Developing Suggestions

Developing Suggestions

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

Further Discussion

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

Nothing on this page will be archived.

Please Read Before Posting

• Be sure to check The Frequently Suggested List and the Suggestions Dos and Do Nots before you post your idea. There you can read about many idea's that have been suggested already, which users should be aware of before posting what could be a dupe, or a duplicate of an existing suggestion. These include Machine Guns and Sniper Rifles. There users can also get a handle of what an appropriate suggestion looks like.
• Users should be aware that this is a talk page, where other users are free to use their own point of view, and are not required to be neutral. While voting is based off of the merit of the suggestion, opinions are freely allowed here.
• It is recommended that users spend some time familiarizing themselves with this page before posting their own suggestions.
• With the advent of new game updates, users are requested to allow some time for the game and community to adjust to these changes before suggesting alterations.

How To Make a Suggestion

Format for Suggestions under development

Please use this template for discussion. Copy all the code in the box below, click [edit] to the right of the header "Suggestions", paste the copied text above the other suggestions, and replace the text shown here in red with the details of your suggestion.

===Suggestion===
{{suggestionNew
|suggest_time=~~~~
|suggest_type=Skill, balance change, improvement, etc.
|suggest_scope=Who or what it applies to.
|suggest_description=Full description. Check spelling and be descriptive.
|discussion=|}}
====Discussion (Suggestion Name)====
----

Cycling Suggestions

Developing suggestions that appear to have been abandoned (i.e. two days or longer without any new edits) will be given a warning for deletion. If there are no new edits it will be deleted seven days following the last edit.

This page is prone to breaking when there are too many templates or the page is too long, so sometimes a suggestion still under strong discussion will be moved to the Overflow-page, where the discussion can continue between interested parties.

The following suggestions are currently on the Overflow page: No suggestions are currently in overflow.

If you are adding a comment to a suggestion that has the deletion warning template please remove the {{SNRV|X}} at the top of the discussion section. This will show that there is active conversation again.

Please add new suggestions to the top of the list.

---

Suggestions

Gas Siphoner

Timestamp:	Blake Firedancer T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T. 23:51, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Type:	Skill + Item
Scope:	Survivors
Description:	This does two things to the game. Firstly, it adds Empty Fuel Cans to the game, with the same stats as a regular fuel can, only you can't use it to fuel up generators. Secondly, it adds the skill Gas Siphoner to the Civilian skill list. This does three things: At gas stations, the survivor can use the external gas pumps to fill up an empty fuel can for an 8AP cost. This must be done outside, in order to access the pumps. At carparks or streets, the survivor can siphon gas from abandoned cars. It only costs 5 AP here, but only has a 50% chance of working at carparks, and a 10% chance of working on streets. You no longer automatically discard fuel cans when used, as you now have a use for the empty can. In-game messages would read: When filling up a gas can from a pump: You operate the gas pump and fill the can. When siphoning gas from a parked car (success): You siphon gas from an abandoned car, filling the can. When siphoning gas from a parked car (failure, carpark): You go to siphon gas from a car, but end up empty-handed. When siphoning gas from a parked car (failure, street): You cannot find a car to siphon gas from. When attempting to siphon gas without a fuel can: You need an empty fuel can in order to siphon gas. When attempting to use a gas pump without a fuel can: You need an empty fuel can in order to use the pump. When fueling a generator with the skill: You fuel the generator, keeping the empty can for later

Discussion (Gas Siphoner)

So, for ~10AP you can get a full fuel can regardless of the state of the suburb? Way overpowered. And aren't petrol stations Borehamwood-only? --Midianian^|T|DS|C:RCS| 00:47, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Technicality. There are plenty of locations where one would possibly find fuel: Auto Repair, Carpark, Junkyard, and Police Station. Possibly Factory, Fire Station, Fort, Power Station and Railway Station.--Pesatyel 03:34, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

You'll want to have a large failure rate, so it's worth the risk on ruined suburbs, but pointless in smaller ones. Linkthewindow  Talk  00:49, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

What about the possiblity of, well, injury or getting splashed? If your physically sucking the fuel out of a car's gas tank, there is the possiblity of accidentially swallowing some or getting the gas on your clothes.--Pesatyel

---

Jump from window

Timestamp:	Dr Rosenrosen 19:20, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Type:	Interface
Scope:	Anyone in a building
Description:	When a Survivor jumps out of a window it shows upon all the other residents interface. Just like "A Zombie brought down the last of the barricades" shows. "Dr Rosenrosen jumped out of a window." or "Dr Rosenrosen jumped out of a window and plunged to a certain death." or "Dr Rosenrosen couldn't take it anymore and jumped out of a window."

Discussion (Jump from Window)

Dupe. --Midianian^|T|DS|C:RCS| 19:39, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

---

Headphones

Timestamp:	Robshadow27 9:07, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Type:	Item
Scope:	Survivors
Description:	Spamming altogether has created an element of gameplay that some survivors are not fond of. Others wish for their younger children to be able to play, but choose not to because of constant radio broadcasts of vulgar language by those who wish only to annoy, and by passerby's harassing survivors huddling together in buildings. Therefore, I would like to propose an idea whereby survivors could mute the speech of other players by wearing headphones, which could be found at any mall in the Tech Store. Of course, like any other item, it would be necessary to search for the headphones, which would have a search rate of roughly 10 %. Alternately, instead of a search function, headphones could be worn in place of a hat, in which a survivor would either A)not hear any conversation, or B)hear only muffles, equivalent to a groan being heard. The text could read "You see <insert name here> talking, but only hear muffles behind your headphones." This would eliminate the problem of encumbrance, if that were to become an issue.

