Fort Perryn/Discussion Archive
This is an archive for the Fort Perryn discussion page. All discussions older than one month should be moved here. (Exception: topics that are still prescient, like barricade levels, should stay on the active discussion page.)--Koppie 23:33, 23 September 2007 (BST)
Fort Wiki Formatting
All issues with Fort formatting for both forts within the wiki are asked to be adressed at the very cleverly titled Fort Project. --Joe O'Wood TALKCONTRIBSUD 17:31, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
SHIIIT! I MESSED UP THE TEMPLATE!!!
I have no idea what just hapepned, I was just trying to edit the description template of fort perryn and everything went wrong. help! The man 10:27, 18 August 2007 (BST)
Main page layout
Shouldn't the status form be moved up to the top? And should we enhance it in the likeness of the Fort Creedy status form? --JohnRubin 19:50, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- I have actually tried to do that and failed miserably. --JohnRubin 19:54, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- No. Fort Creedy's status is outdated, now that forts have changed. We should make whole new way to show fort's status, but I'm too tired to think of one now. Anyone got any ideas? --Niilomaan GRR!•M! 19:56, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I have succeeded in moving the status form to the top. As for the form itself it definitely should contain information about both the gatehouse and armory - most important buildings in the fort (that includes barricades level, number of zombies inside and outside). Total zombie count inside the fort (perhaps not including those outside the armory and definitely not including those outside the gatehouse). --JohnRubin 20:02, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Something like that perhaps. --JohnRubin 20:20, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
| the Gatehouse | |
|---|---|
| Barricade level | QSB |
| Zombies Outside | 23 |
| Bodies Outside | |
| Zombies Inside | 0 |
| Bodies Inside | 0 |
| Comments | Needs barricading! |
| the Armoury | |
| Barricade level | Doors wide open |
| Zombies Outside | 34 |
| Bodies Outside | 49 |
| Zombies Inside | 13 |
| Bodies Inside | 2 |
| Generator | none |
| Comments | Ransacked |
| the Fort | |
| Total Zombie Count ^ | 110 |
| Comments | Some coordinated action definitely needed |
| Signature | JohnRubin 21:07, 24 November 2006 (UTC) |
^ Total Zombie Count - number of zombies inside the fort. That number does NOT include zombies outside the gateway and inside buildings.
- I don't know how to make "the Armoury" and "the Fort" headings appear in the center. --JohnRubin 20:20, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Status form suggestion
After some thinking I came up with the following idea for the status form. It is actually derived from color-coded "zombometers" that some groups use.
The form contains the following information:
- level of barricades (color-coded)
- number of zombies inside the buildings (presence of zombies color-coded)
- number of zombies outside the buildings
Latest status of Fort Perryn
Updated by JohnRubin 20:38, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
|
|
| ||||||
| Outside: 11 | Outside: 11 | Outside: 2 | ||||||
|
|
| ||||||
| Outside: 24 | Outside: 19 | Outside: 4 | ||||||
|
|
| ||||||
| Outside: 10 | Outside: 16 | Outside: 3 |
Color code of zombie presence in a building:
|
|
Color code of barricade status:
|
|
|
|
|
Comments
Your comments are very welcome. --JohnRubin 10:05, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
It looks fine to me. Add something about bodies inside, though. -Mark 02:19, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
- Is the body count really necessary? I doubt that. --JohnRubin 20:21, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Improved version of status form
Looks a bit messy, but has a good idea.. Here's my edited version of it and Fort map:
Amount of survivors / zombies and the barricade levels at the Fort:
Vehicle Depot
|
Exercise Yard
Outside: 0 / 11 |
Training Ground
Outside: 0 / 2 | |||
Infirmary
|
Armoury
|
Storehouse
| |||
Storehouse
|
Gatehouse
|
Barracks
|
Color code of barricade status:
|
|
|
|
|
So? --Niilomaan GRR!•M! 16:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Comments for the improved version
This looks a lot nicer than my version. But do we really want to show the number of survivors? I mean Wiki is an open resource and zombie players are sure to see it too. I guess information of that sort would definitely benefit zombies more than humans. I think zombie count is necessary and survivor count is not. --JohnRubin 20:01, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- Well you do have a point there... It's just that I wouldn't wanna scare survivors by saying that there are 50 zombies inside, if there also were 300 survivors having fun with them. but lets just leave survivor count out then.
