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

New Encumbrance/Search Rates (or: Zombie Lord’s Next Amazing Idea)

Timestamp: -- | T | BALLS! | 03:56 22 December 2009(BST)

Type: Improvement

Scope: Encumbrance/Search Rates

Description: Ok, now the Encumbrance of all Items is doubled. But, now all search rates are doubled as well. (or tripled, whatever works better) This way you can carry less Items and it’s less retarded with the whole carrying 5 Portables Generators at once BS, but at the same time you can cycle through Items quicker so basically you have to use em up a lot faster. In a siege this could help Survivors in special areas (getting more FAKs out in Hospitals making them much cooler, same with PD’s etc.) But you would no longer be a walking fuckin Warehouse.

Discussion (New Encumbrance/Search Rates (or: Zombie Lord’s Next Amazing Idea))

What if I like carrying 20 or so shotguns underneath my trenchcoat? Now I won't be able to carry them and be hardcore zombie killer who shoots people outside buildings. I will have to rely on overcading like I normally do to keep zombies out because you nerfed my encumberance. Truthfully...I don't like it, as a Death cultist, I like to take a day or two to stock up on ammo, and once I'm out, I jump and eat people. This would limit the number of kills I can make my limiting my guns and ammo that I can carry, I understand I can find more, but carry less. Without the ability to carry, I don't like it. -- 

•   Timmah!  

•   Talk  

04:01, 22 December 2009 (UTC) Just double the max AP possible while you're at it. I mean, if we double/triple everything, it won't fuck with the intended way the game is supposed to be played, right? It'll just make things more epic? --

 

 

 

 

04:03, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Hate to break it to you, but I think we're way past "intended way the game is supposed to be played". Do you honestly take that seriously? Besides, doubling the AP would just be stupid.--

| T | BALLS! | 04:43 22 December 2009(BST)

Yeah, doubling AP is stupid, it's not like Nexus War did it for years.... -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 09:45, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Better to just make the 50 AP we have more effective. It would increase the "fun factor" if half your actions (or more) didn't turn out to be completely wasted and would not double the server load.--

| T | BALLS! | 16:42 22 December 2009(BST)

As is simply doubling other random aspects of the game. If you actually thought the game was as broken as you claim it is; you'd go to further lengths when suggesting balance/gameplay improvements, methinks. --

 

 

 

 

04:51, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

It's obviously just a basic idea, open for discussion. The core being making things easier to find, but being able to carry less of them. The rest is open to development.--

| T | BALLS! | 04:59 22 December 2009(BST)

Well, I think it would make short-term seige gameplay much more engaging for survivors, but at the same time, well, seiges aren't what they used to be (ie. decent or long-term) since Kevan introduced Cadeblocking, so I dunno. At first I thought it would also make it a lot more difficult for survivors to pick back up after a big trouncing, but doubling search rates would also mean that the search rates would be so good that lighting buildings wouldn't be necessary so they could recover without needing a fuel and genny. Hmm. Interesting proposal. --

 

 

 

 

05:04, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Hmm yes, depending on how high the search rates went it could make PG's less needed for rebuilding, which I had not really considered. It makes sense though, a ruined building should not be THAT large an impediment to searches. I'd think the presence of Zombies probably should, but that's for another suggestion. I was more thinking that if PG's weighed 40% or so then you'd want to set them up somewhere ASAP instead of lugging them all over, and I like the idea of empowering the special qualities of specific buildings (Hospitals, PD's etc.) Malls search rates might need to be lowered slightly to keep them form being the Fortress of Doom and make their bonus the luxury of variety vs amazing search rates, which might lead to less Mall-centric play.--

| T | BALLS! | 05:20 22 December 2009(BST)

Not a fan. However, to note something, what happens to the people who are already over the encumbrance rate if this gets implemented? E.g. My Encumbrance is 87%. This happens. Effectively, I could now only hold < 50%. Do I keep all of the junk I had before? But, as I said, still not a fan. Doubling/Halving is way too much to even consider.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:58, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

You probably get to keep your junk until you use it up.--

| T | BALLS! | 00:08 23 December 2009(UTC)

I don't like this. Makes it too difficult for zombies that don't spend much time alive to go off like bombs when they get combat revived. Before the "Get Brain Rot and STFU!" types chime in, I should point out I mainly mean rotters. They do get CRed (in fact my last two CRs were suffered by this guy, and unlike death cultists or the less committed, if they want to punish the CR with gunplay they've got to stock up a lot in advance because while it happens, it's not very often, and they need to move quick before they get PKed just for having the rot. --Mold 05:18, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

