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

Brain damage

Timestamp: Zamins 17:54, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Type: Skill

Scope: Survivors

Description: Consider this, when someone in real life gets shot in the head, they either have brain damage or die. Mostly the latter. But zombies are different, their bodies regenerate. Zombies should have brain damage, but just untill their brain regenerates. This skill would be in the skill tree of headshot, making it the second skill in the zombie hunter class. This skill could cause some of 5 different effects to happen. -Nulling the effect of ankle grab (paying the full price of dying) -Loss of motor skills (not able to move, etc) -Mental retardation (Messed up speech, sometimes doing the wrong thing) -Aggression (When trying to do something else, they could attack any breathing thing there. Zombie or survivor.) -Confabulations (Seeing things that aren't there, such as reading barricade levels wrong.) All of these effects would last for 5 ap, one after the other. Now before you think this is over powered, it is not 100% that any of these effects will happen. However, the zombie wouldn't know if it was effected or not. And would be given a choice to spend 10 AP to null all effects (excluding the ankle grab one) The chances that effects will happen: -1 effect happening = 95% -2 effects happening = 50% -3 effects happening = 25% -4 effects happening = 2% -5 effects happening = 1%

Discussion (Brain damage)

I believe that this suggestion may be a little over powered with the nulling ankle grab one. Perhaps I should change it to adding on 5 ap to death. --Zamins 17:55, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

This goes against plenty in the Suggestions Dos and Do Nots. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 18:08, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Such as? I kept those dos and do nots in mind when I made this suggestion. --Zamins 19:13, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

FUCK YEAR ZOMBIES R TOTES OVAPOWERD DUDE DEY SO NEED DA NERFIN. Fuck off. Adding anything to the already-punishing array of AP-sponging survivors can dish out to zombies is just spastic. Sorry this doesn't sound constructive, but that would be because it's not. 01:08, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Exactly. Despite how much of a parody that could be. --Zamins 01:41, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh, reading the small part of that I see brain damage is already in the game. It takes well over 20 AP to revive a survivor after death. For a zombie? 6 AP. So even WITH this, it would be 16 AP (excluding the ankle grab). Well, that's why I said in my first comment that this is a little overpowered. --Zamins 01:45, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Actually it takes 10 AP to revive a survivor, and the reviver gains experience for doing so. That same 10 AP revive is also a one-shot-kill versus zombies too, so there's no arguing that it's a niche item. Headshot is already a skill that hurts new players to a spastic degree, essentially saying "Oh hey, you're a new zombie player. That's great and all, but we're going to go ahead and only give you 7/10s of the play experience that new survivors get. Enjoy!" Enhancing the effects of headshot by increasing the stand-up cost, or anything else detrimental to normal, regular zombie play, hits the most fragile demographic in this game - a game which, might I add, is losing player numbers quickly. Of course this doesn't matter to you, you don't give a fuck about reaching new players or increasing player base or even allowing zombie players to enjoy the game, because I'm obviously in the wrong. You're not just making a stupid suggestion, you're making one that would impact the game decidedly negatively. Dick. 01:56, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I play both a zombie character and a human one, and I can say that on the zombie account, there is no repelling us. There are only people spending 40+ AP getting us to waste 6 ap. --Zamins 01:47, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Are you counting the AP to stand up, go to a RP, another survivor to go to a NT building, find a syringe, and then go to the RP? And about the one shot kill, get brain rot. 6 ap is not a spastic degree. I agree on the experience thing though. Oh and, stop being a jackass, mmkay? --Zamins 01:59, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