Now the real problem is how to make that thing easy to edit? --Niilomaan GRR!•M! 08:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)- That I do not know, unfortunately. I am not sure if you can insert comments to the code that wouldn't be visible on the page, but would highlight the code to be edited. Can you? --JohnRubin 09:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Commenting is easy,b ut highlighting is up to your browser. I don't think that any current browser knows how to highlight code on text area. I was thinking more like using templates to make it easy to read. Check this for example. --Niilomaan GRR!•M! 09:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Technical side is definitely not my domain. So if you could make it easier to edit - either by means of templates or in some other way - that would be great. But I cannot help you with that, sorry. --JohnRubin 11:44, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- P.S. I slightly re-arranged comments and added new headers. --JohnRubin 11:44, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Commenting is easy,b ut highlighting is up to your browser. I don't think that any current browser knows how to highlight code on text area. I was thinking more like using templates to make it easy to read. Check this for example. --Niilomaan GRR!•M! 09:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- That I do not know, unfortunately. I am not sure if you can insert comments to the code that wouldn't be visible on the page, but would highlight the code to be edited. Can you? --JohnRubin 09:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Events section restructured
The vents plage was an utter and complete MESS. I fixed it for the first time since February 2006. The man 11:26, 29 June 2007 (BST)
Miscellaneous Talk
lumber mall is up move to wait untill zeds get bored and go there to kill us.Cts12345
We kill the zeds and go to a safehouse simply easy.Cts12345
To destory the zombie threat we must get 50 surviors and kill all zeds outside the buildings make them have fear of the open them kill them indside to show them they can't hide some will abandon the fort others will stay we will do that untill they have no point to stay becuase do they want to die 7 times in 3 days?.User:Cts12345 10:36 march 2 2007
- Wouldn't work. Zombies have a habit of arriving where they know is something to munch. So to make that plan work, everybody should sleep in some random building 5 blocks away and lure zombies out. As long as we sleep inside the fort, that's where the zeds will go. If you have to go inside, then only barricade and get out. --Niilomaan GRR!•M! 20:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Please Revive me because being a zombie sucks. Also we need more surviors to assult the fort and kick those zombies bastards out of the fort. They don't belong in the fort anyway they belong on the street dead..--Major Striker 18:25, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- its our fort, and it will always be ourt fort. you silly breathers just never seem to figure that out. so by all means, pile on into the feeding trough so the youngings can eat again. XD -Bullgod 10:35, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
- So much for zombies not holding ground, hmm BullGod? The problem with the Forts are that they aren't as useful as the Malls, yet we're surrounded by Malls in SW Malton. So, it'll be us fools who'll try to hold the Fort Feral whilst everyone else makes Stickling into another Caiger. Robert McFarlane 15:14, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Please Revive! - I am in need of reviving, ive been dead for a while, during this time ive been attack zombies inside the fort and trying to get them to turn on themselves, but with all buildings ransacked and no survivors in sit, it seems hopeless. please break into the fort with a good force and baracade the buildings if you revivie me i can help you too, im usually in the training grounds.
- If I wanted a revive I would definitely give a link to my profile. But you probably think that we here can read minds. Well, good luck! --JohnRubin 16:34, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Jan. 2 2007 - zombies break into the storehouse destroying the generator and killing a few survivors in there. 6 zombies remain in there with the doors left wide open. We must take back the fort before its too late. i am attempting to but i just dont have the numbers nor the skills to do it by myself. we must unite and take the fort or the zombies will have it under there control soon. anyone that is interested should rally outside the fort somewhere near the gatehouse. --Xxbenxx 20:50, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
New Report: There are now two zombies in the gatehouse. Baracades are at VS. A zombie killed a fellow building mate that i had shared a night with. i was able to flee but i dont think i can last much longer. i am infected and without a firstaid in the courtyard of the fort. anyone that could revive my fellow building mate and maybe me, it would be helpful. watch out for the 2 zombies (one of which is a suvivor wanting reviving) in the gatehouse. someone should update the map on the main page to have the gatehouse at VS baracades and 2 zombies inside.--Xxbenxx 07:16, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
For Dominic88: we could reach Fort Perryn, but we need to plan our trip. I have 6 AP now, and enough bullets to level up two times without too much trouble. Tomorrow we could travel down 30 squares, possibly stopping in a VSB building. It would be better to spend one full day gathering gear (ammunition for me, don't know for the others). Let me know. --Mireille Bouquet 22:10, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
It is a bloodbath out there. There does appear to be support coming. Until then, how do we work on getting the undead outta here? --mallyd
- We can't throw the zombies out of the fort. We have to make them want to leave. It should be very boring for them to be in the fort (and so far it has been very interesting). Barricade the buildings, heal wounded, shoot zombies in the head. That's about it. --JohnRubin 11:10, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
- And do not proclaim (rather provocative) capture of the fort... --Kokka
- But, the fort and all the building's within it have been cleared of humans, the zombies have control of the fort --Lord Evans 10:15, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
- The Minions of the Apocalypse have come for your flesh. Lay down your weapons and submit to your inevitable fate, then rise and join us in remaking this city in the image of it's inheritors, the last race. In the name of the Minions, the Undying Scourge, The Shambling Seagulls and all feral zombies everywhere we claim Fort Perryn for the dead.--Keith Moon 01:31, 19 February 2006 (GMT)
- Amazing job there, for a moment I thought I had wandered into Ridleybank, I knocked down the barricades on the armory and groaned twice, I hope I help your cause --Lord Evans 01:48, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Some group made a claim they were moving into the Fort earlier today. Don't remember who. If anyone can, that needs updating. Cheers. -ElMarto
In Fort Perryn somebody has left the graffiti: "This armoury is property of the BMC. Leave or die."
We don't know who is responsable for leaving this message, but while a portion of the BMC inhabbits the armoury, we have no problem with others there.
Don't know if it's one of our members being a c**t or someone else trying to stir things up.
-El Marto of the BMC.