Discussion (Headphones)

Radio Spam is a pain in the ass but such an action to filter language for children who may play would deprive them of the many benefits talking has... In any event, any child mature enough to want to play a zombie game has probably heard more bad words in the playground than they will hear in game so I am not really sure that this is worth programming. --Honestmistake 10:07, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from but the more i think about it the less useful it seems. What about offensive graffiti or profile names? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 10:16, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

I actually like this. I think this is the first suggestion of the year that I do like. We have a benefit (removal of messages that may offend) for a downside (ability to hear helpful speech removed). I'd prefer the item to be an findable item rather than a clothing slot, only for the reason that all clothing slots should be flavour only, with no implied use.

The problem is where to find them. For their intended purpose they'd have to be found first, meaning the cute kiddies that this is meant to help would still be subject to the 'bad' words until they do find them.

The only foolproof way to manage this is to put an age bracket on the signup screen, giving all players 15 and under this as a bonus item automatically (players aged 16 and over would start as normal). The item could then be found by all players at certain locations in the game should they choose to gain the item. A small encumbrance penalty, say 2%, would be fair. Limiting it to mall tech stores is flawed, add in buildings, clubs and junkyards and this might actually work. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 14:06, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

I find it disturbing that you're worried about "vulgar language" in a game that involves:

• lots of blood,
• zombies killing survivors,
• survivors killing zombies,
• zombies killing zombies,
• (and most importantly) survivors killing survivors (ie. MURDER).

To fix that, I'd suggest another item to complement the headphones: Candy-Lensed Safety Goggles. For the wearer they'd turn all weapons into Template:Wikipedia, melee attacks into hugging and kissing, infection into cooties, blood into lemonade, zombies into hares, and survivors into rabbits. Damage would be called "nuggets of joy" (as in: a hare hugged you for 3 nuggets of joy) and dying would be called "fainting from happiness". And the interface would be pink. And the game would be called Urban Lagomorphs. --Midianian^|T|DS|C:RCS| 15:57, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

I'd play that game. --A Big F'ing Dog 16:25, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah... maybe 8 year olds shouldn't be playing UD. However, if you do have your children playing, and you're concerned about the content -- follow what all the advice on good parenting says, and play with your kids, don't leave them unsupervised -- and then try to nerf the game for the adult majority because you CBAed to supervise your kids.

As for spam... sheeesh, who's making you read it? Why doesn't it bother me? Or, how about this: leave the safety of green wanker suburbs 00 which is where all the spam happens, anyway -- and go help where it's needed. Less spam. More impact.

That out of the way... The mechanic of this does more to discourage survivor organisation and encourage the undirected, individualistic trenchcoater playing style than anything I have seen in ages. --WanYao 20:05, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Dupe of Ear Plugs specifically. Also Ignore Certain Types of Messages. As for the age thing, he just, perhaps, needs a disclaimer on the main page.--Pesatyel 04:11, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I actually don't have a problem at all with the radio broadcasts, and receiving all types of noises and communications. I enjoy the spamming for what it is. I really only felt like submitting this idea to actually get an idea out here, to learn the process, and because there are others in my group who are concerned for their children. I believe that it is really up to the parents to deal with the implications of playing a game such as this, as it does have a good deal of violence. I thank you all for your comments, and I will also think harder on these ideas for the next time. Also, thank you Pesayel for pointing out the dupe. That was my fault for not searching thoroughly enough.--Robshadow27 06:10, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

It's not problem, that's the point of the page. Finding dupes isn't that easy and there is nothing wrong with representing an idea.--Pesatyel 07:01, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

---

Flare Accuracy Increase

Timestamp:	Yungblood 23:22, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Type:	Zombie Hunter Skill
Scope:	Flare Gun Accuracy, which means survivors I guess
Description:	Decorated Malton survivors are now becoming more accurate when firing a flare gun at a target. Logically, at the distance you have to be at to effectively hit a target with a shotgun, the proximity would have to be pretty close. So, shooting at you target with a flare gun wouldn't be too hard, but the room for error would still be large. My suggestion is simple, increase flare gun accuracy by means of a new zombie hunter skill: Flare Experience- Player gets +5% to hit with a flare gun. I chose 5% because i believe anything over 5% would be too overpowering. This wouldn't make a flare gun a primary weapon for someone to use, but it would make it a little more useful when ammunition is low and you happen to have a surplus of flares. P.S. I'm horribly at finding dupe suggestions, so I'm sorry if there already is one like this.