No, I'm not counting that. Because that's fucking stupid. I shouldn't factor in another player's AP expenditure as my own. And the only jackass here is the fucking retard trying to make this game more one-sided and significantly more difficult to pick up for the first time. Suggestions need to be applied to everyone, and that includes Paddy-New-Guy with no skills purchased and no gaming experience who will just ragequit UD entirely the first time your suggestion causes him to lose 40% of his gaming time to some retard idea. Also I don't think you understand for a second that there are players who don't have certain skills because they are fucking new. Brain Rot is not an option for someone who's just started, who already faces a 15 AP standing cost (which is a lot more than 6, in case you need it pointed out for you). Stop being a fucking idiot thinking only of established players and actually empathise with the little guy who this would fucking cripple. 02:05, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Stop with the swears, mmkay? Aren't you like, a wikimod or something? It just makes you look aggravated , which you probably are. Which is silly to get over the internet. You must have a poor temper. It is not stupid to count another person's AP. It's still AP from the survivor side. How will it make it one sided? Trying to have zombies do something other then camp out in a tent outside a building? If they get revived, then they do what a survivor has to do, get back to the right side. And the new zombies would just have to cooperate with older ones to get in and chow down. May I ask how you think zombies are not over powered? They will eventually ALWAYS break into a building. I'll try it on my zombie account right now. Stand outside of a popular building for a couple days, eventually I will break in. Oh wow, alot of fun for both sides. One side knows they're getting broken into, and the other has no challange. No need for cooperation. --Zamins 02:13, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Why are zombies not overpowered? They rely entirely on teamwork to achieve anything. One zombie can do almost fucking nothing alone - and as I keep trying to fucking convey to you, new players are the crux of this problem. They most often play alone, having not gotten into the game fully yet. They will drift from one building to another, maybe following groans if they're clever enough, finding scraps sometimes, and generally struggling to use their vastly-reduced AP total to achieve anything. Please tell me why, in no uncertain terms, you have this serious hard-on for ass-fucking new players. You have at no point addressed the fact that this is only going to hurt them, and it's obvious to anyone that they're both the most vulnerable and the most vital resource we have in this game. Why do you want to hurt new players? Why do you want to drive people away from starting this game? Why can't you comprehend the order of letters and punctuation on your screen and actually address a point being hammered home multiple times? 02:21, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Hunting Rifle