Minions of the Apocalypse, do you have to put your propaganda here? Can't you put it somewhere else? Please? It really is a mess out here, though. Good job for the zombies inside. John Rubin, I'm afraid we can't hold at this rate, but I'll do my best. (And for goodness sake, dump your bodies, people!) -Mark 02:13, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Not that I'm complaining or anything, but how are you harmanz supposed to re-take this place? Can you dump bodies over the wall? If so, what about bodies outside the Armory? If not, then the only way to get all zambaz to leave is for us to get bored and move on. -JMac85 06:21, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
New Ruin Changes
With the new game changes, zombies can now cripple the Free Running network with ruin. Since the Forts only have one entrance/exit, I propose that the Forts implement an evacuation strategy. Not because the Forts will fall to the zombie hordes, but because the zombies can now turn them into deathtraps if they ruin enough of the surrounding suburb. --Adrian Steiner 13:09, 25 August 2007
- What does it have to do with the fort itself? You can enter it only from streets, so surrounding free run network doesn't have any effect for the fort itself --~~~~T''' 19:47, 25 August 2007 (BST)
- Even then, this is madness, idiocy even. You want to free run walk into the ruined building. It is a 1 AP change, not a loss of a free run lane. It's not a reason to run away from a place.--Karekmaps?! 20:59, 25 August 2007 (BST)
Movement in the Fort
Rogue claimed (on the main page) that "Gatehouse is currently EHB.." therefore "zombies are locked in fort". And then "You can't free run out the gate house last I checked, After it was EHB I got locked in there with them!".
When I was killed in the fort I was able to enter the gatehouse from the inside as a zombie and the leave the gatehouse (by clicking on the building outside the fort).
I am sure that you CAN free-run from the gatehouse into buildings outside the fort (you CANNOT free-run into buildings inside the fort though).
Anyone able to confirm? --JohnRubin 08:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
- Confirmed and tested (I'm the author of the Free Running and Outdoor movement diagrams). You can free run from the Gatehouse to buildings outside the fort. Even excluding Free Running, you can leave any EHB building by clicking on an empty (non-building) adjacent square. There is no mechanism by which to lock zombies in the fort (as they can enter the Gatehouse from inside the fort whatever the barricades are at - just like survivors). --Funt Solo
11:02, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
The 7th siege of Fort perryn
yes, there IS currently a siege going on but its still in its infant stages. I'll create a section on the fort perryn wiki once things become clearer The man 11:32, 29 June 2007 (BST)
The Fort Perryn Recalamation
Us Harmanz need to get Fort Perryn back. While it is obvious zeds can read this too. We need to gather our strength and fight to get our beloved fort back! We need a plan and some soldiers. Start the discussion! --Josh508 14:10, 21 October 2007 (BST)
Absolutely! We need a group of at least, say, 11? Is there anyone else?DillyDally
Radio frequency?
Some clueless survivor seemed in haste to choose "wrong" suburb frequency (26.11) for Fort Perry. I fixed it to the correct one (26.20) based on Radio page but it seems that some survivors inside the fort have got the impression that the prior freq has to be enforced. Any ideas where this wrong radio freq came from? --Tumu 23:39, 22 August 2007 (BST)
- It seems the misunderstanding has been cleared for Fort Perryn and for neighbouring radio transmitters. Survivors are exchanging info about local zed activity on the proper frequency continuously. --Tumu 22:49, 24 August 2007 (BST)
Barricade Plan
Old Discussion
We have to come up with a unified barricade plan. FER suggests barricading
- gatehouse (85, 91)
- armory (85, 90)
- storehouse - SW corner (84, 91)
- barracks - SE corner (86, 91)
to VSB. All other buildings to EHB.
