Developing Suggestions

Developing Suggestions

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

Nothing on this page will be archived.

Further Discussion

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

Please Read Before Posting

• Be sure to check The Frequently Suggested List and the Suggestions Dos and Do Nots before you post your idea. You can read about many ideas that have been suggested already, which users should be aware of before posting what could be a dupe: a duplicate of an existing suggestion. These include Machine Guns and Sniper Rifles.
• Users should be aware that page is discussion oriented. Other users are free to express their own point of view and are not required to be neutral.
• If you decide not to take your suggestion to voting, please remove it from this page to avoid clutter.
• It is recommended that users spend some time familiarizing themselves with this page before posting their own suggestions.
• After new game updates, users are requested to allow time for the game and community to adjust to these changes before suggesting alterations.

How To Make a Suggestion

Adding a New Suggestion

• Copy the code in the box below.
• Click here to begin editing. This is the same as clicking the [edit] link to the right of the Suggestions header.

• Paste the copied text above the other suggestions, right under the heading.
• Substitute the text in RED CAPITALS with the details of your suggestion.

{{subst:DevelopingSuggestion
|time=~~~~
|name=SUGGESTION NAME
|type=TYPE HERE
|scope=SCOPE HERE
|description=DESCRIPTION HERE
}}

• Name - Give the suggestion a short but descriptive name.
• Type is the nature of the suggestion, such as a new class, skill change, balance change, etc. Basically: What is it? and Is it new, or a change?
• Scope is who or what the suggestion affects. Typically survivors or zombies (or both), but occasionally Malton, the game interface or something else.
• Description should be a full explanation of your suggestion. Include information like flavor text, search odds, hit percentages, etc, as appropriate. Unless you are as yet unsure of the exact details behind the suggestion, try not to leave out anything important. Check your spelling and grammar.

Cycling Suggestions

• Suggestions with no new discussion in the past two days should be given a warning notice. This can be done by adding {{SDW|date}} at the top of the discussion section, where date is the day the suggestion will be removed.
• Suggestions with no new discussion in the past week may be removed.
• If you are adding a comment to a suggestion that has the warning template please remove the {{SDW|date}} at the top of the discussion section to show that there is still ongoing discussion.

This page is prone to breaking when the page gets too long, so sometimes suggestions still under discussion will be moved to the Overflow page, so the discussion can continue.

Please add new suggestions to the top of the list

---

Suggestions

Ingame-Event Email Notification

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

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

Scope: Available to all players

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

Discussion (Ingame-Event Email Notification)

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

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

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

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

---

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

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

Type: Tweak

Scope: Survivors

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

100% should be 100%. I'd vote Keep.--Maps 18:16, 22 September 2009 (BST)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

World War Z

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

Type: New city based on movie

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

Description: Template:Wikipedia by Max Brooks is going to be adapted into a movie. There is a supposed viral marketing website, itstartswiththeflu.com, which says it will come out September 8, 2010. So there should be a city based on WWZ, Template:Wikipedia (from the Battle of Yonkers). First of all, there would be no NecroTechs. To avoid the Yonkers city from becoming all zombie, players could reset their accounts after death. It would not delete their accounts, but instead let them choose a new starting class and start again at a random class-specific building. All zombies would start out with Infectious Bite and Vigour Mortis. To reflect Brooks canon, doors would not have to opened (zombies could just bang them down) and the revised zombie skill tree would be: Scent Fear, Scent Blood, Scent Trail, Scent Death, Infectious Bite, Vigour Mortis, Neck Lurch, Death Grip, Rend Flesh, Tangling Grasp, Feeding Drag, Feeding Groan, Ransack, Flailing Gesture, Lurching Gait, Ankle Grab, Flesh Rot Infection is now incurable., and Bites are 15% more accurate. Zombies recieve extra XP when the infectee dies. And on a side note, all poetry books should include Daniel 12; 1-13 (taken from a hidden message on itstartswiththeflu.com).