Timestamp: Toshiro Aki 5 November 2010

Type: New Weapon, Game Mechanic

Scope: Humans, Civilians, Malls, Skills

Description: The Every-mans gun, do all civilians need to be in the military to know how to shoot? no, we hunt! the basic idea here is a civilian skill tree weapon, we may find pistols and shotguns, but we have to save massive XP to make them Useful, so if civilians/police had hunting rifles, we could be more effective at a lower LV, zombies can overrun easily in a mall invasion, with ankle grab and hand to hand skills, this allows civilians at a lower lv to be an asset and not a liability.... Ammo Capacity, 5 rounds (Rifle Cartridge) Damage, 5-8 (pistol is 6 rounds for 5dam each, so if we make a rifle, 5 rounds for 8dam has a similar AP per use/reload) Weapon and Ammo only found in malls... (ammo found in groups of 5, gun found with 2-5 rounds loaded, or 0 you found it in a mall) ( in military as is no change ) Basic Firearms Training (Player gets +25% to hit with all firearms attacks.) o Pistol Training (An extra +25% to hit with a pistol.) Advanced Pistol Training (An extra +10% to hit.) skills, in civilian tree (basic firearms skill applies to rifles) o Sportsman (An extra +15% to hit with a rifle.) + Trophy hunter (An extra +10% to hit with a rifle.) + Militia Member (An extra +10% to hit with a rifle.) (notice instead of 25,10 --- we did a 15,10,10 so a civillian requires more EXP to fight effectivly (as a civilian 75+75+75+/-100[fire arms train]) or buy military skill (100+100+/-100 to get pistol+basic train[/-unless a police officer]) Discussion (Hunting rifle) Auto-dupe/Auto-spam on my watch. Please view the Frequently Suggested page. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 15:42, 5 November 2010 (UTC) Um. Starting accuracy is what? Also how is this more effective than having a pistol? Also ammo consider ammo dilution. (someone remind me where grims template is?) --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 16:16, 5 November 2010 (UTC) Starting accuracy needs to be given, but assuming it is the same as a pistol, the rifle is going to be a little bit better. Consider 30 pistol vs rifle shots. So for the pistol, it takes 30AP to fire, and 5AP to reload 5 clips (6/clip 30shots). For the rifle, it takes 30AP to fire, and 6AP to reload 6 clips (5/clip 30shots). So you are looking at a possible 150 Damage * 0.65 / 35AP = 2.78 Dmg/AP for the pistol and 240 Damage*0.45 / 36AP = 3.00 Dmg/AP for the rifle. I *think* .-MHSstaff 16:29, 5 November 2010 (UTC) It is also better if you have only one gun skill (pistol or zombie safari rifle). None of this really changes the fact that this is kinda "meh"-MHSstaff 16:31, 5 November 2010 (UTC) Also, the crux of the idea is that it's available for civilian characters more quickly than the pistol, but civilians need 100XP for all human skills. This would be a scientist gun.--User:Yonnua Koponen/signature3 17:04, 5 November 2010 (UTC) Lighthouse Timestamp: Necrofeelinya 06:10, 5 November 2010 (UTC) Type: New Building Scope: Everybody, the map Description: I'm putting forward this suggestion for a couple of reasons. First, the hardcore city design I've been rarely working on as a hobby is scheduled for completion some time around February of 2073. I thought certain features of it might be worth introducing in case other, speedier individuals wanted to make use of them in their own map designs, if such designs exist, and to give people an opportunity to encourage Kevan to use it in any future city plans he may have if such plans come about before the next 60+ years have passed. I happen to like this idea, and would like to see it included in a future city if any plans happen to be in the works for another "hardcore" map. Second, though clearly the basic idea is pretty well hacked out here, I figured I could use some slight assistance tweaking it in terms of external messages, suggestions about the range at which such messages are visible, whether it's even possible to install two gennies in a building and if not what sort of substitute might be made, and what items should be available in a lighthouse, as well as suggestions of % chance of finding each of them. As with my previous suggestion, buffnerfbuffnerfbuffnerfbuffnerfbuffnerf, and references to ritual animal slaughter are also welcome. Lighthouse Lighthouse [0,0] beach field field beach style="width:100px; height:80px; Template:Lighthouse"|Lighthouse road beach field field Basic Info: Template:Info Lighthouse A Lighthouse is tall structure with a powerful light at the top, designed to warn ships at sea of coastal dangers. It has little value as a Tactical Resource Point, but is unique in another fashion. When a player installs a generator in a lighthouse, it functions as normal... the building becomes lit, but the signal light does not turn on. Players have the option of installing a second generator to turn on the signal light, in which case the signal light becomes visible to all players on the map, and gives a vague indication of distance and a precise direction to the lighthouse. A lighthouse has no specific interior description, other than to say "You are standing in a lighthouse", but is subject to Ruin and Decay, along with the accompanying interior and exterior descriptions. When the main light is powered by a second generator the