Discussion (Flare Accuracy Increase)

Survivors already have really nifty things called Pistols and Shotguns. Flares are supposed to amazingly inaccurate, that's the whole point. However, they deal 15 HP of damage if they hit -- and 30 HP (!!!) if you hit someone with fuel-soaked clothing. Firearms don't need buffing, including Flares. --WanYao 00:38, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Flares are a novelty weapon-the point is that they are so amazingly inaccurate (as Wan said,) that they are useless except in a randomly find and then use environment. Linkthewindow  Talk  11:23, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

---

Find faces in a crowd

Timestamp:	Linkthewindow  Talk  05:13, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Type:	Interface
Scope:	People in crowded buildings
Description:	It's logical to assume that it would be easier to recognize people you already know in a crowded building. In short, people who you have added to your contact list will appear on a separate list below "list names"-similar to the message that shows you recognize zombies in a horde. A quick check finds no dupes, but I'll be happy to be proven wrong. It would look a bit like this: You are inside St George's Hospital, dark corridors leading through abandoned wards. The floor and walls are marked with splashes of blood. The doors to the street have been secured. There is a crowd of 71 survivors gathered here. [list names]. You recognize Boots the Monkey, Mightyoak, Violet Begonia and mere bystander in the crowd.

Discussion (Find faces in a crowd)

Tear apart when ready. Linkthewindow  Talk  05:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I hate you. Because you thought of this, and I didn't.... IMNSHO this is a fantastic idea! As long as it applies across the board to zombies as well, then I love it! And hate you... ;P --WanYao 06:07, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

This is great. Save the IP hits :) --xoxo 06:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I was wondering why I couldn't but never put much thought into it. _■^■ 06:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Simplicty itself. Of course, contacts you recognize among the survivors should be seperate from the contacts you recognize among the zombies. The two "recognition lists" should follow the total numbers of humans and zombies, respectively. --A Big F'ing Dog 07:05, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

How does this affect the order of precedence?--Pesatyel 07:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I could have sworn I'd seen this before. Turns out I had, and it ended up in Peer Reviewed. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 10:19, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Not surprising-I was surprised I didn't find it in my search. Thanks. Linkthewindow  Talk  10:24, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

No probs! I just searched the Suggestion namespace for "recognise". What can I say? I have search kung fu. ;) ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 10:30, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

---

Props

Timestamp:	A Big F'ing Dog 22:53, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Type:	Improvement
Scope:	Clothing
Description:	This is a clothing suggestion, but I'm posting it here because it's to suggest a new slot of clothing instead of a single garment. Clothes are designed to act like costumes, correct? If you're a doctor wear a labcoat, etc. Playing soldier? Wear dogtags. But part of a costume is what you're holding. Since people can't see your inventory, I suggest adding a new clothing slot for a prop. What is a prop? It's something you hold. It could include stuff like: A purse. Guitar. Backpack. Flags. Walking stick. Cane. Flute. Boxing gloves. Flowers. Candy bar. Swiss army multitool. Mirror. Sleeping bag. Manila envelope. Polaroid camera. Etc. Props would be the same as clothing. You wouldn't search for them but instead add them to your profile in select buildings. Just like clothing they'd have no in game effect, and they'd get bloodied and damaged each time you're killed. There would be no props that overlap with actual items (so no fire axe prop). Zombies would be able to select one prop, but just like clothing after that they'd need to get revived to get new props. This seems like an obvious suggestion, so if you can find a dupe please let me know.

Discussion (Props)

I'm not opposed to the idea, but there is a significant factor your neglecting. Most players have a weapon in hand. Would it mean you'd be able to see what weapon someone is using?--Pesatyel 03:20, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

No, weapons wouldn't be props. You wouldn't see anyone's inventory at any point. The idea is more about the thematic trademark possession your character might carry rather than weapons. Stuff like a cane, a cigar, or a purse. --A Big F'ing Dog 07:03, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

There are just so many possibilities to cover. Too many. Just put it in your character description. --WanYao 06:19, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

---

Construction Worker

Timestamp:	Corinthias 22:46, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Type:	New class
Scope:	Survivors
Description:	There are many kinds of people that escape a post-apocalyptic zombiefied world, and no one has considered the working class. I suggest a new class of civilian, the construction worker, who starts with: the construction skill a toolbox. Naturally, this is a hard character to level up, as you don't gain experience with the construction skill. In itself, it balances out to being a skill that novice and beginner classes would have difficulty leveling up with, and experienced players would still have a rough time.

Discussion (Construction Worker)

The problem is that survivors could create lots of level 1 characters just to repair ruined buildings. All those 80+ AP ruins out there? A survivor could create a throwaway character to patch it up. I think this has been suggested before. --A Big F'ing Dog 22:58, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

This has been suggested many times before and spammed out for the above reason. --Papa Moloch 00:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

What the above two said-mostly zerging issues, and we don't need another useless starting class Linkthewindow  Talk  01:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

First, there is this already in Peer Review. Then we had this and this. That was just searching for "constructio worker". The game really doesn't need new classes since th are all, roughly, the same by level 6 anyway. Plus, this is just zerge bait.--Pesatyel 03:40, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

---

Radio transmitters in more places

Timestamp:	WanYao 18:11, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Type:	Increased item availability
Scope:	Survivors
Description:	As it stands, radio transmitters can only be found in Malls and Forts. This doesn't seem right to me. Therefore, I suggest that Radio Transmitters be added to the following locations, which seem logical to me: Fire Stations and Police Departments and (probably make FS's the higest %age to give them a bit more functionality, as well as not water down ammo searches in PDs too much) Junkyards (very low %age) Specifics are up for discussion. It's only logical to me that PDs and FSs would have radio transmitters. At the very least, this change would help make survivor play less mall-centric. People could play far from malls and still have access to this very useful in-game communication tool. More flexibility for the non-mall rats and non-fort-roaches seems good to me.