But what if I WANT to be a walking Warehouse? Some of us enjoy the hilarity of holding what could be tons of stuff and still being able to even move. Cookies and Cream 11:58, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

---

New Revivification Syringe Mechanic

Timestamp: -- | T | BALLS! | 09:14 20 December 2009(BST)

Type: Improvement

Scope: Revivification Syringes

Description: Now using a Syringe is treated the same as any other weapon. It costs 1 AP, but only has a 10% chance to “hit“. Any “miss” with a Syringe has a 10% chance to have the Syringe break during the struggle, effectively losing the Syringe for no effect. This is because sticking a Zombie with a Syringe should be like a combat action. Zombies don’t wait passively in line to peacefully accept being jabbed. It should be a struggle. Oh, and I don’t give two fucks about IP hits or how much more “work” this would be for Survivors to have to use their 10 AP one by one, so don’t bother whining about those.

Discussion (New Revivification Syringe Mechanic)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active discussion. It will be removed on: Dec 28 at 19:50 (UTC)

May be a dupe, but I'd suggest 10% being a base with the necrotech branch skills upgrading it as time goes on, maybe 30% when maxed? Dunno. It'd also mean level 1 Necrotech skill would have to be changed to allow syringe use (if my changes were implemented). --

 

 

 

 

09:44, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

It is a dupe, one of mine no less. No need to discuss this further and feed ZL. It's all be said before and put to Kevan and if he puts it to a vote it'll take five minutes for me to remove it. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 12:01, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

HA HA HA! Isabella's mental image of herself. Yes, she HAS THE POWER!--

| T | BALLS! | 17:03 20 December 2009(BST)

I believe I clearly remember this from Iscariot. And ZLord, why do you hate Iscariot so much?Cookies and Cream 03:42, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't waste a fine emotion like hatred on Judith. I merely dislike everything she stands for.--

| T | BALLS! | 19:50 21 December 2009(BST)

---

Morphine

Timestamp: Captdrett 18:42, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Type: Drug

Scope: Survivor

Description: Morphine can be used by a survivor on another survivor or on themselves temporarily making all movements cost double. This would not effect other actions and no XP would be awarded. The effects of morphine would last 12 hours of real time, regardless of AP used during that time. Morphine can not be used on zombies. Morphine can only be found at hospitals. Cost to use: 1 AP Encumbrance: 2% (for needle) Requires: Lab Experience Optional Effect: Morphine causes all attempted speech to be jumbled. Players type as normal; however, letters are randomly replaced when the character speaks making it difficult to understand what was said. This does not effect what the character hears.

Discussion

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active discussion. It will be removed on: Dec 31 at 02:04 (UTC)

And the point of this is? - User:Whitehouse 18:47, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Griefing.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:48, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Well that is what I thought it sounded like. :P - User:Whitehouse 18:50, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Ideally, it would be used defensively; but, yes it certainly could be used as griefing, although a player could avoid any negative effects by waiting it out. Captdrett 19:06, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Defensively? What benefit to defense does this give? Also, "wait it out?" I guess you can just "wait out" those zombie break-ins too... no, nobody ever needs to flee and people just love having their movement speed halved for no reason. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 19:07, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes. Defensively. To escape a PKer or to escape as a PKer and increase your odds of getting away. And waiting wouldn't be required, just a way to avoid any negative effects. If you got 1 AP you can run out of the building whether you spend 1 or 2 AP. Captdrett 19:15, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Did you even read the Suggestions Dos and Do Nots, or do you just decide that your idea was too awesome to possibly have mistakes? Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 18:53, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

I did actually. Care to be more specific? Captdrett 18:56, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Don't Reward Players for Playing Out of Character, Multiply it by a Billion, Put Yourself in the Other Person's Shoes, Make it More Fun, Not Less Fun, Make it Fun!. Are those enough? Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 19:04, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Not to mention the whole "this has absolutely no benefit yet allows survivors to jab each other and grief to no end." --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 19:06, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

How is that out of character? As for the fun, yes you are right, it doesn't perticularly add fun but I don't feel it takes it away either. I could see an issue with maintaining the timer on all players, so I'll agree that could be a problem. And, as for putting yourself in others shoes, this would be no different than moving zombie without lurching gait. Captdrett 19:12, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

...Are you stupid or something? Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 19:15, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, sure am, but I put this under developing suggestions for a reason. I appreciate your comments on why it wouldn't work. Captdrett 19:21, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Fine.