following descriptions are added to all players' screens, depending upon distance from the lighthouse and with (direction) being the most direct route to the lighthouse out of a choice of the 8 possible movement directions on the mini-map: 1-10 squares away: "Nearby to the (direction) you see the bright beacon of a lighthouse" 11-25 squares away: "To the (direction) you can make out a lighthouse signal" 26-50 squares away: "A light appears off in the distance to the (direction)" 51-75 squares away: "Far to the (direction) you can see a light shining" 76-99 squares away: "To the (direction) you can barely detect a light flickering very far away" If fog is implemented in-game again, the lighthouse will still be visible when powered, but only to a limited degree. Then the following messages will be seen by players: 1-5 squares away: "To the (direction) a bright light cuts through the fog" 6-15 squares away: "A light can be seen signaling through the fog to the (direction)" From 16 or more squares away the lighthouse cannot be seen through fog, and the light does not allow players to better see their surroundings, it only indicates the direction of the lighthouse. Both generators must be fueled for the signal light to work, if either one runs out of fuel, the signal light goes out. Items found in lighthouses are: newspaper flare gun radio Discussion (Lighthouse) Question: Where would this lighthouse be?--User:Yonnua Koponen/signature3 11:44, 5 November 2010 (UTC) I love it! Malton basing it is a problem. But its still a fantastic idea. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 12:07, 5 November 2010 (UTC) I like it a lot as well. You could do something similar with stadiums and stadium lights to make the general concept a little more Malton-friendly. Lighted stadiums are easy to see from a distance. -MHSstaff 16:47, 5 November 2010 (UTC) Gun noise Timestamp: ~m T! 02:51, 4 November 2010 (UTC) Type: game mechanic Scope: firearms fired in streets Description: I think this has been discussed before in the old days, but what's the opinion on firearms being heard from nearby blocks, at least when fired from the street? Discussion (Gun noise) For one, I'm a supporter of the idea. Specially nowadays, since the server is a lot emptier than it used to be and there are many ghost towns around, I like ideas that draw players to action (like this, if it could be hear by zombies too) ~m T! 02:54, 4 November 2010 (UTC) Rejected! --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 03:12, 4 November 2010 (UTC) Yeah, I though I'd seen it before. Nevermind then. ~m T! 19:52, 4 November 2010 (UTC) Rejected in April 2006.... well that's recent :) --Honestmistake 22:02, 4 November 2010 (UTC) Shout Timestamp: ~ 17:29, 2 November 2010 (UTC) Type: Survivor Skill Scope: Survivors Description: Shout is the survivor equivalent to the Zombie skill Feeding Groan. When a building's barricade level reaches Lightly or below, survivors are able to shout into the streets, beckoning survivors up to 4 blocks in any direction to aid with building defense. Skill Tree and Cost: Shout is a subset of the Civilian skill Construction and costs 100XP for all survivors. Flavor: To those shouting: You have no reason to shout. (There there is no immediate threat to this building.) (Barricades above Lightly Barricaded) You shout in astonishment. (Lightly Barricaded) - 2 block radius You shout loudly into the streets. (Loosely Barricaded) - 3 block radius You shout alarmingly into the streets. (Doors secured or wide open) - 4 block radius Shouting as heard by others: You heard a loud commotion from inside the building. (If the shout comes from your current location) You heard loud shouting X blocks to the <direction>. Discussion (Shout) Another variation of Shout would be more similar to feeding groan and is available only when faced with a horde of zombies. I looked through suggestion portal and didn't find this one but pardon if it is a dupe. I think this would help with some of the survivor disorganization issues. It's a non-meta way of getting specific information to other survivors and unlike firing flares, shout leaves no guessing as to what's going on in the surrounding area. Flares can be used in ANY situation and does not deliver specific (or even valuable IMO) information ~ 17:29, 2 November 2010 (UTC) Won't the zombie hear this as well? --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 17:31, 2 November 2010 (UTC) I had thought about that and it makes sense that a zombie would here and audible cue like shouting. However, a human would likewise be able to hear zombie groans. In-game they cannot. I think to keep it consistent with feeding groan, it should be audible only to survivors or possibly to survivors and zombies at that location. I suppose one could argue that zombies are driven by feeding instincts and the scent of death and their auditory senses are limited only to Death Rattle. ~ 18:13, 2 November 2010 (UTC) Survivors CAN hear feeding groans- if they are outside when the noise is being made. Nobody (survivor or zombie) can hear any feeding groans if they are inside. Also, zombies can understand human speech just fine, so it also not true that "their auditory senses are limited only to Death Rattle."  