Developing Suggestions

NOTICE

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

Shortcut:
DS

Developing Suggestions

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

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

Further Discussion

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

Resources

• The Frequently Suggested List
• Suggestions Dos and Do Nots

How To Make a Discussion

Adding a New Discussion

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

Adding a New Suggestion

• To add a new suggestion proposal, copy the code in the box below.
• Click here to begin editing. This is the same as clicking the [edit] link to the right of the Suggestions header.

• Paste the copied text above the other suggestions, right under the heading.
• Substitute the text in RED CAPITALS with the details of your suggestion.
• The process is illustrated in this image.

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

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

Cycling Suggestions

• Suggestions with no new discussion in the past month may be cycled without notice.

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

---

Suggestions

Complacency

Timestamp: 15:17, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Type: Minor change

Scope: Change to headshot

Description: Following on from the idea of helping ferals, I tried to figure out a way to flavour things that would only help lone zombies and not hordes - that way the buff doesn't become overwhelming to hordes and sieges. What I came up with was the idea that survivors facing one zombie are going to be less urgent and determined in their actions - there's a sense of complacency that comes with the relative safety. As such, they're not going to be lining up shots perfectly or checking that they've put the zombie down properly. The gameplay implications of this idea would be that zombies suffering a headshot when they are the only standing zombie on that block will pay 3 extra AP to stand up instead of 5 extra. This effect does not change any numbers when multiple standing zombies are present, just when there's only one.

Discussion (Complacency)

While I think helping ferals is good, I think the flavor behind this one is just the reverse of what would be truth. If there is a lone zombie facing you, you'd have time to pick your shot where as if surrounded by a horde of organized zed, you'd be shooting with more abandon and possibly missing your mark at times.

That's all I got. No good suggestion as to how you could improve on it. It's too early here and I haven't had enough coffee. ~ 15:32, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Could be re-concepted as the thick crowds in a horde situation making it more difficult to stand up, representing the 5 AP, whilst a clear area doesn't have that problem, so it's 3. 15:36, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

I believe the basis of Headshot costs is that the nervous system of a headshotted zombie takes more time to recover than non-headshotted zed. I don't think a horde of standing zombies would either hinder or help the synapses reconnect. I'd say rework the flavor so that it falls in line with previous updates concerning Headshot.

Kevan said:

Cranial decomposition is setting in. Headshots now only knock off 10XP for each level of the zombie, rather than reducing them to zero every time - higher-level zombies have a greater proportion of active grey cells, and more to lose when the bullets go in.

Kevan said:

It might be a further level of decomposition, it might just be the effects of the colder weather, but zombies seem to be reacting differently to Headshot as the snow begins to fall - they no longer lose experience, but their nervous system becomes frayed and slowed, taking them longer to stand up after a blow to the skull.

~ 16:10, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't really get the flavour, but the idea makes enough sense.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 15:34, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

I like Vapor but FLAVOUR IS FOR FAGGOTS >=] but seriously, as kilt laden as I am, I dig this. Zombies need teh buff, and while a lone zombie inside mah house can cause quite a scare for a group for fear of information spreading, even DDR the lamest zombie group player ever (ask BI and HKL) knows what it's like to be the lone zombie who made it into a room full of survivor cunts. Sometimes I want that headshot action reduced. Make this shit so, man. Although in the interest of seriousness of roleplaying (rather than flavour) contemplate making the name something other than "complacency" lest you lose the survivor vote due to implication ;D -- LEMON #1 16:24, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Heh just trying to help. I mean I can already hear it now in voting. *whines* But that doen't make sense *bitch* headshot causes cranial damage *complain* that's why it takes them more AP to stand *my vagina hurts*. ~ 16:30, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Trust me, what I'm doing is hardly... well... bullying or such, because I know that I am by far in the minority with my anti-flavour stance, so I'm the one bleating and QQing more than anyone else, dw. BUT I STAND FIRM -- LEMON #1 16:51, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Yeah but I like good flavour. I'm 99% sure to be taking this to voting, once I figure out exactly how to concept it. 23:52, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Two extra AP per day is not going to be enough of a buff to help feral zombies, it won't even take down an extra barricade level on average. However if you want a flavour argument, you could claim that feral zombies act more like automatons, not needing the higher brain functions that hordes use to communicate and coordinate their attacks. - User:Whitehouse 22:50, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Berserk/Rage/Ferals/Other cheesy name Zombies.

Timestamp: Thadeous Oakley Talk 13:15, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Type: Zombie gameplay

Scope: Zombies

Description: Playing as a lone zombie/feral actually become viable and most importantly, fun.

This suggestion is big, in a way that completely changes the way zombies can play. I'll keep it short, and give you a general idea of what I propose:

Lone zombies, who are separated from the horde have begun rapid transformation in order to make up for being on their own. These so-called ferals become stronger, smarter and regenerate more rapidly. However, this transformation costs a lot of energy, leading to a loss of bulk. Because of a more solitary nature, they also begin to ignore other zombies, a lacking horde mentality so to speak.

Facts:

- Zombies who find themselves on their own with no other zombies in their block for 24 hours will change into a feral zombie.