Discussion (Radio transmitters in more places)

apologies ahead of time if this is a dupe! --WanYao 18:13, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

My first thought, on reading the title, was "won't this just create more radio spam?" After reading, that is still a concern.--Pesatyel 19:17, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

A real problem in borehamwood, with only 2 locations to find them. Hmm. perhaps. I'll have a think. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 23:56, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't care about radio spam. I just ignore it, I don't know why everyone else doesn't. Or, if you catch a spammer, just shoot him. :) Anyway, radios are very useful. Back in the day when I hung around Pole Mall, we coordinated the feral harmanz with radios. Now that I don't hang malls around so much, I still wanna be able to use radios without having to deal with all those damn housewives in sweats! And the farkin' WalMart greeters, I do NOT need you to greet me, leave me alone already!!! :P And, thing is... It's exactly those places that are far from malls that could use radios the most... Again, a very cool added benefit of this would be another small shift away from mall-centric play. And I am pretty strongly in favour of anything balanced that makes mall-centric play weaker. --WanYao 03:41, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Seems like a good idea. I don't think it needs to water down ammo search rates at all though. Just slightly decrease the chance of finding nothing. Since people search A LOT in police stations for ammo search rates should be fairly low. Maybe 2% in PDs? --A Big F'ing Dog 16:02, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Because people need a reason to complain. What search rates were you thinking?--Pesatyel 03:42, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Sounds fine. I've always wondered why Fire Departments don't have radios anyway. Linkthewindow  Talk  05:20, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok... So let's make FS's the primary place to find a transmitter. I'm thinking somewhere from 4-8%, I dunno, these are very tentatives numbers, all of them. They can also be found in PDs, but rather rarely: 2% is plenty , imo. And as part of the pile in junkyards, however Kevan deals with junkyards. What do you's think about this? --WanYao 06:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Should I put it up for voting, then? --WanYao 00:39, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

---

Hardcore Mode

Timestamp:	Kamikazie-Bunny 01:35, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Type:	Skill, balance change, improvement, etc.
Scope:	Anyone who wants to.
Description:	Simply put Hardcore Mode is a way of playing in Malton as an Original Monroeville zombie. At character creation there would be a tick box labelled "Hardcore" with a warning along the lines of "Warning: Hardcore players cannot be revived and cannot stand up from head-shot!" or words to that effect. As a hardcore player you cannot be revived and if you experience a head-shot it results in perma-death (as the warning suggests). Now people may be asking "WHY?", well aside from the extra challenge, change in game experience and shiny gold medal (or some other icon) in their profile page there would be 2 new additions to the stats page; 1 - "Hardcore players" under the basic stats telling people how many Hardcore players are currently standing in game; no biggie. 2 - A new section labelled "TOP 50 HARDCORE PLAYERS" Which as the title suggests gives a list of the top 50 hardcore players listed by total experience gained, this list will include the top 50 living/undead/dead/idle players listing their names and total experience acquired. 3 - A new section labelled "TOP 50 STANDING HARDCORE PLAYERS" Which lists the top 50 hardcore players currently standing (living/undead) and total experience gained. Notes: These Top 50 lists WILL NOT include profile links! *"TOP 50 STANDING HARDCORE PLAYERS" is an idea I'm unsure of so opinions please? Attempting to revive/scan a hardcore player will result in a message along the lines of "This specimen is unable to be revived." The shiny gold medal can be changed to something else if preferred (suggestions please). In game reason... There is now a 2nd strain of the zombie virus in Malton which although resistant to the Necrotech Revivification process does not have the same healing capabilities. (It will bring you back from the dead but it won't fix a hole in your head).

Discussion (Hardcore)

Well, first, not giving links to their profiles in the list is kinda pointless as you can get their profiles from their names at http://profiles.urbandead.info anyway. Second, over half of standing survivors have Headshot. There wouldn't be much skill involved in "surviving" as a hardcore zombie, mostly just luck. Third, how do you explain this in flavour terms? Why these zombies cannot be revived when everyone else can be? Why do these zombies die when headshot when everyone else just stands back up? --Midianian^|T|DS|C:RCS| 07:54, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Suggestions/RejectedDecember2005#One_Way_Ticket links] Been suggested before, several times. I don't have the time to look for the [, but the name "hardcore mode" has even been used. The problem is this would turn into "everyone vs the hardcore characters" instead of zombies vs survivors. I forget the other arguments against I'm tired.--Pesatyel 08:01, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

No one would survive for more than a week in Malton on "hardcore" mode before being permadead. It'd be completely pointless, sorry. Buy rot but play as a survivor, that's the REAL hard more. Or take an alt like one of mine who has no combat skills and try playing him! There are many ways to make the game more interesting, they just require creativity with your playing style -- as opposed to altering the mechanics. --WanYao 08:14, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

This is the suggestion Pesatyel was on about.

The main point in this is the pointlessness of the whole thing, you want to have Kevan code specifically for characters that are just going to get abandoned the first time some trenchie decides to get bored and step away from the mall breach and shoot a zombie outside. Add in the confusion to newbies over the two types of play.