1. Don't Reward Players for Playing Out of Character: That means you should avoid helping PKers, ZKers, Life Cultists, and Death Cultists. This suggestion only allows survivors to hurt other survivors, and is out of character.
2. Multiply it by a Billion: If every griefer spent all their AP finding and using these things, assuming they have little trouble finding their targets, they would probably be able to permanently suppress just about every active survivor's movement indefinitely. That's bad.
3. Put Yourself in the Other Person's Shoes: It wouldn't be like playing as a zombie without lurching gait, because zombies don't have to find entry points, gather supplies, run from falling buildings, scout the area, or go through a lengthy process of receiving a revive every time they die. It would in fact be like playing as a survivor with x2 movement costs.
4. Make it More Fun, Not Less Fun: Who is going to enjoy this? Griefers? They don't count. This clause and the next one are in the D&DN almost specifically to kill realism-over-fun and pro-griefing suggestions.
5. Make it Fun!: See above
6. Overall, this suggestion would add nothing of any value to the game, and would only serve as useless nerf to allow griefers to take away fun from other survivors. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 19:55, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

>PKers and Death Cultists are pretty in-genre. Human on human conflict, as well as mad religious cults are pretty staple to the zombie genre when it started. But besides that, all other points hold. Some people only play at a certain time each day, like say, right before they go to bed. If you jab them within twelve hours before that time, you've more or less forced them not to play that day. Or at the very least, not play as effectively. Not everybody spends all day watching their UD accounts for the morphine timer to run out. RinKou 20:28, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

While I don't agree with all assertations. I do agree, this was a poor suggestion. I will without sarcasm now agree with the stupid comment. Thank you, Lelouch. Captdrett 20:36, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Bah, no one who is even capable of considering themselves unintelligent actually is. It was a dumb idea, but everyone, no matter what, does some god-awful stupid things, worse than this, every now and again [thinks of last A/VB Talk comment about Iscariot]. The fact that you're willing to see your own idea's flaws means you're better at it than most of the people who put things up on this page. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 21:07, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

1. Don't Reward Players for Playing Out of Character: This guideline is stupid and bullshit. Pking and culting is perfectly in character at any given time. please bawwwww some more about it.
2. Multiply it by a Billion: "If every griefer spent all their AP finding and using these things, assuming they have little trouble finding their targets, they would probably be able to permanently suppress just about every active survivor's movement indefinitely. That's bad." the only valid and good point you've made with your "i'mma be smarrt!" liste.
3. Put Yourself in the Other Person's Shoes: "It wouldn't be like playing as a zombie without lurching gait, because zombies don't have to find entry points, gather supplies, run from falling buildings, scout the area, or go through a lengthy process of receiving a revive every time they die. It would in fact be like playing as a survivor with x2 movement costs." Which would be a lot more fairer to newbie zombies who deal with worse shit all the time. Try limiting yourself to 35 ap AND 2x movement costs for a hell of a long time because you can't get the xp to get skills to give you a little bit more ap in the long run. Shut up.
4. Make it More Fun, Not Less Fun: Pkers and cultist would enjoy this quite a bit. They DO fucking count, because, you know what? It's a playing style in the game. It's been here just as long as the other ways of playing too.
5. Make it Fun!: It would definitely be fun as a pker/cultist to go in a safehouse and mass stick people, and then have the horde come in and wreck everything.

In short, you're a dumbass. Pkers and Cultists have become a fairly influential part of the game at this point, it's time you all grow up and stop thinking of them as a random anomaly (hint: they're not). Also. "huurrr r u stupid? hurrr". Get over yourself.-- ¯\(°_o)/¯ 22:58, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

u dun? Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 00:05, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

I love that the one you didn't provide a counter argument for is the one that severely breaks the game.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 12:08, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

That's because he made a valid point there (and why I said so in the list). I just had to clear up the rest of his bullshit. :/ -- ¯\(°_o)/¯ 13:16, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, but arguably, it's enough to render this suggestion pretty much void. Hilarious way of deposing his comments, by the way. :D--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:03, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh yes, the suggestion is overall shit, not very fun for anyone but one style of playing. And while I'd enjoy it, I'm sure Haliman wouldn't when I grief him to death. >:) -- ¯\(°_o)/¯ 09:26, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