Discussion (World War Z)

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

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

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

Where's Digestion gone?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

Glass Shards

Timestamp: Cookies and Cream 13:50, 20 September 2009 (BST)

Type: Infection; possibly new item.

Scope: All Players

Description: When you hit someone with a bottle, it smashes. If the person you hit has 20HP or less, they get glass shards in their wounds. Glass shards do 1HP damage. The 1HP damage stacks with infection. It would be displayed if they have Diagnosis. Possible part: Tweezers (or something similar) can be found in Hospitals. Tweezers are used to pull out glass shards. If glass shards aren't pulled out, then your damage continues. If you are FAKked before having your glass shards pulled out, then after 5AP you will get an infection.

Discussion (Glass Shards)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active discussion. It will be removed on: 30th September

The possible bit is my favourite. Cookies and Cream 13:53, 20 September 2009 (BST)

This suggestion is useless for most players. What does this add to legitimate player's experience? All it does is give griefers another tool to use against low HP survivors, and even then a griefer would have difficulty finding someone, as most survivors patch up ASAP when damaged. It also requires some suspension of disbelief. Wouldn't most First Aid Kits have something with which to remove glass shards or similar? Wouldn't many survivors carry tweezers around in case they or a friend got splintered on a barricade or something? --Anotherpongo 14:49, 20 September 2009 (BST)

Pointless, spammish, incomplete suggestion.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 15:07, 20 September 2009 (BST)

Yeah. And say this was implemented, and I highly doubt it will, how if you have more than 20 HP do bottles became magically indestructible? That part makes little sense.--SirArgo ^Talk 16:37, 20 September 2009 (BST)

No, but you can only get glass stuck in you if you have less than 20hp.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:42, 20 September 2009 (BST)

Still makes little sense. Does something magical exist that makes your skin impenetrable above 20 HP?--SirArgo ^Talk 16:55, 20 September 2009 (BST)

Little sense? this makes no sense.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 19:14, 20 September 2009 (BST)

The argument is that, when your that low on HP you have lots of cuts/injuries on your body the glass can get stuck in. The glass is more likely to get imbedded IN the cut then just on the surface of the skin.--Pesatyel 20:15, 20 September 2009 (BST)

Useless and grieftacular. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 20:22, 20 September 2009 (BST)

At least it is something relatively new/different.--Pesatyel 04:53, 21 September 2009 (BST)

Wouldn't tweezers be included in a FAK? If you look at what this does, it just bumps the damage of a bottle to 4. Plus I'm not sure how the "infection" affect works. But even then this is too powerful.--Pesatyel 04:53, 21 September 2009 (BST)

Not only will this likely affect less than 1% of UD players (who attacks with a bottle?), but the mechanics are needlessly complicated. Interesting flavour, but wholly unnecessary. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 06:57, 22 September 2009 (BST)

Well, taking the suggestion as is, this would put the damage per AP equal to a maxed knife (1.0) with the bonus of the "infection" and the only drawback being the "one shot" aspect.--Pesatyel 03:50, 23 September 2009 (BST)

---

High Variance Attack for Zombies

Timestamp: Anotherpongo 15:53, 19 September 2009 (BST)

Type: Attack

Scope: Lone, Low AP Zombies

Description: New attack "Savage", requiring skill of same name, child skill of Rend Flesh. It would do 15 damage (12 damage vs. flak jacket) at 7% hit rate giving 1.05 damage / AP (0.84 with flak jacket), making it no more effective than hands with Rend Flesh + Vigour Mortis. Death Grip would give the attack a 9.5% hit rate giving it 1.425 damage / AP (1.14 with flak jacket), making it slightly less effective than hands with Rend Flesh, Vigour Mortis and Death Grip. It would however have a much higher variance, making lucky lone zombies with few AP to spare more dangerous, particularly to low HP survivors, and allowing zombies to get extra XP from kills in a similiar manner to survivors with flare guns. Tangling Grasp would have no effect on this attack. Variance of maxed claw: 2.3 Variance of maxed bite: 3.4 Variance of maxed savage: 19.3