Your comments are very welcome (please sign your posts). --JohnRubin 10:00, 22 November 2006 (UTC) of FER
- Is there a reason the barracks and storehouse are only at VSB? Both can be got at with free running from the armoury (which has to be at VSB, otherwise no-one gets in), so to increase security, the barracks and storehouse could be at EHB. This does mean you have to have free running to get to any buildings, but that's how it usually is with high profile locations --Bevear 10:10, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- On a second thought you are right. Well, it seems like the gatehouse and the armory are supposed to be VSB, the rest is EHB. --JohnRubin 20:20, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
the Malton Rangers and possibly a large portion of the NMC are en route to perryn. Anyone who wishes to join the glorious NMC is welcome to, or even an alliance. Let us know at c4nt.proboards104.com--Dickholeguy 16:06, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
As said on the Creedy Fort talk, all componments of the forts should be at EHB, exept the armoury and gatehouse, which should be at VS+2. Forts aren't for noobs. -Certified=Insane☭
01:56, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Since the consensus is reached, shouldn't that information be reflected somewhere on the Perryn Fort main page (preferably somewhere where it will be visible to everyone)? --JohnRubin 10:21, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- I actually took the liberty of editing the main page in the way of the Fort Creedy page. --JohnRubin 10:48, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
By the way, does anyone know if zombies can get through the barricaded gatehouse if they want to get out of the fort? Because otherwise they are trapped in the fort as long as we keep the cades up, aren't they? --JohnRubin 19:50, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- If that was the case, we could try to trap as many zombies inside, with no humans, until they wanted to leave? --Bevear 02:56, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
New discussion
Now that it's possible to truly hold the fort, maybe we should change the barricade plan. Many survivors seem to like the idea of keeping all buildings at VSB, unless the zombies attack. However, that will give survivors a weak position when the zombies do attack. I think we should have two barricade plans: a "normal" barricade plan and a "siege" barricade plan. When the zombies attack, all buildings should be raised to EHB except the armory. The gatehouse barricades will be kept at EHB, and lowered several times a day to let survivors in. (That means survivors have to wait in a nearby safehouse until the designated time.) This will require more manpower and coordination, but make the fort a lot easier to defend. Just my opinion.--Koppie 23:32, 23 September 2007 (BST)
Internal Revive Point
Old Discussion
Shall we agree on having a revive point inside the fort? On the exercise yard, for instance. That might save some AP. --JohnRubin 10:30, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, I think that would be a damn good idea, MANLAW --Dickholeguy 14:24, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- The only question is how those in need of revivification will let know they need it? --JohnRubin 19:50, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- MANLAW, I'll add the exersise yard to the revive point list. I would suggest using the dem's revive tool so you don't have to sign up at a lot of forums to get your request out plus it weeds rotters. http://tinyurl.com/zmmas Friends and family can use intragroup communications. --Ed_Harken T|C4NT 22:05, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- I think this is a must, because with gates at VSB, zombies can't leave the fort to get revived unless they destroy their own efforts and down the gatehouse cades.-RevEngEspc
- Pal, before writing your newbie bullshit you had better investigate how you can enter and exit the fort. If you had done that you would know that a zombie can leave the gatehouse even if it is EHB. --JohnRubin 19:57, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
New discussion
First of all, most survivors don't seem to want a revive point inside the fort any more. As pointed out above, it is easy for a "friendly" zombie to leave the fort and go to a nearby revive point. Second, since groups like the British Military Corps have done such a good job cleaning up the neighborhood, there are several active RP's near the fort, making an internal RP even less necessary. I suggest we follow the popular sentiment and remove the internal RP.--Koppie 23:32, 23 September 2007 (BST)
this article needs to be cleared
this article is too long, and his history should be moved to the archives, anyone know how?--Jakio 14:25, 19 August 2007 (BST)
- Done --~~~~T''' 18:33, 19 August 2007 (BST)
- Not sure what Duke Garland was talking about, but I have created a new discussion archive page and moved all old discussion topics there.--Koppie 23:32, 23 September 2007 (BST)
Listed survivor groups
I propose a set rule regarding which survivor groups are allowed to list themselves as being present in the fort. For suburbs, a group is not allowed to list itself as present in the suburb unless it plans on having a permanent presence there. I think the same rule should apply to forts. Visiting groups are always welcome, of course, but they shouldn't list themselves as "in the fort" unless they plan on staying.--Koppie 23:32, 23 September 2007 (BST)
Mercenary Elite Annoying?
Does anyone find the recruiting efforts and other actions of the new trenchie group Mercenary Elite to be quite irritating? For one, they spraypaint messages overtop of barricading reminders, and one of their own members (Viking Raider) was accused by multiple people of overbarricading the armoury on multiple occaisions. When I dealt with the problem, I was PK'd. Anyone else feel annoyed? User:Melted plasteel 13:31 29 September 2007 (BST)
- Yes, one of their members has been accused of wiki vandalism and is generally considered a loose cannon (not to be confused with the Loose Cannons). They also openly admit to zerging; they only have two actual members. PKing is illegal, of course, and I suggest you report it through the proper channels. You're also welcome to post his UD profile here and I'll add him to the Cannonball Crew shit list.--Koppie 18:56, 29 September 2007 (BST)
FPDF Proposal - radio-free zones inside Fort Perryn (June 2008)
Due to the ongoing campaign of false and misleading information being broadcast on the Whittenside / Fort Perryn radio frequency, the Fort Perryn Defense Force is proposing to limit transmitters inside the fort to ancilliary buildings only (barracks, storehouses and vehicle depot) as they are not really that useful anyway, and are currently causing more harm than good. The more densely populated fort buildings - gatehouse, armory and infirmary - will be maintained as radio free zones.
Please post any comments, feedback or objects here: Fort_Perryn_Defense_Force/Radio_Proposal --Mad Dog Munro 22:02, 7 June 2008 (BST)
FPDF Proposal - EHB/VSB Barricade Plan (April 2008)
The Fort Perryn Defense Force April 2008 proposal and discussion regarding the EHB/VSB barricade plan at the gatehouse has now been archived here: Fort_Perryn/Discussion_Archive/Barricade_Plan_April_2008.