My last note got removed :\ But anyway, it was basically what DM said. Human on human conflict, and to a lesser extent, mad cults, are pretty in genre. At least when everything started, that is. As far as Romero's films went, the central conflicts were human on human, with zombies in the background. In any case, some people only log on around one time a day. Some times that happens to be right before they go to bed. At worst, you've kept this person from playing one day. At best, you're still costing them at least 25 AP. Not everybody has the time to sit around and watch their morphine clocks. RinKou 01:14, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

lmao the real-life properties of heroin are the opposite of what this suggestion is suggesting. How about; Morphine revives 15HP, thats it..simple, none of that comedown bullshit and it does what its supposed to do. JUST LIKE A F.A.K. GasCandle 06:23, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Bad idea.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 12:08, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

This is dumb because people generally only play once a day at the same time, work out when someone's online and this can be used to grief that character out of the game. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 12:03, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

How about...meth; you DONT LOSE ACTION POINTS AT ALL!! GasCandle 12:26, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Sure, but the only things you can do are talk, pick at your face, and clean obsessively, and each action that would normally cost an AP costs you a HP instead as you waste away from never eating. --Mold 12:37, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

you never eat in the game anyway. good point though, if you take alot of meth - u start to pick your skin (like IRL, after alot). if you can fight zombies you can handle your pipe. unless youre a little feen. SO ITS DECIDED THEN, meth is the new FIRST AID KIT GasCandle 13:59, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Add AIDS while you're at it. The new infection! --

 

 

 

 

04:52, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

This is completely pointless, it only helps griefers (which is not a valid playing style, thank you very much). It is not the same as playing a zombie without lurching gait because zombies can buy lurching gate to avoid spending 2x AP on movement whereas this allows someone to have their movement effectvely stalled indefinitely by greifers. Quite simply, no.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 02:04, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

---

Doors/Memories of Life

Timestamp: -- | T | BALLS! | 23:44 18 December 2009(BST)

Type: Improvement

Scope: Doors/MoL Skill

Description: Ok it’s time for the doors, as they currently function, to go. The whole thing is just stupid. Here’s the skinny: Doors 1. Now doors act like just one more level of Barricades that can be broken down like any other level. Yay, you Survivors get one extra level of cades! Neat huh? 2. Once a Door is broken, there is a new description inside/outside the building. “The doors are ripped off their hinges”. For 1 AP (construction/toolbox required) the Doors can be repaired, as long as there are no cades present! That’s right, the doors must be repaired while there are no cades, or the option to repair them goes away. This is because you cant reach the doorways once a bunch of shit is piled in front of them. Memories of Life Now the MoL skill grants a Zombie +10% to knock down cades (and only cades). This represents "cleverness" over brute strength. The Zombie remembers enough to exploit weaknesses vs. just flailing mindlessly. So the new chances are like so: Zombie vs. Barricades No combat skills: 12.5% No combat skills +MoL: 22.5% VM:17.5 VM+MoL:27.5 VM+DG:25% VM+DG+MoL:35%

Discussion (Doors/Memories of Life)

I like it. I like it lots. I'd suggest adding flavour descriptions for the doors as barricades though (the doorway has been locked tight, or something, rather than the doors are closed) but that's only trivial. Me rikey muchly. 23:49, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

I like the general idea, and flavor-wise it makes sense, but I'm hung up on one issue: you're letting ALL zombies enter doors now, but are removing the only defense that low level survivors have when they're in a building with no barricades. I really like the MoL change, but it all feels a little too overpowered at the moment. There needs to be some way of balancing for the lowbie survivors still. —Aichon— 23:58, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

On the off chance that you're actually serious this time (as this suggestion shows what might be possible thought), I think that a +10% buff to zombies against barricades would be ridiculously OP; They're all that survivors have to defend, and while this would help the solo-zombie, it would fuck over survivors massively any time there's a horde gathered. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 00:04, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

I didn't realise this, but you're right. Having 100+ zombies bashing on your doors is hard enough, but with 10% boost! And you're right, this is a decent suggestion. CONGRATS ZOMBIELORD! Cookies and Cream 09:26, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

1) I'm always serious about my suggestions. 2)Hordes always win. That's never going to change as long as stupid people keep clinging to the status quo regarding the broken nature of this game. Giving solo Zombies some actual power is the only real way to fight Hordes. As long as solo Zombies are totally fuckin useless the Hordes will never be short of willing sheep. It's the best recruitment tool they have.--

| T | BALLS! | 09:22 20 December 2009(BST)