This is mindless boredom playing out in the suggestions system. Take a survivor with the rots like Wan said, take a Level 5 character to every suburb in Malton doing something useful, or perhaps play your 'hardcore' character and just don't stand up when you get your first headshot. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 08:26, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Midianian - I am aware of the profile link page, the reason for leaving the profile links out is to reduce the amount of Dedicated Hardcore-Killers (HK) out there and inconvenience the ones who do (every little helps). The headshot problem is unavoidable short of changing the current mechanics, the only thing I can say is a zombies we'll have to play smarter but this mode is not meant to be easy. In-game justification has been added to the suggestion, I forgot about that.

Pesatyel - Those two suggestions are pretty similar although one was a new server ,effectively Monroeville and the other one was pretty vague and seemed to be forced upon all players so I admit the similarities but this is a different way to do things. I see no reason why this would turn the game into everyone vs Hardcore except at the start when everyone is trying to gain a place in the top 50, there's no incentive or reason, you don't get XP or anything, the only reason would be to be an a-hole or if you had someone in the top50 and another player was a threat to your position (even dead players hold their position on the board until pushed off) hence the hindering to HK.

WanYao - I have been playing different roles with different characters including rot survivor (he got killed cause he had the rot), the only major roles I haven't done are ZK and PK (although my primary character is now slightly mad kills any players he sees revived because of paranoia yet is best friends with a particular group of zombies (and a hot-dog!)). Can I just point out, this does not alter the games mechanics, unless YOU choose so and it will only affect YOU. Not having a go at you but I'm expecting a few "don't force people to play as zombies/a certain way" responses.

Iscariot - The coding should not be an issue and is for kevan to decide, but in response the coding already existed in monroeville, as far as I understand (based upon what people have said) all the players in all the cities are kept in the same database, this means that the monroeville zombies probably have a flag next to them to identify them receiving perma-death (it's how I'd do it), all Kevan would have to do is create a tick box that toggles the flag on or off at character creation and extend it's function to include no revives (copy it form brain rot and include NTB's). The Top50 list wouldn't be that hard just list the Top50 players by XP with the same flag. Newbies getting confused? If they don't read the warning about how ticking the box makes the game harder and fail to understand this concept they're probably not going play for long anyway, this isn't exactly a game for idiots. I will give you the "mindless boredom" point though, I was bored and the suggestion system has been quiet, although I have been toying with this idea for about a month now.

I hope that answers all your queries/problems, any suggestions/improvements? --Kamikazie-Bunny 15:24, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

You completely missed my point: that this is pointless. No one would survive more than a week in Malton in this mode. "Standing Zombie Hunters : 7498". That's almost equal the the number of zombies in Malton. It won't work, sorry. Thus, find different ways to make the game more challenging and/or fun. --WanYao 18:18, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

The Problem: The story is not about the zombies, it's about the survivors, the zombies are the supporting characters, the never ending horde of ever living monstrosities that make every day in Malton a struggle to survive. Giving survivors perma-headshot takes away from that, it also takes away that the ultimate task is supposed to be staying alive, some people dedicate to being zombies out of necessity because users don't be zombies when they're zombies, Hardcore mode is Brain Rot, always has been. It makes the ultimate central game task harder. This is why Killing is the main zombie mechanism and reviving is the main survivor one, reversing that doesn't fit in with the game. --Karek^maps?! 16:20, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

The reason it would turn into "everyone vs the hardcores" is because the game DOES get boring, which is almost he ENTIRE point of the suggestions page on the wiki. I haven't even played my character in some time because it was just boring for awhile. Adding in something this dramatic is going to shift the balance. Look at all the discussions about how pointless it is to go out and kill zombies. Survivors are just supposed to hole up and only kill if there is a break in. There are a LOT of players that would get a thrill out of their target staying permanently dead, not becuase they are assholes but because it is DIFFERENT. Why attack a zombie when you know he will just stand up (maybe even DURING the combat) when you can attack Bob who won't? There is also the matter of NEW additions to the game. What if some new skill gets added, for example? Also, this says AT CHARACTER CREATION. WTF? Do you think the character will survive? When I played in Monroeville, my character barely made it to, I think, level 4 before he died (and there was no reviving). Malton is a lot harder than Monroeville was. Andthe last factor is that headshot is AUTOMATIC.--Pesatyel 19:30, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

---

Military Satellite

Timestamp:	A Big F'ing Dog 15:09, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Type:	Skill
Scope:	Survivors
Description:	The military is still active outside of Malton. They rebuilt the forts, drop packages, maintain the quarantine. Their satellites in space should still be functioning as well. I suggest having the military decide to share some satellite data with its personnel trapped in Malton. I suggest adding a new military skill called Intelligence Officer, or something more clever with the same gist. It would give you clearance to access satellite data using the computers in fort armories, when the building is powered and intact. Survivors with the skill would have an "Satellite View" button, next to two small boxes. One to enter an x coordinate, the other a y coordinate. Once valid numbers are entered pressing satellite view would show you an outside view of that one square (not a 3x3 map, just an exterior view of the single square you choose). The cost would be 5AP. This would allow the forts to act as command centers of a sort. Or at least allow the "military commanders" that take refuge there to be informed about places all over the city. Want to check mall statuses? NTs? You can do that. Anywhere in the city. What keeps this from being overpowered is the high expense. Not so useful for being safe and lazy and checking up on nearby buildings. Maybe it'd save you a round trip if nothing is wrong, but if you actually want to go there you'd have been better off seeing for yourself rather than spending all that extra AP just for a peek. It isn't overpowered to look at buildings far away, because by the time you get there conditions may have changed. And if you really want a comprehensive view of an area it'd require multiple scans costing lots of AP. That said, I think this would have its uses and would make the fort more tactically interesting.