Discussion (High-Variance Attack for Zombies)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active discussion. It will be removed on: 29th September

15 damage? What the hell? What on earth is a zombie going to do which parallels being hit by a flare gun?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 15:55, 19 September 2009 (BST)

Hmm, well the big problem here is that, as you may know, the RNG isn't exactly random. For those who subscribe to groove theory, the ability to land 15HP of damage rather consistently would be very powerful indeed.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 15:59, 19 September 2009 (BST)

Giles: That is a problem with the RNG rather than this suggestion. Koponen: Higher variance, as I said. --Anotherpongo 16:04, 19 September 2009 (BST)

There are a great deal of things a zombie could do to deal 15 damage, rip out your throat, do an amateur appendectomy, rip out a few feet of intestine, you know... gory wicked messy zombie stuff. personally I can't see this getting a lot of use, my survivor never carries a flare gun for any reason, and my zombie usually sticks to claws over anything else. I don't know if it will be used but I'm willing to try it. -Devorac 16:16, 19 September 2009 (BST)

I like this idea. --  RoosterDragon  16:25, 19 September 2009 (BST)

Try answering my question.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:51, 19 September 2009 (BST)

This attack is more likely to deviate from the average damage making it more useful in a situation where the average damage is not sufficient but less useful in a situation where it is. It allows a lone zombie without sufficient AP to kill using claws or bite more chance of killing or severely injuring a survivor. It makes lone zombies breaking into poorly fortified safehouses that bit more dangerous. It may also allow zombies some extra XP from "overkill" damage. I hope that answers your question, if it doesn't please rephrase it, as I'm not sure I understand it fully. --Anotherpongo 17:46, 19 September 2009 (BST)

How would a zombie do the damage? Answer the question, stop just explaining what your suggestion does.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 17:56, 19 September 2009 (BST)

My apologies, I did not understand your question. A zombie could damage internal organs, sever limbs, etc. --Anotherpongo 19:43, 19 September 2009 (BST)

And they would need a skill to attack people in this manner, why? It's what they're already doing, and there's no reason one attack should suddenly do 15 damage.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:39, 19 September 2009 (BST)

I like the look of it but (its a big but) flare guns are the comparable survivor attack and need searching for which makes their use somewhat rare. A zombie with this would be able to do it at whim.... Perhaps making this a kind of critical hit that is only possible once you take the skill. Instead of choosing to make such an attack the system would just check against a suitably low percentage as to whether this triggers instead of a normal attack. Oh and I think 15 damage might well be a bit OTT, maybe 10damage and some suitably nasty flavour text instead --Honestmistake 17:34, 19 September 2009 (BST)

This attack is no more damaging on average than other attacks available at the same skill level, and it is deliberately less powerful than flare gun attacks to account for that searching. However, I do like your "critical hit" idea. --Anotherpongo 17:44, 19 September 2009 (BST)

Umm, it isn't weaker than flare gun attacks?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 17:56, 19 September 2009 (BST)

It is because it is less accurate and requires a skill to use, however...

The problem with weakening it a bit to balance searching is that I can still always use it as my last attack or 2 each day. while the numbers balance out in the long run the tactical ability to choose when to try this makes it much, much more valuable than those numbers would suggest. --Honestmistake 18:01, 19 September 2009 (BST)

Ridiculously OP; We all know the RNG isn't perfect, and I don't want to be nailed by four of these in quick succession... Any serious zombie break-in already spells inevitable doom for the survivors inside, so why bother with something so potentially game-breaking? Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 17:58, 19 September 2009 (BST)

I did have the idea of making it so that its accuracy reduced with every zombie present nearby, possibly (but not definitely) by 1% per zombie down to a minimum of 2.5%. Would that improve it? I'm also open to the idea of somehow adding conditions its use, but I'm not sure how that could be implemented. And yes, you could use it for your last couple attacks... and occasionally get lucky. That's the whole point; it makes being a low HP survivor when a lone feral knocks down the cades that bit more risky. It makes playing as a zombie occasionally that bit more rewarding. --Anotherpongo 19:41, 19 September 2009 (BST)

EPIC FAIL This idea or suggestion is based around a concept or worldview so fundamentally flawed that it is completely beyond any redemption or improvement whatsoever, excluding complete obliteration and reconstruction from scratch, which doesn't count.