This screws newbie survivors, because they don't get to protect themselves any more. This screws newbie zombies because it means that they need to buy yet another skill to become proficient at things. This would divert attention from the other zombie skills, which are frankly more useful. This very minorly screws advanced survivors, as it means that they have to do an extra repair before they can start cading. Not the end of the world, but takes more time in a realtime scenario. Now, for high level zombies, you'd see one zombie able to break in to any building in a day, and have the ability to infect most of the people inside. Then, we apply probably the most important DevSug axiom: Multiply it by a billion. Hell, multiply it by 2000. The dead had that many members, and they totalled malton without this. This could potentially end urbandead with how overpowered it is.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 10:12, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Riiight. Because Survivors win so many sieges now. Survivors are just going to have to give up on that little dream and start acting like, I dunno, Survivors and stop trying to hold ground hopelessly. Course the only way to do that is make dying actually mean something. Otherwise they will just keep standing there like retarded hamsters, waiting for death and running on the Revive Cycle Wheel endlessly.--

| T | BALLS! | 09:35 20 December 2009(BST)

Please respond to my comment, instead of spouting propaganda.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 12:10, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

I did, the second half of your comment. You were the one that brought up "The Dead", so I assumed you were crying about megahordes. The first half, well, this hardly screws anyone. Survivors already have it too easy to start anyway. If solo Zombies could actually do something, low level Survivors just might spend some time as Zombies. boo hoo.--

| T | BALLS! | 16:40 20 December 2009(BST)

My zombie breaks in to EHB buildings in about 30AP. Go cry to someone who hasn't got game experience.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:47, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, every time you attack EHB cades they are gone in 30 AP. Moron.--

| T | BALLS! | 16:58 20 December 2009(BST)

Pretty much, yes. Have you ever played a zombie character?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:03, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Liar.--

| T | BALLS! | 18:10 20 December 2009(BST)

trolls: plz dun feed thum. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 18:10, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Coward.--

| T | BALLS! | 18:25 20 December 2009(BST)

EHB in 30AP... you are kidding aren't you? I hardly ever get inside on my own if its over VS so one of us must be having amazing luck. --Honestmistake 16:51, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Just to make my point i just smashed my way into a EHB from 44AP. I groaned and have 1AP left.... thats better than usual in my experience. As shown by maxed zombie number 2 wh managed a pathetic EHB to HB in 31AP--Honestmistake 16:54, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

About a month ago, I took out the barricades of Hazeldine NT in about 30AP, then proceeded to groan twice, and infect about 50% of the people inside. This isn't the only time it's happened.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:35, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok, but not every time. I know the sort of event you speak of, it's about 1 in 100 thing in my experience. A good day, but pretty darn rare. If you take half the players (usually around 11500 Zombies or so, and further divide that by 100, you get 115 a day. And that's assuming every single Zombie goes after cades that day. Not game breaking IMO.--

| T | BALLS! | 19:41 21 December 2009(BST)

I'd provide my own statistic, (roughly 1 in 10, I reckon), but I'm busy being CRed at the moment.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 10:08, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

You're on crack. Either that or Kevan fucks with the % numbers on cades as well. It would not surprise me to find out he has the whole thing automated based on how fucked over a burb is.--

| T | BALLS! | 16:32 22 December 2009(BST)

Not terrible, but multiple. You're suggesting 3 things at once. I'm pretty sure the door ripping thing is a dupe. How about zombies with MOL treat doors as they do now, but to those zombies without MOL it counts as another level of cades? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 10:50, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

I like Rosslessness's variant. It makes sense, Mol still benefits zombies but isn't necessary to get passed door, just the most efficient way. It should have minimal effect on balance, just gives low level players a break. Captdrett 14:03, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Amen, Rosslessness! Definitely change to that. --Karloth Vois ^¯\(°_o)/¯ 18:44, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm in this camp too. Sure doors aren't the low level human's only defense. VSB+2 buildings are. Doors don't provide any protection against mid-level zombies at all, and do nothing but frustrate and prevent growth for feral new zombies. Rossy's change to ZL's suggestion lets survivors keep their defense against low level zombies, while evening the playing field for them, without the arguably broken +10% vs barricades. RinKou 20:21, 19 December 2009 (UTC) Forgot my sig.