Swiers 22:18, 3 November 2010 (UTC) Actually, I think it's fine like this. Shouting in the face of a horde of enemies is for orcs, not humans. Yelling like a girl because the 'cades are down, that's more like it. ~m T! 21:32, 2 November 2010 (UTC) Fireman's Carry Timestamp: Wayson 00:09, 2 November 2010 (UTC) Type: Survivor Skill Scope: Move people outside of buildings inside them Description: Currently, zombies can drag people out of buildings into the street, where babah zambahz can chow down on fresh bra!nz. That's excellent, but as a survivor it always sometimes sucks to see one of your mates dragged out as an appetizer. At present, all you can do is slap a FAK on him and hope that he logs in before it's too late. But in a real zombie apocalypse, would you be content with putting a bandage on your friend and then leaving him in the middle of a shamblin' crowd of cannibals? Of course not! That would be plain mean. Getting serious, what I propose is a mechanic whereby survivors can carry, pull, drag, or otherwise move unconscious survivors into buildings. The mechanic would only be available if the individual in question was standing directly outside the building. (Presumably he was dragged out, but maybe he's just stupid or doesn't have free running.) This would involve a more-than-usual AP cost, such as 5 or 10 AP. There is an issue that I can think of immediately, and that's the problem of this skill being used to circumvent free running. On the one hand, any problems could be avoided through the simple expedient of having cades greater than VSB++ negate the use of this skill. But on the other hand, it could be also be avoided by having the carrying player 'toss' the unconscious survivor over the barricade, while he himself remains outside and needs to negotiate his own way back to safety. Needless to say, I favor the second suggestion. At present a mechanic similar to this suggestion already exists; in Forts, survivors have the option to dump bodies outside of the gatehouse, in effect 'dragging' corpses over multiple blocks. Obviously doing the same thing for survivors (dragging over multiple blocks) would be a case of Pied Piper Skills, which would be bad. Reiterating, the Fireman's Carry would only function if the target was directly outside the building. Other names for this could be 'Helping Hand' and so on. I envision it falling under the Civilian skill-set, with Bodybuilding as a prerequisite. (People are heavy! You think some shrimpy survivor is going to carry someone to safety? Nu-uh.) In closing, it should be obvious to everyone that the greatest weapons survivors have are coordination and teamwork. We need to heal and revive our people, we need to hide behind barricades and repair ruined buildings, and we need to communicate and watch each others backs. This skill would flow directly from those principles. Thoughts? Discussion (Fireman's Carry) Feeding Drag is one of the skills that should never, under any circumstances, be neutured. Its greatest use is for feeding babahz, and that's a difficult task to accomplish. Hurting it only hurts new players. 00:17, 2 November 2010 (UTC) Peer Reviewed already. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 00:19, 2 November 2010 (UTC) Didn't see that (and I did look), but no wonder! It was last peer reviewed in 2006. I'd say that four years entitles me to another review? --Wayson 00:23, 2 November 2010 (UTC) Nope. It'll be used as a dupe link until you make noticeable changes in your suggestion to make it "different" than the given dupe. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 00:32, 2 November 2010 (UTC) That is silly and mindlessly bureaucratic. But this this is the UD wiki so I'm not sure what else I was expecting. The suggestion will stand unaltered, as I believe that it has merit and that four years is sufficient time to raise the point again. In response to Misanthropy, I don't believe that it substantially neuters Feeding Drag. It's a race between survivors to save one of their own, and zombies to eat that same individual. The babahz still have the opportunity to feast... they just need to be prompt about it. --Wayson 00:47, 2 November 2010 (UTC) Organisation isn't often the forte of new players. You're essentially comparing "need to gain a foothold in the game" with "need to not die and mrh for a revive", when one is a greatly more pressing concern. 00:50, 2 November 2010 (UTC) You can leave it unaltered, but I'm telling you now, the dupe vote will stand, regardless of how long ago it was. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 00:51, 2 November 2010 (UTC) Misanthropy: I agree, but the two aren't mutually exclusive. When writing this, I had in mind situations where every survivor counts and needles are scarce, for example during smaller sieges (the only kind where survivors have a chance) or when rebuilding destroyed suburbs. Axe: what sort of noticeable changes would you recommend? In the end, this suggestion boils down to 'move unconscious survivor into building'. I don't really know how else to put that. --Wayson 01:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC) IMO, the peer reviewed (and this) version both have a huge flaw in terms of flavor; the guy who got dragged out can't simply be carried back in, because zombies would be swarming all over him. This is true in EVERY zombie movie. I'd say each zombie outside has a 50% chance of blocking the use of fireman's carry; two zombies would thus block for a net 75%, three for 87.5%, four for 93.75%, 5 for 96.875%, etc. Basically, any sizable swarm would make such rescue very unlikely (or at least very effort intensive) due to its costing an unpredictable but large number of AP to do so. Remember, zombies can NOT just drag survivors outside for 1 AP; first they have to bring down the barricades and than take that survivor below 12 HP.  