Discussion (Military Satellite)

I think you really should read this. --Midianian^|T|DS|C:RCS| 15:18, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not trying to make it balanced by attaching a high AP cost. The 5AP cost is just to discourage local usage. 5AP isn't ridiculously high, just enough to make this more appropriate for viewing distant squares. I think it's balanced not because of being rare or expensive, but because it wouldn't give survivors any major unfair advantage over what they have now. Of course, I think it's interesting/useful enough to be worth implementing. --A Big F'ing Dog 16:06, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Um. Why do you need a skill if its just typing in co-ords? Anyway. Why a satellite? Why not just a spy plane? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 16:18, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

It requiring a skill isn't necessary, but I think it's best not to give it away for free. It's not so much typing the coordinates, but knowing how to use the military systems in general. And a spy plane would require a human being involved, an unseen NPC pilot that people might not like the idea of. A satellite is just a machine like necronet. --A Big F'ing Dog 16:36, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't sound particularly useful. You might as well just check danger reports, or ask others. And I can't see why you would either want or need to know. Faranya 01:31, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, the danger reports are very general. They give you an idea of an entire neighborhood. This would let you check on a specific building. Coordinated groups might want a representative, or their leader, to remain in command at the fort, scouting buildings in whatever suburb they're in, giving commands by phone, radio, or through a group forum. --A Big F'ing Dog 02:44, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, except that the fort isn't exactly the safest place to be hanging out just to get information of random locations. You would actually be safe running all over hell and creation than at a fort under current conditions. Faranya 14:58, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

That's the idea. Want this ability? Better fight for it. --A Big F'ing Dog 15:00, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Wow, twice the failure all in one. X-Ray Vision and Rare =/= Balanced. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 08:05, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Maybe it would be better if the satelite was over a particular 10 x 10 area, and only co-ords in that area could be seen. --Blake Firedancer ^{T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T.} 08:41, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

On second thought, I realize this idea could fall prey to alt abuse. People could use alts to help their other characters scout. Too bad. As an alternative, what if this just showed a 10x10 map centered on that fort's armory? All it would tell you are which buildings are normal, ruined, or powered. --A Big F'ing Dog 05:56, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

It's hopelessly overpowered as originally presented: 5 ap to basically use binocs on ANY block, anywhere in the city, holy Humpty Dumpty broken, Batman! And, to make it just apply to 10 hexes around the fort makes it useless. Just leave the fucking fort already and help the suburb. I understand what you're trying to do here, but fact is it's broken. The metagame and inter-group coordination is where you do this stuff. --WanYao 18:00, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

---

Syringe Modification

Timestamp:	Lexicality 19:32, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Type:	Equipment Change
Scope:	The Undead.
Description:	Syringes act the same as headshot, adding an extra 5AP onto the standup cost. Why? Because according to the syringe's flavour text, when you inject a zombie, you're pumping a "glittering serum" that does "slow, molecular work". This is not something that you just jump up from. Having your flesh revitalised from rotten to living shouldn't happen instantly. I would prefer it to always cost 15AP, but there's no way that would be accepted. Your thoughts?

Discussion Syringe Modification

Your scope says the dead. surely you mean the living? As this would massively disadvantage them? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:45, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Why? It may be more realistic, but all it really does is take more time away from the player. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 19:47, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I actually like this idea, it's quite logical and imo in-genre. However, it has one very big problem: it's a massive buff to combat revives. --WanYao 19:58, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I said the undead because you're neither alive nor dead after being revived. But yes, realism, and inconvenience to the breathers.--Lexi^cali^ty 20:02, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

This is stupid. Let's say you're a level 1 zombie, and you only ever want to play as a zombie. Now, someone combat revives you whilst you're sleeping. You pay 15AP to stand up, say 3 to walk to a tall building that's VSB or less and one to enter it and one to jump. Now you pay 10AP to stand up as a zombie and resume your game again.

Bear in mind you get 48AP per day, you've just caused that player to spend 30 of those to return to a justified way of playing the game. No-one will ever start as the corpse class again. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 21:06, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't think people quite understand the suggestion. Or maybe it is just me. If you use a syringe on a zombie,they fall down and when they stand up, they are alive again. Therefore this affects SURVIVORS not zombies.--Pesatyel 06:30, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

It affects Mrh? cows and CR targets -- who are undead at the time they're poked. But, yeah, it comes into effect after they wake up -- alive. Now, as I said, and as Iscariot basically elaborated, it ends up being a gigantically unbalanced buff to the combat revive. Which really screw over newbies. --WanYao 07:04, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