Doesn't this nerf pipes?--Pesatyel 20:04, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I suppose it does. I'd say, pipes no longer work if there is no door present.--

| T | BALLS! | 09:17 20 December 2009(BST)

Breakable doors? Because this isn't a dupe from 2005.... -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 12:04, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Way too much as is. Perhaps if you allowed all survivors with a Toolkit to build barricades upto (but not including) VS level with say a 50% success rate and made construction mean you no longer needed the toolkit it might be balanced... Personally I still think the +10% to attack cades would still be too much though!--Honestmistake 16:47, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

---

Headshot requirement

Timestamp: User:Whitehouse 14:23, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Type: Minor change

Scope: Survivors

Description: Simply make headshot require 10 survivor levels, rather than 10 levels total. Not sure if this is a good idea or not, but it seemed a little odd to me, thus I wanted to see what other people thought.

Discussion (Headshot requirement)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active discussion. It will be removed on: Dec 26 at 19:00 (UTC)

Why the hell not? Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 15:45, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

[Cyrus]I can dig it.[/Cyrus] 18:47, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

^ -- ¯\(°_o)/¯ 22:16, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

I'd prefer 20 survivor levels. The less people have headshot, the better.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:23, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

I'd be up for 10, but how do you deal with the current people that have it that wouldn't with your change? —Aichon— 00:37, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Well the simple thing would be to just let them keep it. Think of it this way, leveling as a zombie is generally harder then as a survivor (and, no, that isn't worth the argument) and someone who buys Headshot at level 10 is most likely to be survivor-oriented (ie. not have that many zombie skills). I'd prefer that it be added to one of these.--Pesatyel 03:09, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good. Im not usually killing Zombies, being as I like to kill both and Humans are easier. Still great though. Cookies and Cream 02:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Awww my string of consecutive Kill votes might come to an end if this one comes up for voting. Good suggestion and I'm surprised it isnt already in-game. --YoEleven 13:23, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

I like it.--Mallrat ^{TSI TKS CTD} 19:00, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

---

Skeletons in Zoo

Timestamp: X1M43 02:52, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Type: Flavor

Scope: Zoo locations, decorative items

Description: Simple. Searching in zoo locations gives a 12.5% chance to find an animal skeleton. Human skeletons would be excluded.

Discussion (Skeletons in Zoo)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active discussion. It will be removed on: Dec 27 at 23:33 (UTC)

I like this. 03:00, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

This is one of those things that should already be in the game... The malton zookeepers are going to have a fit though.-Devorac 04:37, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Apparently you've never dropped by for a visit. And it would also explain what happened to that darned Hippo! Good suggestion. --YoEleven 13:36, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Human skeletons should be included because:

1. Harmanz belong in zoos
2. Harmanz actually appear in zoos

-- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 06:07, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

True, but I don't think Malton has that kind of zoo. I don't see why not include human skeletons but on that basis, why not allow human skeletons to be found ANYWHERE?--Pesatyel 02:56, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Iscariot's closet is full of them. Search there first. 03:01, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Lol. It COULD be kinda interesting to see what descriptive ways one could find skeletons just out in the street or other random buildings.--Pesatyel 03:12, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Human skeletons would be fun, but it seems obvious to me why they aren't available. None of the dead harmanz are laying around quiet, they're getting up as zombies. To the suggestion as is, this is pointless, but it's cool. --Mold 10:52, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I support the idea of animal skeletons, but putting human skeletons in the zoo just wouldn't be consistent. Regardless, it's a very small issue, and I support the general idea. --Anotherpongo 15:34, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

SKELETONS! I want all kinds of Skeletons, even decorative ones. Cookies and Cream 02:18, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Ahem. [1]. But yes, I do think it would be relevent to be able to come across a skeleton or two in the zoo. May I suggest that it is changed to leaving the eksleton there once they are found? Verance 01:20, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! I didn't know we had a skeleton museum... Cookies and Cream 00:38, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Simple, just add the findable items in a skeleton museum to the zoo. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 15:16, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

This is a fun idea, but I would reduce the chances of success. 12.5% is way too easy. If you want to find that long-lost Hippo skeleton, you'd better really want to find it. Maybe 5% to find anything (eg a sheep from the petting zoo), and only 1% to find a really interesting skeleton like the Transylvanian Oryx.--Mallrat ^{TSI TKS CTD} 19:06, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

I couldn't find any information on success rates in skeleton museums. The success rate should probably be the same in the zoo, though. That's just a detail; I was more interested in the general idea. X1M43 23:33, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

---

Suggestions up for voting

Alt Proximity Warning

Moved to Suggestion talk:20091219 Alt Proximity Warning

Location Specific Actions

Moved to Suggestion talk:20091206 Location Specific Actions