The proposal was implemented on April 12th 2008, and remains in effect as described below. --Mad Dog Munro 03:16, 6 June 2008 (BST)
suggestion for the event portion of the front page
am i the only one that thinks it should be kept non-POV? posting zombie or human head counts, barricade status, and to an effect even the arrival of groups is one thing, but posting comments like "we will hold the fort forever" or about "dragging you outside" (i know, im guilty of it to) are not actually news, just peoples opinions and propaganda. it was fine when it was just a bit of ribbing but i think were all getting to into it and its taking up a lot of space. all those in favor of just moving POV posts to the talk page when they pop up?--Bullgod 11:43, 3 May 2008 (BST)
- bahaha...i was about to write you an abussive message 'til i got to the 'im guilty of it to' bit :P Yes, i think its ridiculous it isn't like that already. I would have put this forward a long time ago myself but i'm not at the fort enough to feel like it's my place to change it. It should resemble the format and follow the generally (read: somewhat) excepted guidelines for editing a suburb news section.--xoxo 11:46, 3 May 2008 (BST)
- I agree, but would just delete it instead of bringing it to the talk page. It's not really worth saving... --Cman yall 20:26, 3 May 2008 (BST)
- people get pissed if you totally remove something from the wiki. just say POV post moved to talk page or something like that.--Bullgod 00:22, 4 May 2008 (BST)
- I'm in favour; move to the talk page (except perhaps persistent offenders? in which case just delete) --Mad Dog Munro 02:11, 4 May 2008 (BST)
- well yeah, but only after fair warning to tone it down.--Bullgod 02:52, 4 May 2008 (BST)
- I'm in favour; move to the talk page (except perhaps persistent offenders? in which case just delete) --Mad Dog Munro 02:11, 4 May 2008 (BST)
- people get pissed if you totally remove something from the wiki. just say POV post moved to talk page or something like that.--Bullgod 00:22, 4 May 2008 (BST)
- I agree, but would just delete it instead of bringing it to the talk page. It's not really worth saving... --Cman yall 20:26, 3 May 2008 (BST)
Moved from the front page
"May 26, 2008" Despite the noble attempts, by many survivors, the fort is beginning to fall. this is mainly due to the lack of survivors here and partly because o some trouble we've encountered with Gkers, namely, "HUGO DONG" currently taken by a zombie, he was caught in the act of destruction to generators and cades. we have but three options, as far as i can tell:
1. Recruit more survivors to the fort and the suburb - this would involve mass restoring and cading of resource-buildings, as well as the Sherwel Building and the mast.
2. Evacuate the fort, and retreat into the suburb so that we can retake it later - again after more have come or after revives have been given out to those who need them. 3. The third would be for mass extermination of all zombies within the the fort, once again this would require a large amount of high level players with the cade skill. we would also need people to help take out the current infestation within the fort.
unfortunately i was separated from the fort after trying to take the gate house back from about seventeen zombies, and was forced to advance in the opposite direction. this is Mincent signing off from Perryn Fort 11:58pm (BST)
All Surivors need to come to the fort there are more than 300 people right now in the fort. It will never fall. If the zombies get in there are more than enough people to keep them from being inside for very long at all. --Wolf 14:07, 30 April 2008 (EST)
- oh good, your finally getting cocky, thats usually the time things turn around for us.--Bullgod 03:25, 1 May 2008 (BST)
cocky?300 is only the one that is visable.There are 500 over that are not visable.They will just appear when the danger level increase.You needed a thousand zombie.
- weve taken it dozens of times with fewer numbers than we have here now. we have always been out numbered. every time you humans take it back you think its the first. we will always win, you cannot hold forever. and sign your freaking posts, its not like its hard.--Bullgod 22:29, 1 May 2008 (BST)
Well well ,you know, we also take back the fort from you zombie countless of times aready.You cannot hold the fort forever Zombie.We will also win also in the end.So stop talking pointless issue and see who can hold the fort the longest period.
- HAH! you think holding it is the fun part? we abandon it soon after we take it each time and let it fill up with harmanz again. the only fun part is busting in and dragging you all outside time after time. --Bullgod 06:02, 2 May 2008 (BST)
- Take your bitchin' to the talk page, this is the news, not the fashion column. --Cman yall 08:29, 2 May 2008 (BST)
Abandon? let fact the fact.You AFRAID OF us .If you can hold the fort why not.This is empty talk show to us you can hold the fort.
Please sign your posts so we can see who we're supposed to be afraid of. --Zebedee Zyzzyva 20:07, 2 May 2008 (BST)
Shut the fuck up you fucking anonymous trenchie and read 9th siege of Fort Perryn at the end of this page. It was the likes of you, combat revivers and general scum who ruined the only chance of survival, so suck it up, and stop to fucking taunt and bitch around, do something useful and hold the god damn fort because Whittenside needs to stay alive. End of talking on news section. --Danilh http://www.urbandead.com/profile.cgi?id=1219593
Bullgod i sorry let peace together.Let have some green tea at my house.you like brain tea or red wine? We promise not to interfear you and your clan or the dead fort seige.The 500 invisible member will also not appear.I want to see how every surviver can survie without us.We will just take the fort over again when it is down.