You're just not getting it, are you?

Lelouch vi Britannia 21:52, 19 September 2009 (BST)

_

Haha, yeah, everyone knows internet memes are excellent substitutes for logical arguments. Your arbitrary judgement as to the validity of my suggestion is totally reasonable. --Anotherpongo 22:43, 19 September 2009 (BST)

Yeah. I may not be a fan of the suggestion either but using that template for every suggestion you don't like weakens its meaning.--SirArgo ^Talk 02:48, 20 September 2009 (BST)

Ya'know, I thought of that Argo, but what am I supposed to do when there are three totally fail-tacular suggestions on the page? I probably didn't need to do it for the facebook one, but it had so much fail... If you've got another way that I can tell idiots that their pretty suggestions are unfixably broken and that I won't waste any more time with them, then by all means let me know; I'd appreciate the diversity. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 03:28, 20 September 2009 (BST)

Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man. :S I recognise that the RNG isn't perfect, but I'd consider it isn't really a fault with this suggestion. Assuming the RNG was perfect, this would do no more damage on average than any other attack available at a similar skill level. Still, you do have a point, but I wouldn't consider the suggestion "fundamentally flawed". --Anotherpongo 11:58, 20 September 2009 (BST)

12 damage against flak.--Pesatyel 03:42, 20 September 2009 (BST)

Good idea.--Maps 07:26, 20 September 2009 (BST)

I felt that it was implicit, but I'll put it in just to clarify. Thanks. --Anotherpongo 11:57, 20 September 2009 (BST)

I like the idea. However, I do not pretend to have intrinsic knowledge of playing a career zombie character. So... TL/DR, but if some of the career zombies find worth in this suggestion, my vote would support them. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 07:00, 22 September 2009 (BST)

---

Ballistics Training

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

Type: New skill

Scope: Humans

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

Discussion (Ballistics Training)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---

Injured Zombie Revival

Timestamp: Blake Firedancer T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T. 11:25, 17 September 2009 (BST)

Type: Gamplay adjustment

Scope: Survivors, zeds

Description: As it is, zombies always take 10AP to revive with a syringe. With this suggestion, I propose that it be changed to X AP, where X is the zombie's current health, up to a maximum of 10 AP. This probably won't affect revive ques that much, but it will encourage zombies to feed on humans, lest they get revived during sieges.

Discussion (Injured Zombie Revival)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active discussion. It will be removed on: 28th September

So taking a zombie all the way down to 10 HP leaves a full revive cost? At that point, it's more efficient to kinfe the sucker to death... I'm not saying I support this suggestion, but it's still pretty weak at the moment. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 13:30, 17 September 2009 (BST)

This won't do a whole lot, usually when (smart) players get a zombie down to under that threshold, they're going to kill them anyway. Not only that, but you're still going to get situations where player A does 50 points worth of damage to a zombie and then player B comes along and wastes all their effort with a revive. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 15:41, 17 September 2009 (BST)

Mechanics dictate tactics, not vice versa. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 15:54, 17 September 2009 (BST)

If you were going to combat revive a zombie why would you damage it first? The combat revive is the cheapest way to remove a zombie from a building (Assuming a good scan routine and lack of brain rot) --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 15:58, 17 September 2009 (BST)