- They will have only 30 HP regardless of skills.

- Health will be auto-generated in tie with AP. 1 HP every half hour.

- Ferals with ankle grab will become immune to headshots, while those without pay 5 AP.

- Barricades will be more easily destroyed due increased strength. (I don't have exact damage calculations here)

- Barricades which are Quite Strongly Barricaded (QSB) or lower can be entered in the same way survivors can with VBS or lower.

- Damage done to survivors doesn't change and depends on skills.

- Ferals can no longer drag weakened survivors outside, instead going straight for the kill.

- They cannot ruin/ransack buildings(!). Gennies and radio's can be destroyed normally.

- Ferals can be revived normally, depending on whether or not they have brainrot.

- If a feral is killed as a survivor by another survivor or suicide, they will stand up as a feral. When killed by zombie, feral or not, they will stand up as a regular zombie. If a regular zombie dies as a survivor, they will stand up as a regular zombie under all circumstances.

- Up to five ferals in one block. More, and they will change back into horde zombies.

Pretty dramatic. However, I think this can finally make it fun to play as a feral and offer an entirely different playstyle for zombies. All this without making the already powerful meta hordes even stronger, but without rendering them void. Ferals will never be able to destroy suburb, since they cannot ruin and their little HP makes it easy for survivors to take back buildings. Therefore hordes are needed for true destruction.

This is just an idea, and far from finished. Everything is open for change. Go nuts. --Thadeous Oakley ^Talk 13:15, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Discussion (Berserk/Rage/Ferals/Other cheesy name Zombies.)

I'm not really a fan, because my feral zombie is an assist feral. I go around pulling survivors outside for newbie zeds to level, infect them, and ruin buildings. This woulc cause problems. It could also polarise things to being permanently green suburbs (which can't be ruined by local ferals) and permanently red suburbs (where the organised hordes limit themselves to five to knock down cades, enter, bring in a sixth zombie and trash the building). As I said, I'm not really a fan.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 13:30, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

I thiink minor buffs to solo play would achieve the intended goal less forcibly - this seems very strained in its approach, and not very flavourful. 14:17, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

What's supposed to be the logic behind ferals being able to enter buildings at QSB. Does being alone give zombies the ability to pass through walls?--E Gadus 20:18, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Eh, don't like that much. Sounds like shapeshifter zombies, or something like that. Kind of weird. ~m ^T! 20:52, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Move restriction based on encumberance

Timestamp: ~m T! 21:28, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Type: Mechanic change

Scope: Fully encumbered players

Description: Players with full encumberance move at 2AP per block, just like zombies without Lurching Gait.

Discussion (Move restriction based on encumberance)

Or maybe make it so from 80% or 90% encumberance? ~m ^T! 21:29, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't really like it, unless it is countered by Bodybuilding or some other existing skill. Lurching Gate negates 2AP movement, so overencumberance should have a similar negation skill. ~ 21:36, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Have 101% be the minimum amount to trigger it, then it's negating by not being a smart-ass stockpiler - the option exists to carry above 100%, but at a penalty. I like this. 01:15, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

I liked both suggestions. I had thought about a new skill to negate it, but it didn't sound good to me. Bodybuilding or Free Running make better choices! Also, 80% or 90% percent was probably dumb, 101% is more logical. Also, fully encumbered zombies sohuld also move at 2AP, regardless of having Lurching Gait or not, right? ~m ^T! 20:50, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Leave AP alone. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 21:41, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Aren't we over that? Lurching Gait messes with AP, Headshot messes with AP, Scout Safehouse messes with AP. It's life. ~m ^T! 20:50, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I got two people who dig it, with some changes (on which I agree); and one who doesn't. Any final remarks before I make this an official suggestion? ~m ^T! 03:24, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't like it for this: those who went on a pumpkin scavenging spree on Halloween gets hit by this the most. Why would you force them to drop their "limited edition/once a year" pumpkins just so they don't go over-encumbered? --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 04:29, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Because this is "urban Dead" not "Urban Pumpkin Gardener"?--Honestmistake 20:24, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Got your point, but I gotta agree with Honestmistake on that. Plus, I'm gonna suggest it so it's only active from 101%, and negated by bodybuilding; which sounds reasonable enough, right? After all, scrawny survivors clinging to a ton of pumpkins in the middle of a zombocalypse would get eaten in any zombie movie you name. Or maybe not, but I think they should... ~m ^T! 21:43, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Worthless suggestion. Make the game more fun, not less fun. It's not as if being able to carry 18% extra encumbrance is game breaking. - User:Whitehouse 22:44, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

And it's not as if walking per 2AP is game breaking, either. Zombies are forced to at low-levels, anyway. For one, I think more challenge (while not breaking the game, at least) is more fun, and two of my three characters are survivors, currently alive and sometimes carrying overload. ~m ^T! 04:46, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Previous employment

Timestamp: -Scout talk!!!! 22:10, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Type: New zombie skill

Scope: Zombies

Description: Allows zombies to be able to reconize NT buildings from the street without having to become a human to do so.