Swiers 01:36, 2 November 2010 (UTC) I kind of like this idea as a parachuter's buff. Imagine you have 10 players outside an EHB building. 9 survivors and one zombie. Zombie infects all survivors and lowers their health. One survivor spends all their AP dumping bodies over the cades. 8 infected players die inside, stand for 1AP each, kill everything and ransack. It would be great. ~ 14:50, 2 November 2010 (UTC) Don't forget the devious suicide repair team, enters the building on 13hp, repairs, get dragged by a friendly zombie who then ruins the building, only for another survivor to bring them back inside. Perfect for the permadeath cities. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 17:39, 2 November 2010 (UTC) Zombies get small XP bonus for witness survivor slayings Timestamp: -- LEMON #1 08:42, 1 November 2010 (UTC) Type: Zombies Scope: helping newb zeds, hordes Description: When a zombie witnesses a death of a harman, why should the last hit get the XP? I'm thinking a small XP payoff should be given to zombies in the vicinity of survivor that dies. So far, I'm thinking of three versions of this suggestions: 2 or 3 XP payoff for all zombies who witness the death of a survivor, regardless of whether they attacked the survivor or what skills they have. 5XP bonus for survivors who you manage to hit before they die (you'd only need to land one decent hit for it to register, and the survivor would need to have not done any action between when you hit him and when he dies) 5XP bonus for a zombie who has Scent Fear (maybe Scent Trail?) and witnesses a death. Flavour could be that the zombies now take a keen interest in wounded/dying survivors and now take notice of the deaths and the way they are dying, remembering a bit more with each death they witness. being a zombie is cool, but it's a bitch and a half to get that XP as a newb. This also re-inforces awesome horde tactics. Let's bring em back, boys. Thoughts? Discussion (Zombies get small XP bonus for witness survivor slayings) I like 2 and 3. 2 because it would stop peeping toms just going around and watching deaths to level up. (e.g. Major seige - 100 survivors die, 5 skill levels gained by standing there). 3 I like less, for the reason mentioned above, but it makes more sense with flavour.--User:Yonnua Koponen/signature3 08:51, 1 November 2010 (UTC) Go with #1 and keep it down to 1XP, to avoid zambahz jumping up several levels in a night just by being a mall siege. #2 is a beast to keep track of, while #3 helps mostly zambahz who have already some levels under their belt. -- Spiderzed▋ 12:26, 1 November 2010 (UTC) Reduce the gain of nr 1 or drop it entirely, don't give stuff away for free. Reduce nr 2 to the last survivor the zombie hit, current version encourages attacking multiple targets instead of focusing on a single target. Reduce the gain of nr 3. - User:Whitehouse 12:38, 1 November 2010 (UTC) #2 undermines another skill (Tangling Grasp), by encouraging people to break other's grasps. Plus, it'd make for some new tactics that I find to be a bad idea (zombies getting resurrected and healing each other repeatedly for the sole purpose of feeding as baby zeds as possible). #3 is overpowered, I'd say. #1 doesn't seem too bad, but I still can't get past the fact that it makes strike teams even further and away the best source for XP for a newbie zed. Newbie zeds should have new feral options to level, not new horde options, since the horde options are already strong enough. And, as others have pointed out, the idea of gaining an entire level by doing nothing but standing indoors during a mall siege is not a good thing. —Aichon— 13:02, 1 November 2010 (UTC) I'd perhaps give it a limit to when it stops taking effect - perhaps Memories of Life becomes the "off switch" that stops zombies gaining this XP. That stops it being an endless source of XP so you can keep the payout decent. 17:04, 1 November 2010 (UTC) I think a simpler solution would be to allow zombies who do not have digestion to gain XP by feeding on dead bodies. 1 XP per feeding would work. If you witness a survivor being killed... well, there's a fresh body to eat, right? But this is better, since you don't have to actually be there. Helps feral newbies a lot more than simply getting xp for seeing a survivor die would, and gives those non-vigor-mortis zombies a way of earning XP semi-reliably by "cleaning up" after combats, comparable to unskilled survivors getting XP for dumping dead bodies or healing people. Hell, I'll probably take that direct to suggestions. Only problem I can see is it would decrease the pool of edible bodies avaialble for zombies whop do have digestion, as dead survivors are likely to chow down. Then again, almost anything that encourages survivors to try an earn XP as zombies seems a good thing in my book.  