game should go if it works.

Discussion (unlimited AP weekend)

---

You are just too cute. ᚱᛖᚢᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ ||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 03:52, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Ok, but what do you think of the idea?JoshCz (talk) 01:35, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Item Exchange/transfer

Timestamp: PayneTrain(FU) 08:14, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Type: Interface

Scope: Survivors

Description: Yes,I'm actually thinking of going there,I know its been suggested a lot but i think its about time this got implemented,Not just for the sake of it getting implemented....But,because I think this game is slowly fading away and before long it will die if we don't do something about it....and i think the implementation of a suggestion of this scale maybe what this game needs right now...It will probably help in making life for our new survivors easier and prompt them to maybe give the game a chance and who knows? maybe even bring back the old players to the game.... Probable Problems One of the main problems that comes up when someone brings up this topic is that item exchange will result in hoarding or misuse by zergers or multiple accounts to transfer their items to their main account and thus make themselves more powerful,Im no tech whiz or anything but I've seen many games make the use of same IP bans restricting the transfer of items from users of the same IP.I think to some extend its already enforced in Urban dead with the "Daily AP Limit" thing.One drawback to this plan maybe that the zergers may start using fake IP generating software's to bypass this(although i don't think they're intelligent enough to do that and even if they knew it,its still too much work doing it) Another problem that often comes up is the imbalance of power it may cause between the zombies and survivors,but me being a zombie player myself,Id like to encourage all zombie players to think of this from your role player views,Item exchange and bartering is a vital part of all zombie apocalypses....actually if you think about it the zombies are able to help out their newer players more than the survivors can by helping them breaking down barricades and assisting them getting food by use of feeding drags and groans...and lets be honest here,once every survivor or zombie for that matter,buys all the skills they need,they've essentially completed the game...adding this mechanic helps give a survivors life new purpose by letting them act as mentors to new players just as zombies do Onto the next problem,this is one of the suggestions that have been suggested millions of times before with various different variations,but have mainly been rejected mainly because of the two problems i have explained above,but as you can see i have provided solutions to them too... Suggestion 1 Now,The first alternative of how this suggestion can work....What i do have in mind is that it'll look exactly like the attack drop down list with the words "attack -Random person- with -this weapon-" being replaced by "give -random person- your -item-" and would cost 1AP to do.You can transfer almost every item in your inventory to the other person,provided he is not already fully encumbered and if he is,the words "you cannot transfer this item to this person,he is fully encumbered show up" The problem with this alternative is that there is a chance that one of the person may choose to trick the other and run once he has gotten the item,but this is something that happens in apocalypses...it gives way to more interesting aspects like player on player killing,hunting down frauds or cheaters for bounty and all that Suggestion 2 The second alternative is a bit more complex,but ensures that no fraud takes place....In this scenario...There is a trade button right under the attack button,there is a drop down list right next to this button containing the names of survivors that are in your immediate vicinity,once you have selected who you want to trade with,you press the trade button....The person who you want to trade with gets notified saying "This "person" wishes to trade with you,do you accept?" if the person accepts,you are both taken to a box where you can both add your items in,after you have both added your items,and you can only receive each others items once you have both pressed accept this trade If you leave the vicinity or reject the trade the trade gets cancelled and both your items are placed back in your own inventories.... Naturally this is not how far i wish to develop this suggestion,i wish to make it a better,but id like inputs from the UDwiki folk rather than make this my own suggestion..All constructive criticism and ideas welcomed...I'm sure everyone will have a lot to say in this

Discussion (Item Exchange/transfer)

Absolutely perfect in every way.
I don’t think this can be improved upon.
It changed, it sucks now.
—And the name of the pain is…
And the name of the pain is…
The name of the train is…
The name of the train is
Pain and suffering.
@ 08:26, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
@ 03:52, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Lol,thanks...--PayneTrain^(FU) 10:07, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