That's just it, those guys WANT to be revived (well, the Mrh?-Cows). What DOESN'T adversally affect newbies? That's not much of a reason to vote against (so to speak). It affects SURVIVORS. If the said zombie wants to go back to zombie status, that's not THAT hard to do (and is, generally, easier than getting revived). 5 less AP to do that means little when all they have to do is stand outside when they AP out. If its against surivors, they already have significant advantages over newbie zombies (such as 1 AP move and the ability to ask for assistance and free run). After all, that, I don't like this idea. Its, at best, interesting from a flavor perspective, but the game doesn't need a "zombie headshot equivalent" and part of that sentiment comes from the fact it would affect ANYONE revived, regardless (unlike Headshot).--Pesatyel 03:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Getting killed by standing outside is quite expensive, taking ~17AP on average if you don't have Body Building, 20AP if you do. No, it's not your AP, but it's AP that would've been used for killing "real" survivors instead of getting you back to a zombie. Really, you don't say revives are cheap just because all you have to do is stand outside and wait. It's the same to getting killed by standing outside. It takes time for you and costs AP for someone else. --Midianian^|T|DS|C:RCS| 08:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Wait, what does Body Building have to do with anything here? You say "it costs AP for someone else". That's a bad thing? If they are attacking you, the are getting XP.--Pesatyel 06:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... what does Body Building have to do with getting killed? Think about it for a while and maybe you'll get it. And, uhh, yeah AP cost is a bad thing. The fact that it's someone else's AP doesn't really factor into it. It's that much AP not being spent on killing (pro-)survivors. And not everyone needs XP. --Midianian^|T|DS|C:RCS| 11:10, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

But were NOT talking about killing. We are talking about reviving. Your also forgetting that a standing survivors stands at HALF HIT POINTS (unless that's changed), so Body building amounts to, at most 2 extra attacks for the kill if someone is attacking the guy. Your also ignoring the fact the character can kill himself for as little as 1 AP (if inside). Your also forgetting about PKers.--Pesatyel 05:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I (at least) am talking about devivification, and the fact that it's not cheap. Yeah, revived characters stand up at half hit points, which does amount to two attacks, but you seem to be forgetting that zombies do not hit with every attack. It's two successful attacks that's needed to make up for the difference. Yeah, you can jump for one AP, plus one AP to stand up again, but you also seem to be forgetting that you have to be in a tall building before you can jump. I can guarantee that most of the time you won't be inside the building you were revived in (if you even were inside) and that most of the time tall buildings will be barricaded over VSB. Meaning that first you must find an entry point, then a tall building. That costs a whole lot more than 1 AP. As for your last point... waiting for someone to PK you is an even bigger waste of time and someone else's AP than standing outside. Really, how often do you get PKed? My survivors get PKed maybe once a month if they're really unlucky. I'd rather not wait for one month to get back to being a zombie. --Midianian^|T|DS|C:RCS| 09:49, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Your also, it sounds to me like, arguing that the newly standing survivor is NOT going to do anything but just stand there. Yes it will nominally take more than 1 AP to jump (the chance of being in the right building ARE low) but it really doesn't take THAT much to get into one, especially in a red suburb. And getting yourself PKed isn't terribly difficult when you can do it by being obnoxious and/or attacking others. It is MUCH easier to get dead then to get alive. Arguably, the person will stand at 35 AP. If they want to rezombify, they would STILL have to go about doing it whether they had 40 (no suggestion) or 35 (with suggestion). In that context, does 5 less really matter a whole lot? ESPECIALLY if you consider that, once they are done for the day. they just have end up in a conscpicuous place (assuming they didn't get offed during the session) and will likely "wake up dead" the next time they log on. If not, well than that's a FULL 50 AP to do the dead. It sounds like your saying these guys will be "reverse Mrh?-Cows).--08:09, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

A head shot for harmans! so they will be on half HP and minus 5 AP, Its interesting if not annoying but maybe too annoying to those that live in the more dangerous parts of Malton!--mo ヽ(´ー｀)ﾉ ^{MCM MOB DB} 23:24, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Get rid of the half HP and this is a good plan. Half HP and Headshot-like AP penalty, not a good plan. Faranya 21:53, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

This sugestion made me think about the current system and how it basically screws everyone. Unwanted revives are a pain in the ass and the quickest way to clear a room of zeds, that surely was never the intention? Paying 10AP to perform an altruistic action on someone is also pretty expensive when seen as a proportion of your days actions (add to that the cost of finding the needle and its as much a drain as headshot!) However I feel that any significant modification to the current system will never pass or be implemented simply because it would not make "in game" sense to change the mechanic at this stage... However we have now had 2 new maps with the hope of more to follow so I think its worth discussing mechanisms that people might think fairer but would not want to see implemented in Malton. Anyway, for starters how would people feel about a mechanic wherby a syringe dropped its target to 0HP and the "slow molecular work" caused them to gain health at a rate of 2 per hour? This would force survivors to wait a good while before standing up while allowing career zeds to jump up immediatly and fall down again pretty damn quick (esp if they are infected).--Honestmistake 09:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Sure it was(intentional), Reviving zombies is the main game mechanic. Urbandead wasn't built with set roles in mind but rather Dual Natured play. --Karek^maps?! 16:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

What the holy fuck are you talking about? Do you even read what you type or is just