I think everybody has pretty much stated all the reasons why this is a [dumb] idea. Most survivors are either going to CR (in which case they don't care how much HP the zombie has), or they will note that the zombie's health is low enough to just kill it and save the needle. While Iscariot make a valid point in that implementation of a mechanic like this could lead to new survivor tactics--like the dedicated medic of a group being able to use more than 5 needles in a day--I think overall this idea won't pass in voting. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 09:27, 18 September 2009 (BST)

Wait your saying I can't revive a zombie if has 11 or more HP? And you don't think this will "effect revive ques that much"?--Pesatyel 04:11, 19 September 2009 (BST)

No, you can still revive zombies at 10HP or more at the regular 10AP cost. I'm just saying that if they're down to 9HP or less, the AP revive cost is their HP, e.g. 5AP to revive a 5HP zombie, etc. However, given the feedback, I'm thinking that perhaps having it so that for every 5HP the zombie has lost, the revive cost goes down by 1AP. 45-40HP - 9AP revive cost, 40-35HP - 8AP cost etc. --Blake Firedancer ^{T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T.} 07:40, 19 September 2009 (BST)

Much better. --Matthewbluewars ^{/New City\} 14:54, 19 September 2009 (BST)

Like combat reviving isn't already ridiculously stronger than any other method of zombie-removal? Why are we buffing CRs, and what's to stop Mrh? cows from mauling each other to 5 HP and getting 10 revives for the AP cost of one? Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 19:12, 19 September 2009 (BST)

Trenchies looking for a couple more XP, rotters wanting to screw with the system.--Blake Firedancer ^{T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T.} 23:38, 19 September 2009 (BST)

Potential annoyances, but it's still ripe for abuse. Also, why are buffing CRs, I ask again? Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 02:36, 20 September 2009 (BST)

What do trenchies and rotters have to do with anything? The combat reviving AP cost was bumped to 10 for a reason. Mrh?-Cows don't really DO anything at the revive point but stand around hoping to get revived eventually. If they could attack each other to make the revive more likely to occur, why wouldn't they? In other words, its all about getting revived as soon as possible.--Pesatyel 03:15, 20 September 2009 (BST)

Lots of single-digit-hp zombies that want to be breathers clustered at the revive points? You know those idiots that want to post zombie kill counts in their profiles would be all over that. And I for one would go out of my way to park a rotter in/near a revive queue and claw these idiots to death so they can't be revived when the needle man comes by. Both kinds of people would be a major problem for people that want to get clawed down to 5 hp or so hoping for easier revives. --Mold 06:28, 21 September 2009 (BST)

CR as a weapon is already overpowered as all hell, not that I ask it be removed, we can work around it. But trying to power it up by making it even more cost-effective is just insane. --Mold 06:28, 21 September 2009 (BST)

---

Voluntary Character Deletion

Timestamp: Necrofeelinya 16:53, 16 September 2009 (BST)

Type: Okay, I typed here. Now what?

Scope: All players

Description: "Obviously I can make new characters for the future and to complete the piece I wanted to do, however it has cost me character name that I quite liked, and I the owner apparently get no say over this. Unlike Nexus War I can't delete this guy and then have the same name again." Iscariot brought up a valid point, if not the one he was making a suggestion about. Some players might want to reuse names, or just accumulate too many characters they won't use again. Why not implement a voluntary character self-delete feature so players can reuse character names and rid the database of old characters they won't be using anymore? It'd be a button on the settings page, not the regular player action interface, and if you pressed it you'd get two warnings, each very explicit, telling you you're about to delete your character and what the ramifications are. If you proceed with character deletion, the character is erased and you're forwarded to the UD main page. It's not necessarily a crucial feature, as I assume abandoned characters are regularly deleted anyway, but it might be convenient for instances where players are attached to a particular name and want to switch cities or just start over with it.