Thats what we love about harmanz. always retaking the fort. good on you. no trenchies! they taste crap. reflective personality perhaps? and i agree, Whittenside must never become a wasteland. like Bullgod said, that's boring.--Doctorgun 07:26, 7 October 2008 (BST)
Question
Does anyone know what group runs WTFR? I heard rumors that it was heathers with some others. They did play a part in harassing players constantly through the radio in this seige. --Rogue 03:23, 9 May 2008 (BST)
That would be WTRF radio, run from our trusty pirate radio van Brunhilde, broadcasting live, no jive, filling the days of Fort Feral fans with all the latest news and fun from Team Ratfuck! --- 
TRF 12:46, 4 June 2008 (BST)
fall of fort perryn
next time we take the fort im writing it its historical entry, every time we take it you all make it like the impossible has happened. this is at least the 12th time we (the zombies) have taken it since the fort changes were made, and who knows how many times back when it had no walls. i dont mind talk of your bravery or how good your plans were (they did work fairly well) but give credit where it is due, the supposed "spys" didn't win this siege with spray paint and radio spam (which wasn't on our part by the way, but im not about to tell you who was doing it, you wouldn't believe me if i did), it was all the little zombie boys and girls banging at your doors that brought the fort down. any ways, next time im writing it from the zombies standpoint just to give you a taste of your own medicine. not to be spiteful or anything, im just tired of all the brave last stand bullshit every time.--Bullgod 00:21, 12 May 2008 (BST)
- Everyone knows zombies are lower than dirt, though. No one cares about you. We just think of you as extremely mobile and violent shrubs. :P
In all seriousness, though, don’t mind it. It’s just a silly little bit of dramatic story-telling flavour for the bottom of the page. Let the trenchies have their last little comfort. --VI 02:02, 14 May 2008 (BST)
- i will not let them have comfort, stay out of my fort! MALEVOLENT LAUGHTER! see? i can be stupid like you humans too. --Bullgod 01:53, 15 May 2008 (BST)
- Zombies are human! Well most of them area... I saw a moose zombie once. --Cman yall 06:39, 5 June 2008 (BST)
- Blasphemy sir. We Undead are the right hand of God wiping your destructive race from the planet so that nature may reclaim all that you have taken from it. --Bullgod 09:41, 5 June 2008 (BST)
- Minion of the Alligator, you may be, but still human :P --Cman yall 08:54, 8 June 2008 (BST)
- Yo Mama's an alligator. Also you indent to far so im fixing it. --Bullgod 06:35, 9 June 2008 (BST)
- You're a minion of my Mama? And the indent was to seperate it from the other conversation.
- Anyway, Zombies are dead humans. Survivors are live humans. To talk about zombies vs humans is just... illogical. --Cman yall 07:21, 9 June 2008 (BST)
- Zombie is not a species. it is a race and a belief system. a true zombie will not play nice when revived, he will bash gennys and kill people if he can, especially targeting those who revived him. he believes in the spirit of Barhah and if in time he is not again killed he will jump from a building himself. there are those that play dual nature. just as there are people that call themselves certain religions but do not practice them. if we were the same we wouldn't feed on you and you wouldn't shoot us with your guns. we are separate in the way we think and act, in our baser instincts, to say we are the same is like saying that Gahndi and Jack the Ripper are basically the same guy. --Bullgod 04:55, 10 June 2008 (BST)
- That which you describe is not a zombie, it's a death cultist. And it's still human. As were Ghandhi and Jack the Ripper. --Cman yall 03:45, 11 June 2008 (BST)
- Someone put up that thing about arguing on the internet being retarded poster, im tired of this topic. im right your wrong, go breath you filthy harman.--Bullgod 07:21, 11 June 2008 (BST)
- You mean the one about "arguing on the internet is like competing in the special olympics"? I love that poster :) But you're still wrong. Zombies are human too, and I am sick of hearing survivors claim otherwise. I'm also sick of people who assume that anyone who disagrees with them is from "the other team"... what is this, American politics? In the real world, there are more than two types of person. --Cman yall 06:33, 12 June 2008 (BST)
- There in lies the point. we are not in the real world, this is a game. you play zombie or you play human, and even if you play both you have a preference. just as does (if we can get back to the original topic) the person who wrote the entry for the last fall of the fort. it was a biased view and next time we take it im going to write a biased one in zombie favor.--Bullgod 09:21, 12 June 2008 (BST)
- Agreed... and if you promise not to use the word "human" to describe survivors, then I promise to stop my whining :) --Cman yall 02:15, 13 June 2008 (BST)
- You might have to keep crying then. Human translates alot easier than survivor into the zombie spoken tongue. (ie; Human/Harman, Survivor/Zerb!ber). So go preach to someone else, because ive been calling them harmanz for over two years now and im not about to change just because it bothers you.--Bullgod 02:03, 14 June 2008 (BST)
- Agreed... and if you promise not to use the word "human" to describe survivors, then I promise to stop my whining :) --Cman yall 02:15, 13 June 2008 (BST)
- There in lies the point. we are not in the real world, this is a game. you play zombie or you play human, and even if you play both you have a preference. just as does (if we can get back to the original topic) the person who wrote the entry for the last fall of the fort. it was a biased view and next time we take it im going to write a biased one in zombie favor.--Bullgod 09:21, 12 June 2008 (BST)
- You mean the one about "arguing on the internet is like competing in the special olympics"? I love that poster :) But you're still wrong. Zombies are human too, and I am sick of hearing survivors claim otherwise. I'm also sick of people who assume that anyone who disagrees with them is from "the other team"... what is this, American politics? In the real world, there are more than two types of person. --Cman yall 06:33, 12 June 2008 (BST)
