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

Yet another fire suggestion

Timestamp: --Anarchomutualist says: The state is war, ⓐnarchy is order. 02:46, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Type: New feature

Scope: Buildings

Description: When a generator is destroyed, a fire starts. There are five levels for a fire, going from one to five. A building on fire has this message added to its description: There is a [minscule/small/medium/large/blazing] fire in the building. A building on fire cannot be scouted as a safehouse, for obvious reasons. Every action taken in a flaming building takes away 1 HP per level of fire (like a location-based infection; a level 3 fire would take 3 HP per action), except with Fire Safety (see below). A new item, Fire Extinguisher, would be found at Fire Departments, Mall Hardware Stores, and Fort Storehouses. Fire Extinguishers, when used, would have a 30% chance of reducing fire by one level. Firefighting (see below) would increase this change to 75%. The fire skill tree (Civilian class) would be: Fire Safety - negates all fire damage. Firefighting - increases fire extinguisher accuracy to 75%. And of course, the firefighting class would now get Firefighting on start.

Discussion (Yet another fire suggestion)

I'm sure building fire is a dupe. I'll see if I can find it... --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 02:56, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

How do the levels grow? 02:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

---

Bank Vault

Timestamp: BlackAttack 19:21, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Type: New Building(subset)

Scope: survivors

Description: Fallout Inspiration! So banks are kinda of a dull building, so I think that once you enter a bank, you have the option to enter the bank vault. The vault, when sealed(takes one AP to open and close) will be extremely heavily barricaded. You cannot free run into or out of a vault. Zeds and other can either destroy(temporally) the vault door to open it, or they know the Vault lock combination(Can be changed with a vault encoder). This vault won't have any items, just a place for a group(they can share the vault combo amongst themselves) to rest or for other survivors to rest easy for the night, unless a whole group of zeds are "knocking" on the vault door.

Discussion (Bank Vault)

Another EHB layer would make survivors nearly invincible against zombies, and it would especially make PKers/BHers virtually impossible to kill without a large zombie posse. If you want bonus protection, sleep in a death trap fort building (which already follows a similar principle, but isn't nearly as untouchable as the bank vault you'd suggest). -- Spiderzed▋ 19:27, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to agree with Spiderzed here. I still wish that bank vaults were good for something... ----Anarchomutualist _says: ^{The state is war, ⓐnarchy is order.} 23:22, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

As one of the few Dark building location types, Banks are very useful and not as dull as you suggest. In fact, I like to think of the vaults as the reason why the banks are dark. As Spidey, too overpowered. ~ 07:32, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

---

Improvised Flamethrower

Timestamp: Anachomutualist 18:19, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Type: New skill tree, new weapon

Scope: Science class, PKers (possible buff)

Description: Yes, I know, both concepts have been suggested before. But here's my version, which hopefully is different form both alone. The flamethrower would be a new weapon, found in vehicle depots. (Searching the workbenches, you find an obsolete flamethrower.) It would take 15% encumbrance, do 4 damage and have a base accuracy of 15%. Its ammo would be "Napalm," (found in fort arsenals and vehicle depots), which takes up 5% encumbrance and gives two shots per reload. The flamethrower could hold four shots, but would not be counted as a firearm. Also, the flamethrower would do one extra point of damage to human characters. This could be a buff to PKing (adding a new "mad scientist" type character), and the logic is that zombie flesh is already rotting away. There would also be a new skill tree under the science class. Because forts are so rare and hard to hold, the player would be able to synthesize fuel. Physics - +15% accuracy with the flamethrower Engineering - allows player to build flamethrowers (see below) Thermodynamics - +20% accuracy with the flamethrower Chemistry - allows player to make Napalm (see below) Recycling - gives the player four shots per Napalm instead of two A player with Chemistry could synthesize fuel when in a (powered) auto repair shop or fort vehicle depot. If they have a Beer and a Fuel Can, there is a button to "Synthesize Napalm." Selecting it removes the Beer and Fuel Can, and gives the player one Napalm. (Using some spare equipment and your knowledge of chemistry, you combine beer with gasoline to make napalm.) A player with Engineering would build flamethrowers in a similar fashion. If they are in a powered auto repair shop or vehicle depot with a Flare Gun, length of pipe and Spray Can, a button to "Build Flamethrower" would appear. Selecting it removes all three items and gives the player a flamethrower. (Using the flare gun as a trigger, the pipe as a barrel and the splay can to hold fuel, you build an improvised flamethrower.) There could even be a new scientist class, starting out with a flamethrower, physics and chemistry, and spawning in factories. (Before the outbreak, your worked as a chemist for a factory in suburb...Following the advice of the authorities, you've barricaded yourself in. Now you wait with a makeshift incendiary weapon, ready to strike at any zombies.) Any suggestions, constructive criticism, hate mail?

Discussion (Improvised Flamethrower)

---

• Whoops. Sorry about posting this in the wrong page. Mistake corrected. --Anachomutualist 18:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Hat Mail - The flamethrowers in Malton are obsolete by our standards, but to the trapped citizens, it's the best flamethrower technology they've ever seen. --VVV ^RPMBG 02:46, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

• Other than that, any problems? --Anachomutualist 02:50, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I have a few questions. Why would they run on napalm? Also why would beer and fuel make napalm, when the alcohol would actually dilute the fuel, instead of performing the necessary thickening required to create napalm? Also what is the point of another ranged weapon? 02:51, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Here are the answers to your questions, in handy list order:

"Napalm" is just the placeholder for the name of whatever fuel it would run on.

It's accounting for game mechanics (Beer can be found in the same place as fuel), but if you'd like to suggest any other consumable item that would work with it, I'd actually be happy to hear it.

I think that the science class is underpowered and underdeveloped, and I found a way to expand it while incorporating the "mad scientist" stereotype. --Anachomutualist 02:59, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Just use fuel cans. Also the way to go about the "mad scientist" thing is to use science, not weaponry. Brainstorm something using DNA extractors, needles, etc, rather than something military based. 03:02, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

One of the advantages a scientist would have would be the ability to build stuff the average yokel can't. Mad scientists are usually portrayed with some kind of special weapon, and zombie fiction includes its fair share of mad science. Also, I'd like to see the science class move away from NT and into "conventional" science. --Anachomutualist 03:14, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

This. Pistol vs. Shotgun is the most balanced part of the game. Do not disturb the balance. --VVV ^RPMBG 02:56, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

See above; I think that the science class is underpowered and underdeveloped, and I found a way to expand it while incorporating the "mad scientist" stereotype. --Anachomutualist 02:59, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Scientists are the most powerful harman class. Needles and FAKs outperform guns and claws with ease - just ask The Big Prick. (Just as a side remark until I get around to read and think through the suggestion.) -- Spiderzed▋ 13:07, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

After having read through it, fucking against. It's an useless weapon that takes up as much encumbrance as 2.5 shotguns, uses ammo that weighs 50% more than shotgun shells, and does as much damage as a pistol - it would never be a feasible choice compared to the existing guns. Plus, it violates the distinction between scientists and militaries - militaries get all the combat stuff, scientists all the humanitarian skills. -- Spiderzed▋ 19:32, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Suggestions up for voting

The following are suggestions that were developed here but have since gone to voting. The discussions that were taking place here have been moved to the pages linked below.

Recon Training

Discussion moved to Suggestion talk:20110110 Recon Training --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 22:11, 10 January 2011 (UTC)