Discussion (Voluntary Character Deletion)

It took you longer to type that than it did for me to find this. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 16:57, 16 September 2009 (BST)

There is also this, this and this.--Pesatyel 04:47, 17 September 2009 (BST)

So, my PKer who's KOS on the rogues gallery decides to delete himself. User B comes along, and enters my PKer's name for their name. My character has been deleted, so they can use it. They're walking around Malton, and are continually attacked by Bounty Hunters, for no real reason. --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:58, 16 September 2009 (BST)

If the RG then proceed to make allowances for this, my PKer who's KOS can now delete himself, and start a new account, with no Bounty. Flawed, as all character deletion.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:58, 16 September 2009 (BST)

Just note that bounty hunting is an external system. But you are of course right that character relations could become rather confusing if this were implemented. - User:Whitehouse 21:04, 16 September 2009 (BST)

So it shouldn't be considered? It's an integral part of the game, so should be considered with all relevant suggestions.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 15:46, 17 September 2009 (BST)

It's not an integral part of the game at all, one could play this game for years and have nothing to do with it. What it is is a database that originated and is still controlled by a group with questionable alt policies who run add-ons universally denounced as cheating devices. Why should we be considering the RG again? -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 15:57, 17 September 2009 (BST)

I'm referring to Bounty Hunting as a whole, not just the RG. Playing Urbandead, unless as a dedicated zombie who is never alive, and rarely metagames, will result in you encountering Bounty Hunters at some point.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:08, 17 September 2009 (BST)

What you're referring to is kill lists, let's not try and obfuscate that with political language. Kill lists are a player invention, like revive points. Neither should dictate the game updates in any way. I point you, somewhat reluctantly, to Nexus War. There you can delete and recreate characters and there doesn't seem to be any major problem with 'misidentification'. The staggering coincidence that would have to happen, I pick a name, mass up hundreds of kills on the name, delete and then a newbie has to create a character with the exact same name? You're more likely to win the lottery.

Your notion that 'the bad people' will delete their characters in order to escape 'justice' is a straw man. What do you think they do now? People who don't want RG bounties are free to create new characters to replace old ones because it's a player invented system that Kevan, and the rules, couldn't care less about. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 16:17, 17 September 2009 (BST)

I agree with your argument about them just creating new characters. But on your other points, I'll have to disagree. Firstly, I don't see PKers as an unfair or "Bad" class. I actually play predominantly PKer (In the sense that my main alt used to be a PKer, and my secondary alt is a PKer.) Anyway, say this gets implemented. I then get my character, 'Roger Federer', to commit several horrific murders in and around the stadiums. I delete the account. A few months later, around the time of Wimbledon or another grand slam, a player thinks that getting Roger Federer as a RP alt would be fun. They get him a tennis racket, and head over to one of the stadiums, to find that they are immediately killed by bounty hunters. Finally, I'd say that Metagame things are always considered in game changes, e.g. Kevan boosting syringe search rates because of the Dead, or nerfing syringes because of On Strike.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:36, 17 September 2009 (BST)

You are of course forgetting the wonderful piece of information on everyone's profile, 'Created on'. The newbie's would be different to yours, thus giving him a straight alibi to any of the 'crimes' committed before that date. The Dead situation wasn't a meta thing at all, it was the ingame reduction in survivor numbers that did it, not the fact that a new group had shown up wanting to break the game. One does not equal the other. You'd be surprised at the number of experienced players who always have a new character on the go. Most do it for the fun of the challenge of starting from scratch, those characters then get loaded up with supplies, taken to certain places in Malton and idled. You know, in case someone starts a new group we want to join. Given that it's not against the game rules, new host bodies are more likely than you think.... -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 16:44, 17 September 2009 (BST)

I agree completely in that aspect. But do you really think that the typical bounty hunter's going to check the profile of someone they've heard is a PKer?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:30, 17 September 2009 (BST)

Your typical reviver might not scan before reviving, should we remove Brain Rot? -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 05:10, 18 September 2009 (BST)

No, because if they don't scan, that hurts them. If this is implemented and a bounty hunter doesn't check the profile, it hurts The other person. If there are problems to be gained from not checking, they should always be at the expense of the party that doesn't check.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 07:18, 18 September 2009 (BST)