Swiers 01:44, 2 November 2010 (UTC) I'm with others above. # 2. That's the direction I would go when suggesting. @swiers That suggestion would need a bit more work before it would pass I think. It sounds good but there are a couple of problems and I don't want to spam DDR's DS. ~ 04:39, 2 November 2010 (UTC) Interior Description Mod Timestamp: Necrofeelinya 04:05, 30 October 2010 (BST) Type: Flavor/Building Status Indicator Change Scope: Pretty much everyone Description: I've been thinking lately, which is always a problem and never bodes well for the future. The first stage in this unfortunate process brought to my attention the fact that although zombies outside a ruined building get a vague notion of how long it's been ruined ("very long time", "some time", etc.), when they're inside there's no similar indication. So I thought "if we got that, that'd be a nice change", but given the troublesome nature of my thought processes, I couldn't leave well enough alone. I then got to thinking "but it makes sense that we probably shouldn't get that in darkened buildings", because in the dark you really can't tell how messed up things are or how long it's been that way. And then another realization set in, which is that the same basic concepts should apply to survivors somehow. So I propose that you shouldn't find out the exact AP cost to raise a darkened building until you light the place up, and shouldn't get an interior description of the ruination level of the building until you can actually see what's around you. Just estimate from the exterior description like zombies do. So the sum of what I'm suggesting here is this, though some of the effects for humans might be already implemented and I'm just too perpetually zombified to realize it: 1. Zombies should get some vague indication of duration of ruination status inside as well as outside except in darkened buildings. 2. Humans should have to install a genny in a darkened building before they find out the exact AP cost to repair it or get an indication of duration of ruination status on the inside. Also, Simon says take a shot or chug a beer every time someone posts the word "buff" or "nerf" in response to this suggestion. Ready... Set... Go! Discussion (Interior Description Mod) Welcome back Necro. Decay levels in building change based on time. Its more vague than the outside, but it exists. How would you change the messages. Im pretty sure survivors can't see repair coast until dark buildings are repaired. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 12:12, 30 October 2010 (BST) Yeah, I'll confirm this. There's no clear cost until the place is lit. Dark buildings: the bane of repairers everywhere. And while I'm here *Nukes the suggestion just for the lols* Since that won't be accepted, I'll say here that it's a good idea. I personally like it, adds a bit of atmosphere to the game. I mean, you aren't going to walk into a ruin and not notice that it's trashed :) Shadok T Balance is power 12:22, 30 October 2010 (BST) Why thank you, Ross. It must be pretty vague indeed, I didn't even realize it exists, but I guess I just wasn't paying enough attention. I tried to look up whether survivors could see repair costs in darkened buildings, but the Wiki pages I checked for Ruins and Decay didn't seem to mention it specifically. Anyway, guess that renders the whole thing moot.--Necrofeelinya 12:25, 30 October 2010 (BST) Y'know, I remember a time when you were pretty much guaranteed a rapid if not at all satisfactory response on this page... Geez... Fine, I'll do it myself... Buff! Nerf! Buff! Nerf! Buff! Nerf! Buff! Nerf! Buff! Nerf! Stagger to your feet and start cooking something but then pass out and wake up to the sound of the fire alarm as the room fills with smoke, take it off the heat, chuck it in the sink and open the windows and pass out, wake up late the next day to the sound of your obnoxious neighbors chatting loudly about their various illegal behaviors just outside your apartment door! Lather, rinse, repeat as necessary!--Necrofeelinya 12:19, 30 October 2010 (BST) *Downs ten cans of beer* --16:58, 30 October 2010 (BST) The way I see it, this suggestion buffs the zombies all to hell when what they really need is a nerf. Except in those areas they need buffs, because they need to be buffed, buffed, buffed right up if you ask me in lots of ways. But mainly they need nerfs. Survivors needs nerfs too...NERF GUNS! But that'd be a zombie buff if all of the survivors had to use nerf guns, but it'd also nerf the trenchiness of some trenchies, so that'd buff intelligent players, which is always a good thing. Who woulda thought you could buff players by literally nerfing them? —Aichon— 17:50, 30 October 2010 (BST) I have one question about this suggestion: How much nerf could a buff nerf buff if a nerf buff nerf got buff?--E Gadus 22:35, 30 October 2010 (BST) *Counts all the nerfs and buffs in both Aichon and E Gadus's posts, then adds two for his own* *Downs 23 cans of beer* For all I know, I might have miscounted. >_< --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 22:39, 30 October 2010 (BST) 42! ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 22:43, 30 October 2010 (BST) Suggestions up for voting XP for Feeding Moved to Suggestion talk:20101105 All Zombies Feed on Corpses; Feeding Grants 1 XP --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 18:15, 5 November 2010 (UTC)