How about some structure to the suggestion? Or some capitals? Or decent punctuation? Or something else than "I think this is a good idea, but I don't want to put in the work to actually make it work"? Just my 2 cents... PB&J 09:26, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry,but its been a while since I've actually made a suggestion or been on the wiki for that matter,how would you structure this suggestion? I do admit my English is a bit rusty,but id do think i do better than some people,if you find my suggestion to be undecipherable or wrong in any other way which bothers you,I invite you to correct any wrongs in my post and make them right because like i said,my English is rusty and its not my native language.Lastly on the part of not willing to put any work into my suggestion on my part,need i remind you that this the "Developing suggestions" page on the wiki? the place where people post their suggestions which they want to develop with the help of their peers? i would like to do the same,i would like the people of UD wiki to contribute to this,give in their ideas on how we can carry this out and hopefully implement it,start a discussion on the best way this can be carried out,actually develop this suggestion rather than just blindly shoot it down because of something that i said,which they didn't like.If for any chance,they fail to do this,then....i shall put forward the improvements that are needed from all the suggestions i have gathered.....Thankyou,for your 2 cents--PayneTrain^(FU) 10:07, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Sorry if I came over a bit rash, but this is quite possibly the most proposed idea in the history of UD. It's been discussed at length, in all possible variations and with all possible outcomes except implementation. I understand that English isn't your native language (it's not mine either), I was just missing some structure and a general direction for what your idea brings to the table that similar ideas in the past didn't have. PB&J 18:44, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Ya,i guess you're right....I just figured mine was different and better than all the rest...but,then again,i guess everyone feels that way about their suggestion.Anyway thanks for contributing!!--PayneTrain^(FU) 19:25, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

I think this would definitely get voted down as a duplicate suggestion. Item transfer has been discussed a ton before, so unless you're proposing something new (e.g. limiting it to specific items) this isn't likely to succeed. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 12:10, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

I realized that even as i thought of the Idea,but it is high time something like this got implemented,especially with people asking for something new and also because i have been able to solve almost all the problems that may arise...almost every suggestion is a duplicate of the another one,what matters is that this is something that may actually be essential for the survival of the game and that its much more better than the others(I know,i studied most of them before posting this)...and thats why i'm relying on the people of the wiki to push this through--PayneTrain^(FU) 16:13, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

If we're going to make the argument "let's implement something, anything!" then allowing people to give one another items is definitely not the change to make. Shrink the city by half its size, that'd be a much better choice for reviving & fixing the balance of the game. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 18:49, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

I get what you're saying bro,thanks--PayneTrain^(FU) 19:25, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

I do want to say — I don't mean to seem really harsh! (I'm running on not as much sleep as I need this week.) I do really appreciate you keeping the suggestions active, and I look forward to other ideas you may have. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 20:04, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

it's all good man, I would understand even if you were harsh..this Ideas been suggested countless times,i was actually expecting more rash comments and criticisms to be thrown around...But,thankfully..it was all good.I really was hoping to get the wiki more active because i remember the suggestions were always a big part of Wiki activity...Thanks anyway--PayneTrain^(FU) 06:45, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

So, regarding zergers/cheaters using tools to hide their IP, yes, they're smart enough to do that stuff. Not only that, but they've been actively doing it for years, have been openly bragging about it, and we've even called them out for using those tools when they've tried to get away with that crap on the wiki. That issue alone sinks this suggestion unless you can come up with a way to circumvent it (which may be possible). Many other MMOs have gotten around this problem, but most of their solutions (e.g. requiring payment, requiring that both accounts be online, making it useless to do so) are unworkable for a browser-based game that has mechanics balanced and built around survivors having to each do their own searching. If you break that mechanic, everything built on it (e.g. having to choose either barricading or searching) crumbles. But if you can get around that issue, I'd love to see trading introduced into the game.

It's also worth noting that there are already items in the game which can be traded/given. For instance, I still have a Stale Candy that was given to me by one of the founders of the survivor group I'm in. I'd suggest modeling the behavior on those sorts of items, rather than trying to reinvent the wheel. —Aichon— 16:31, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

That cannonball kinda sunk the ship didn't it? lol.And here i was thinking it was the freaking Titanic....Anyway thanks i guess,and by "it may be possible to circumvent this,what did you mean? how could we do that?--PayneTrain^(FU) 18:43, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

When I said it may be possible to circumvent it, I was simply allowing for the possibility that the suggestion could be designed in such a way that zergers can't take advantage of trading, but to do that, you'd likely need to change the fundamental mechanics of the game, which is likely out of the scope of this suggestion. Even so, if you can come up with a way to do it that's reasonable, I'm open to the idea. —Aichon— 19:26, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

---

Suggestions up for voting

The following are suggestions that were developed here but have since gone to voting. The discussions that were taking place here have been moved to the pages linked below.