Developing Suggestions

Suggestion Navigation

Current Suggestions • Suggestions up for Voting • Clothes Suggestions

Cycling Suggestions • Peer Reviewed • Undecided • Peer Rejected • Humorous

Suggestion Advice • Topics to Avoid and Why • Help, Developing and Editing

Developing Suggestions

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

Further Discussion

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

Nothing on this page will be archived.

Please Read Before Posting

Be sure to check The Frequently Suggested List and the Suggestions Dos and Do Nots before you post your idea. There you can read about many idea's that have been suggested already, which users should be aware of before posting what could be a dupe, or a duplicate of an existing suggestion. These include Machine Guns and Sniper Rifles. There users can also get a handle of what an appropriate suggestion looks like.
Users should be aware that this is a talk page, where other users are free to use their own point of view, and are not required to be neutral. While voting is based off of the merit of the suggestion, opinions are freely allowed here.
It is recommended that users spend some time familiarizing themselves with this page before posting their own suggestions.

How To Make a Suggestion

Format for Suggestions under development

Please use this template for discussion. Copy all the code in the box below, click [edit] to the right of the header "Suggestions", paste the copied text above the other suggestions, and replace the text shown here in red with the details of your suggestion.

===Suggestion===
{{suggestionNew
|suggest_time=~~~~
|suggest_type=Skill, balance change, improvement, etc.
|suggest_scope=Who or what it applies to.
|suggest_description=Full description. Check spelling and be descriptive.
|discussion=|}}
====Discussion (Suggestion Name)====
----

Cycling Suggestions

Developing suggestions that appear to have been abandoned (i.e. two days or longer without any new edits) will be given a warning for deletion. If there are no new edits it will be deleted seven days following the last edit.

This page is prone to breaking when there are too many templates or the page is too long, so sometimes a suggestion still under strong discussion will be moved to the Overflow-page, where the discussion can continue between interested parties.

If you are adding a comment to a suggestion that has the deletion warning template please remove the {{SNRV|X}} at the top of the discussion section. This will show that there is active conversation again.

Please add new suggestions to the top of the list.

Suggestions

Feeding Drag in Large Buildings

Timestamp:	Necrodeus ^{T M!} 02:46, 31 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	improvement
Scope:	Zombies with feeding drag in large buildings
Description:	Hello team. The feeding drag skill allows zombies to drag survivors of less than 12HP outside through an open door at the cost of 1AP. Therefore, if a zombie enters a large building through an open door, then makes its way through the building unimpeded (ie, through more open doors or just empty space), beats a survivor down to 12HP or below, there should exist the option to feeding drag said survivor through the building. It makes sense, as you are inside a building and simply dragging the unfortunate survivor somewhere else in the building, presumably towards the horde that generally congregates in the opened block. Now I know that this is the same as suggesting that I could feeding drag a wounded survivor through open streets, but I do think that as it is limited to the insides of large buildings it is hardly useful as a griefing tool, neither would it be game breaking, and it fits in with the idea behind the feeding drag as well - if a zombie feels the need to drag someone outside, why should the fact that it's slightly longer distance than normal dissuade him?

Discussion (Feeding Drag in Large Buildings)

Kind of like a zombie equivalent for the fort body dump? I like it. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 04:02, 31 August 2008 (BST)

Seems out of genre, normally a zombie will feed for itself with absolutely NO consideration for a horde. Though this skill is a good idea, it would be a bit pointless because if you have a survivor at 12 HP and most of the time the only large building you are in would be a mall, it would mean you drag someone near dead to a horde, either way, the survivor was already HIGHLY LIKELY to die unless terribly low on AP this skill is just useless. I say just stick with infectious bite. Chaplain Drakon Macar 04:12, 31 August 2008 (BST)

No. Feeding Drag and zambahz helping babahz is totally part of the genre -- as in, it's in the game ... So it's part of the genre. Zombies in Urban Dead have intelligence, more like in Return of the Living Dead than in Romero's movies. Regarding the suggestion, I think this is a great idea! But it should cost at least 2 AP to so, perhaps more. You usually don't have to drag as far, or through as complicated a series of buildings as in a fort, so I'm not sure if the same AP costs is in order... but perhaps... Still, in siege situations where this matters, we tend to just tend to kill rather than worry about dragging... However, even then, this ability would be FAR from "useless". --WanYao 06:08, 31 August 2008 (BST)