Seriously, 10 AP for an instant "kill" on a zombie (altruistic my asshole) is "expensive"? Yes, finding needles is harder now that there are more standing survivors than zombies. Oh noes! And I don't even know where to start mocking the syringe drops HP to 0 suggestion. Just UGH! -- #99 ^DCC 17:58, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't know if this is needed logic wise. A syringe already leaves a survivor in less than top shape, with half their health. AP represents game power rather than physical condition. Penalizing the newly revived with an AP cost should be done only if the newly revived are overpowered, rather than to reflect the strain of coming back from the dead. That's already reflected through weakened health. --A Big F'ing Dog 20:34, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

---

Canned Food

Timestamp:	Red Hawk One 07:05, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Type:	New recovery item
Scope:	Survivors.
Description:	Imagine yourself as a survivor who just miraculously survived a zombie attack with a small amount of HP and an infection. You crawl off into a warehouse to die when an untouched can of food left on one of the shelves catches your eye. You quickly wolf it down and, feeling slightly rejuvenated now that you have food in you, think you may be able to make it to the local hospital to seek medical attention. Canned food would be a new method of healing HP, along with First Aid Kits and alcoholic beverages. When used, food would have a 50% chance of restoring 5 HP, and a 50% chance of restoring 1 HP (representing spoiled food). Food would have a 2% encumbrance, not cure infection, and only be useable on oneself. It could be found in warehouses (8%), schools (5%), stadiums (3%), cinemas (3%), and possibly in malls (a new grocery store/ food court?). Canned food would help survivors, particularly low-leveled ones, in situations where a hospital is out of reach (low AP, over barricaded, etc.) and health is severely needed. Food would also be an interesting addition in the RP sense as well. Currently zombies are able to eat when active, while survivors seem to be mysteriously immune to the effects of hunger. While it is possible survivors eat while logged off, there are also just as many times where they would eat during activity as well- a survivor celebrating a triumph over a zombie with a snack comes to mind. Any and all comments/ideas/criteque are welcome.

Discussion (Canned Food)

So. At random in some buildings there are cans of food (like corpses for zombies but more random.)

You have a button saying eat food. and you get a random number of HP and then its gone?

Maybe. But.

• Certainly not in ruined buildings.

• The has to be a chance it does you damage. Remember how long the food been there.--Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 14:27, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

But not kill, as falling from a ruined building? Also, it does need some adjusting, but then again, that's the purpose of this page. _■^■ 19:47, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Can you not die by falling? never knew that. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:49, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Isn't this a dupe? --WanYao 20:00, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Peer Reviewed no less, complete with food poisoning mechanics in the community's approval. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 21:25, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

While both of these adress the same idea (eating as a form of survivor-HP restoration), it seems to me that the implementation of that idea is different enough to not warrant a dupe. Besides, is eating a can of food really the same as eating a rat?--Red Hawk One 18:46, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Just to clarify, food is found and used exactly in the same way as alcohol. Given the base search rate, finding food in a ruin is rather low, but there is always the chance of finding a can the zombies missed. As for HP, something like a 40% chance healing 5HP, 25% chance for 1HP, 25% 0HP, and 10% chance of causing 2 damage might be a little better; I am just a little wary of too many variables for such a relatively simple function. As Dr. Cory suggested, food could not kill (like when falling from a ruin), but would always leave the survivor with at least 1HP. I am fairly confidant this is not a dupe; the only food suggestions I ever came a cross were all in Humorous Suggestions.--Red Hawk One 20:32, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

The only reason that beer and wine are in the game are due to genre reasons. It's popular for people to cope (or not depending on your view) with a zombie apocalypse by getting blind drunk. People don't break out their can opener and gorge on sweetcorn when they can't cope with reality any more. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 21:25, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

First of all, food is already an assumed part of the game. While it happens in scary moviesall the time, Malton citizens don't get caught off guard taking a shit either. The easiest thing would be to just replace the description of beer/wine at some locations with "cans of cat food" (or whatever). But the food poisoning is kinda interesting.--Pesatyel 06:38, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

While making food a carbon copy of alcohol would be easier, it still stands that food and beer are two different things. You're probably (physically) going to feel better after eating than drinking; likewise, you'll feel the effects of rotten food (damage from food poisoning) a lot faster than any adverse health effects of alcohol.--Red Hawk One 18:46, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

True, but your STILL ignoring the fact that food is already considered part of the game.--Pesatyel 03:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

It is assumed to be part of the game- nothing (other than player assumptions) either confirms or denies that survivors even eat. As far as that flavor argument goes, if zombies can eat during playtime, why shouldn't survivors?--Red Hawk One 05:13, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Because the game is BASED IN REALITY. The only special conditions for Urban Dead are that zombies are real and the ability to resurrect the dead is real. Those are the only fantastical elements. Otherwise everything strives to be realistic (in fact that is one of the two KEY ingredients of suggestions). The reason zombies eat is because it is part of the zombie genre. The time frame for playing is severly limited and the basic game is zombies vs survivors. We don't need the AP spent eating, let alone taking a shit, sleeping, bathing, or other generic "assumed" events.--Pesatyel 06:26, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Food would just be an alternative, semi-useful (and flavorful) way to regain a little HP. If you don't want to spend your AP rummaging in a warehouse for and eating a can of food, don't. It would have absolutely no effect on you or how you play. Put simply, food would serve ONLY as a recovery item and nothing else (think of a first aid kit but tastier).--Red Hawk One 06:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

That's why I suggested just renaming beer and wine at some locations to food names. Beer and wine don't go bad?--Pesatyel 08:11, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

---

---