Discussion (Previous employment)

Not a dupe. Just something you should look at. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 20:33, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

I toyed with a similar idea once, under the Scent tree, that would provide the ability only flavoured as the zombie recognising a chemical smell from the building. I think a version that doesn't rely on the idea that one company has employed the entire city at some point or another would be a little better. 21:03, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

• NecroTech Employment requries that. Just an observation.---Scout talk!!!! 19:34, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, so doubling that perception instead of opening a new avenue of thought is a bad idea. 00:23, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

World's largest dupe. See: Swiers, Iscariot.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:09, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

That would be nice but it should not be a new skill but a benifit from memories of life skill--User:Zombeman 11/Sig 16:38 18 of December 2010 [UTC]

I dont see how that would work alot of zombies would not of worked for nero tech and it would make the game unballence.--Survivor 2.0 22:24, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Who shot who in the what now? ~m ^T! 16:56, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Remove skill

Timestamp: -Scout talk!!!! 22:10, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Type: Mechanics change

Scope: Everyone

Description: You would be able to forget a skill for the exact same XP as it would cost to buy it. If you mastered the game, you might want to start over, on another note, zombies with brain rot would be able to forget it.

Discussion (Remove skill)

You need to regain less XP than it cost to buy it. Otherwise, you could get a few hundred XP and just switch it between whatever skills you need at the time. --VVV ^RPMBG 22:13, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Too easily exploitable. Imagine Death Cultists folks with a ton of excess XP who would learn and forget Brain Rot at will when it suits them. Or being able to forget Bodybuilding temporarily to make your HP appear to be maxed. How would this affect skill tree skills? If I forget NecroTech Employment, do I also forget Lab Experience and NecroNet Access since the former is a prerequisite for the later two? ~ 00:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Maybe there would be a limit to how many times you can forget somthing, like you can only forget three times per skill or somthing like that, and/or limit which skills it can be used on.---Scout talk!!!! 20:11, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

This would ruin the entire game.if i want to start over ill creat another character.--User:Zombeman 11/Sig 16:38 18 of December 2010 [UTC]

No way, man. A notice that "Buying brain rot may change significantly your gameplay" or "Buying headshot will make people think you are an asshole" should be enough. ~m ^T! 19:35, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Brain Rot already has a notice. ;) --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 17:12, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Food

Timestamp: —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zombieman 11 (talk • contribs) 02:48, December 8, 2010.

Type: New item

Scope: Survivors

Description: ok i know its hard not to get a med pack but a new source of survivor healing is neccisary for newbs ok so there will be 4 food catagories frozen canned fresh and rotten frozen food will be raw and used to heal 2 hp canned will be used to heal 6 hp fresh will be used to heal 10 hp and last and certainly the least rotten will heal 1 hp and doubles the amount of ap to move for the next 15 actions. Moved from the wrong place for new suggestions.

Discussion (Food)

I like the idea of a uncertain item. Perhaps it could be just one item called 'food', which will usually heal 5HP, but will sometimes be all rotten and moldy, causing 5 damage/infection/lethargy(next five actions cost an extra AP). Maybe 90% likelihood of being 'fresh' and 10% chance of some sort of food poisoning. --VVV ^RPMBG 03:16, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Food has been shoot down in the past. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 03:18, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Twice. Maybe three times, but these two are the ones I know of. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 03:22, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Food shouldn't heal as much as an FAK. I'd support a few differently-named but otherwise identical food items being added as beer clones, but that's about it. Should all be tinned or jarred, to work as an improv weapon like bottles do, and to explain away its continued viability after half a decade of storage. 03:23, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Baguette. If you leave them be for a few days, the get hard. If you leave them for a few years, they get weaponizable. --VVV ^RPMBG 03:31, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm not usually a grammar Nazi but please use some capitalization and punctuation if/when you take this to Suggestions. Otherwise, I like the idea of adding a food item or two. We have vending machines. We have stale candy. Why not food items. ~ 04:47, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Like Mis, I think these should just be canned/jarred goods that could also be used as weapons (I love novelty weapons, me). Given the lack of a decent power supply in the city, frozen goods wouldn't last long. Question: where would these new food items be found? The most obvious place would be malls, but at the moment there isn't a "Search Grocery" button so this would have to be added (although, as Axe has pointed out, this has been rejected in the past). Hotels and mansions may have some canned goods stashed in their kitchens. Pubs probably wouldn't though - they'd just have a few packets of crisps, nuts and hog lumps laying about the place. Apartment towers would probably have some cans, hidden away in kitchen cupboards. Apart from doughnuts in police stations (stereotype alert!), I can't think of anywhere else. ~~ Chief Seagull ~~ ^talk 10:22, 8 December 2010 (UTC) If you could share it.... That would be awesome! Also, maybe it would take two bites to eat fully, each bite would be the same. So if you take one bite, and it hurts you, you could do a subtle form of PKing and share it with someone else. ---Scout talk!!!! 03:16, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I think this Would be fun but seriousley add some periods or caps it will look more formal--Nexus 01:38, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I know it's you. 01:40, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree with nexus -- LEMON #1 16:26, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

---