It hurts a player because another player is working off.... a kill list, we're right back to the whole point that kill lists don't not, will not and should not even enter the equation with updates. Also, by not checking the list first, you are harming yourself, come shoot my death cultist some time to find out why. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 09:07, 18 September 2009 (BST)

There is No reason why Kill lists shouldn't be considered when making suggestions. They are something which make up essentially the basis of the game for the two smaller survivor factions; PKers and Bounty hunters, and should therefore be considered in the process. What's more, it isn't just BHers and PKers who use kill lists. Zombies use them two. And anti-Zombie groups do. Most groups use kill lists. It's just another slice of the cake.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 13:28, 18 September 2009 (BST)

Zombies use them? Who? What? When? Zombies use kill lists? Yeah, because there are people that zombies shouldn't be killing.... The fact is only a small proportion of the game uses them, survivors generally don't kill other because they're surviving, zombies kill anything they want, death cultists and PKers don't give a damn whether you have a record or not, if they want to kill you, they will. The only people that do care about these things are bounty hunters. The game updates are not being dictated to by meta tools and certainly not by one used only by a minority of the game's population. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 22:26, 18 September 2009 (BST)

Zombie, Pker, Survivor. All sides use lists.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:45, 22 September 2009 (BST)

You can't use the exception to prove the rule, otherwise I can say all police groups are zergers due to the DHPD. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 15:13, 25 September 2009 (BST)

Alright, I'm going to try to drum up as many examples as I can. If I can't find any more, I'll accept that you're right. Personally, I doubt you are.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:19, 25 September 2009 (BST)

Alright, from just a quick search, I have quite a few. Naturally, I didn't bother with survivor lists. Lebende Tote, hardly a current group. Trenchcoater list. Not a group list, but still, certain groups use this as a kill list. Bounty Hunters. Good example of people who'll be killed by random PKers. Browncoats, Legends of Darkness. Both PKer groups with Kill lists. --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:43, 25 September 2009 (BST)

As a Rogues Gallery Moderator, I'd like to point out that RG rapsheets are based on UDID, not character name, so there would be no misattribution problem on our end. Having said that, there's no way this is going to be implemented, so it's a non-issue anyway. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 13:20, 25 September 2009 (BST)

And? If a famous PKer like Karloth Vois deleted his account and someone else snapped up the name, RG guys would kill the new guy. They wouldn't check his ID against the rap sheet.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:59, 25 September 2009 (BST)

And? So bounty hunters are dumb, please tell me something I don't know. How is this different to me making a character called KarIoth Vois? -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 15:13, 25 September 2009 (BST)

UDTool list? -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 15:33 25 September 2009 (BST)

It isn't. Those characters are frequently killed unfairly. Further, more apt situations, like Jorm, don't have variations. One look at Jorm walking down the street from a survivor, whether he's a level 43 zombie, or a level 1 fireman, they're still going to kill him.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:19, 25 September 2009 (BST)

It doesn't matter; it's a dupe, people. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 18:47, 17 September 2009 (BST)

I got escalated for taking that view to its logical conclusion. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 05:10, 18 September 2009 (BST)

Dupe or not doesn't mean it can't or shouldn't be discussed. Dupes are abused enough as it is.--Pesatyel 04:01, 19 September 2009 (BST)

The ONLY benefit is being able to reuse a name. Is that really a significant enough "benefit"? All the bounty hunter/PKer/kill list stuff IS relevant. After all if I see an target named "Bob" am I REALLY going to waste time checking their profile to see if is is the "Bob" I'm looking for when this IS the only ONE Bob? Bob is going to get whacked for being named "Bob". That having been said, the basic argument is more that there, apprantly, aren't enough names to go around. Other than that, who is it going to benefit to get to "reuse" a name? At best, I don't think a player should be allowed to delete the character they created. However, if a character hasn't been played in like 4 months, maybe.--Pesatyel 04:08, 19 September 2009 (BST)

---

Suggestions up for voting

Filter racial slurs

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