- Someone put up that thing about arguing on the internet being retarded poster, im tired of this topic. im right your wrong, go breath you filthy harman.--Bullgod 07:21, 11 June 2008 (BST)
- If further crying is required, I guess I can keep crying... Harmanz is fair enough, I guess, because of the limits of the zombie tongue... but zababarz could work too, and here in the wiki there's no excuse. --Cman yall 23:11, 14 June 2008 (BST)
- That which you describe is not a zombie, it's a death cultist. And it's still human. As were Ghandhi and Jack the Ripper. --Cman yall 03:45, 11 June 2008 (BST)
- Zombie is not a species. it is a race and a belief system. a true zombie will not play nice when revived, he will bash gennys and kill people if he can, especially targeting those who revived him. he believes in the spirit of Barhah and if in time he is not again killed he will jump from a building himself. there are those that play dual nature. just as there are people that call themselves certain religions but do not practice them. if we were the same we wouldn't feed on you and you wouldn't shoot us with your guns. we are separate in the way we think and act, in our baser instincts, to say we are the same is like saying that Gahndi and Jack the Ripper are basically the same guy. --Bullgod 04:55, 10 June 2008 (BST)
- Yo Mama's an alligator. Also you indent to far so im fixing it. --Bullgod 06:35, 9 June 2008 (BST)
- Minion of the Alligator, you may be, but still human :P --Cman yall 08:54, 8 June 2008 (BST)
- Blasphemy sir. We Undead are the right hand of God wiping your destructive race from the planet so that nature may reclaim all that you have taken from it. --Bullgod 09:41, 5 June 2008 (BST)
- Zombies are human! Well most of them area... I saw a moose zombie once. --Cman yall 06:39, 5 June 2008 (BST)
Personally i don't care about the forts anymore. Its the same thing over and over again, we take the fort and then after awhile you retake it. --FreddeX 11:28, 16 May 2008 (BST)
- that sir, is EXACTLY why we like them. you guys come back every time, if not you then some other new human who thinks forts sound cool. its like free refills.--Bullgod 23:31, 16 May 2008 (BST)
- Yeah, and if the forts never fell, who would clean out all the trenchies and morons? --VI 01:48, 17 May 2008 (BST)
Touché i guess you have an point there. --FreddeX 17:28, 19 May 2008 (BST)
it is our sacred duty to kill those FUCKING trenchies. i hate trenchies. --Doctorgun 07:29, 7 October 2008 (BST)
- Don't be so harsh on trenchies! What have they ever dont to you? Any way I like forts, 'cause they're a great source of XP. --Angusburger 09:11, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
The barricade plan
With the search rates in the fort significantly reduced since the Dead have begun to leave the game, I wish to see the barricade plan reverted to the normal fort plan (VSB++ at all times). It is counter-productive to keep survivors locked away from easier access to ammunition, FAKs and syringes. Not to mention that it is still confusing to many people (at least once a day, someone asks how they can get out of the fort and are usually insulted for doing so). I recently spent 40 AP and got a total of 3 FAKs, a pistol clip, and a shotgun shell. This waste of AP will doom the survivor cause in the Fort. Your plan was fine for an experiment, but it is clearly failing and must be removed. Robert LORD 16:41, 11 June 2008 (BST)
- Unfortunately, it's not just the fort buildings that are affected. The same thing is happening in the hospitals and PDs - we've documented 0 FAKs from 15AP, 2 FAKs from 45AP, 0 guns/ammo from 30AP etc recently. VSB-only would make sense if search rates were better immediately outside the fort, (e.g. at Anne GH or Sprackling Square PD), but there's evidence that they are (quite the opposite). Only the Malls seem to be unaffected, and the nearest one is Joachim - a 40AP round trip from the gatehouse. That's a 2-3 day round trip to stock up, so it's not as though survivors can pop in and out of the gatehouse to search, like they can at Creedy (where VSB does make sense for exactly that reason). It takes a couple of days to get there and back, meaning you only actually need access every couple of days, and that's exactly how the VSB windows are spaced.
- Meanwhile the periods of EHB provide a clear benefit - ESPECIALLY when items are hard to find - because it means fewer FAKs and ammunition are lost dealing with the costant break-ins. Breaches are less frequent, and the zombies that do get in have fewer AP to damage and infect.
- Given this, what evidence is there EHB/VSB barricade plan is 'clearly failing'? The objective is to improve upon the VSB-only plan. Since implementing it, we held out for well over a month during the last seige with virtually no casualties against a horde that reached 150+. With VSB only, the fort has fallen frequently to hordes smaller than that. It wasn't until The Dead arrived in their overwhelming numbers that VSB/EHB Perryn finally fell. But the same horde destroyed the VSB-only Creedy only a week or two later with no less ease.
- The second evidence we have is this most recent recapture. We first retook the fort on May 24th, in a joint effort with The Fortress and the CDF. We maintained it at VSB only and it fell in less than a week. All our AP was being spent just dealing with break-ins at the gatehouse, with no opportunity to restock and revive. Outnumbered, we rapidly ran out of supplies. Then we came back on June 1st with the same allies and the same numbers (both survivors and zombies in the fort) but this time immediately adopted the EHB/VSB policy. This time the gatehouse held (against the same odds). This is the second comparison we have, and again it points to EHB/VSB being more effective (as several survivors who actually took part in both strikes commented at the time).
- So while it could still be argued that time has yet to tell whether the complexity of the EHB/VSB plan outweighs the clear defensive benefit that EHB brings, the evidence presented above suggests that - so far - the opposite is true, and the VSB/EHB barricade plan is helping. If you already have clear and convincing evidence to the contrary, can you provide it? --Mad Dog Munro 04:43, 12 June 2008 (BST)
- No, I do not have clear and convincing evidence to refute your claims, just as you had to rely on conjecture to make them in the first place. Every day is different and we don’t have access to an alternate reality where we can compare the results of both barricade plans under the exact same circumstances. That’s why all this talk of ‘we held the fort for a record time’ does not hold much water. There may have been fewer zombies, maybe they were less organized, and maybe there were more defenders holding the fort at the time. Nobody can make definite claims one way or another. Perhaps your plan worked initially because the enemy did not know how to counter it but have since adapted, and maybe you already had a built-in casual player base when you enacted it that does not exist anymore.
- While it is not possible to compare barricade plans directly, my major argument is that I believe you are cutting off access to casual players who don’t want to deal with wikis, confusing barricade plans, GMT calculators, and the like. They want to have fun shooting zombies and leveling up, not just seeing if they can hold the fort a day longer than the last time. And they don’t want to be insulted or attacked for having dissenting opinions or for asking questions. I will argue that without these casual players, the Fort will not hold. While I believe you to be sensible, Mad Dog, and I have seen you being personally polite to those people who do not understand the complexities of your plan, I have also seen insults hurled by others (including some in your group) and a lot of ill-will stirred up. I have been on the receiving end of plenty of it myself. It seems to me the casual players are now bailing out of the fort because they don’t want to deal with these issues. If you are hemorrhaging these players at an accelerating rate, the fort will get harder and harder to hold because of it. I see fewer and fewer new faces, and fewer faces in general. To me, the key to defending the Fort is by getting as many dedicated people involved as possible, regardless of the barricade plan. Even with your plan, you have to open the fort up to VSB on some days, and those are the days that the zombies simply wait for.
- And don't look now, but the Fort is currently ruined again. Whether or not it held an extra day or two because of the plan is irrelevant to me if you are cutting people out that could be helpful and enjoy defending the fort. Even if your rules held them off for a small amount of time, the question becomes: was it worth it? Was it worth the effort to deal with the confusion, the ill-feelings, the limits on syringes and malls? My answer to the question of whether it is worth it is a resounding ‘No’. Robert LORD 16:00, 16 June 2008 (BST)
- You are an quite ignorant, Robert. I would like to meet you sometime. - CITIZEN VI 01:30, 13 August 2008 (BST)
- Ah yes, more insults and implied threats. Lo and behold, these fresh ones are from a PKer… what strange circles the FPDF runs with. I have actually had more than one person thank me for speaking up on this subject. When I suggested to one that it might lend credence to the argument if he also spoke up, he told me he was afraid he would be targeted in-game. Sadly, after reading replies like the above, I can’t disagree. But I won’t be cowed. If you wish to “meet” me, feel free. I am not exactly hard to find, you know. I have been targeted rather frequently since I explained my disagreement, and it just serves to strengthen my resolve and make the detractors look poorly. Finally, a bit of advice: if you are going to attempt to insult someone, don’t call them “an quite ignorant”. It doesn’t really make you look like the proper authority on the subject. --Robert LORD 17:00, 18 August 2008 (BST)
Fort differences
I noticed that in Fort Creedy there are two barracks and one storehouse while Fort Perryn has one barracks and two storehouses,making perryn have more resources than creedy.Just want to point out that where the buildings are at and which suburbs the forts are in aren't the only differences.--Gamestriker4 21:03, 25 July 2008 (BST)
Fort perryn
how long have we been fighting to get and keep the fort? shouldent this be a historical event yet lol or is this just normal for fort perryn? --Fanglord2 14:57, 24 August 2008 (BST)
- the fort has been in and out of zombie hands for as long as its been up, i lost count after 30.--Bullgod 19:53, 24 August 2008 (BST)
MALTON itself is like this you know.--Gamestriker4 15:57, 20 September 2008 (BST)
Actually I think The Dead's rampage across malton should be an historical event.--Gamestriker4 15:58, 20 September 2008 (BST)
Uh guys,I noticed that outside fort perryn gatehouse,there's a spray saying 2 attack at 20.00GMT,most likely today!I mean think about it,over 60 dead bodies and few of the are ever up and walking.Looks like there waiting.Just a quick alert.--Gamestriker4 22:58, 23 September 2008 (BST)
Well, we just lost the fort, update the 10th siege please. I just created it. Angusburger. 16:53 5th October 2008
Question
This is ancient history, but earlier this year when we took the fort, there was a nicely written section about it, under the 2008 heading, and it's gone...
I checked the editing history, and it was removed by Gamestriker4 - and I wonder if there was any reason for this.
Copied to his talk page as well. --Necrodeus T M! 18:49, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