Ok.. I'm out of it.. I understood this as the equivalent of dragging a body outside the Forts. Which would mean you click the ability and you drag your target outside -- and you go with him, just like you would a normal feeding drag. No "half drags" to another corner of the mall -- it's all or nothing, all the way outside, or not at all. And that would cost 2 AP. And of course you'd still have to spend AP getting back inside and to the action, if that's your desire. There are some tricks to overcome with this... but it's a cool idea, nonetheless. --WanYao 06:37, 31 August 2008 (BST)

Yeah, I like it as well. Some people might call it greifing though Linkthewindow 04:21, 31 August 2008 (BST).

I was 50/50 between making it just like a body dump costing 2AP and making it like it is now, but certainly a feeding drag all the way outside for 2AP - like the survivor body dump - is just as keeping in genre and could be considered less of a potential griefing tool.

What if it just acted the same as feeding drag, so I end up outside. It costs 2AP, and then if I want to get back inside it just costs me the same as normal movement rates - so at least 1AP to just re-enter the building, and 2 AP to get back to where I was originally? It's hardly a griefing tool, you're only ever going to end up outside the building you were in, and at most 1 block away from where you were Necrodeus ^{T
M!} 12:38, 31 August 2008 (BST)

The Zombie Survival Guide

Timestamp:	Nequa 18:59, 30 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Possible ideas.
Scope:	Humans and zombies.
Description:	The zombie survival guide by Max Brooks is probally one of the best zombie books ever. For those how dont know what I am talking about look it up, if you love zombies you will love this book. But now let me get to my point, before people think I am writing a book review. As you can tell by title of the book, it talks about survifing zombies, so why not add some of the ideas from the book to Urban dead? I know I am not really giving a idea, but hwo knows? Maybe we can find something to at to Urban Dead in the book?

Discussion (The Zombie Survival Guide)

I got this gut feeling that this idea will not go well, but might as well try, right?Nequa 19:01, 30 August 2008 (BST)

Stop suggesting. Right now.

You really need to lurk more and longer, at both the game and the wiki. Go off and create yourself two new characters, a zombie and a PKer. This will round out your view of the game rather than the one dimensional view you have now just playing your survivor.

Read the rules on zerging before you create these characters.

Read the Frequently Suggested Ideas page and the archives to get a view of what has gone before and what we hate here.

-- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 19:06, 30 August 2008 (BST)

Nequa, I'm guessing you want tips in books? Well. If that's the case, Dupe of one of my 2 100% keeps suggestions. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{^{^{^{^{#nerftemplatedsigs}}}}} 19:14, 30 August 2008 (BST)

This is not a suggestion ... not really... Suggestions are supposed to be about game mechanics. However, vcery specifically in relation to this: Urban Dead is a stand alone game, and a stand alone "world"... It is based on various different zombie genre classics, certainly, but is its own thing... If you want to incorporate stuff from the ZSG, feel free, but do it as RP stuff.

And... Iscariot is correct in so far as you ought to be playing not just the survivor side of this game. It's more fun -- and leads to a deeper understanding of the mechanics etc. -- to play several "sides" and styles. However... to heck with PKing, that's boring, go for death culting instead... ;P --WanYao 20:40, 30 August 2008 (BST)

Definitely. Walk a mile in undead shoes (Its the equivalent of 2 normal miles) and you'll become a much better survivor. --Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 21:00, 30 August 2008 (BST)

And huddle in enough dark corners, listening to the groans and the battering on the barridaces... watch the uselessness of 90% of the survivor population, see it for yourself... learn their weakenesses... and how to exploit them... Long live the New Flesh!! :) --WanYao 21:15, 30 August 2008 (BST)

FWIW, probably half of the suggestions made (even the bad ones) are things that are in that book, though not necessarily taken from that book. There's unavoidable overlap. But as others said, UD is its own world, and also the mechanics don;t allow a lot of the details that book would suggest. For example, multi-floor buildings with retractable ladders? Great idea for Zombie Survival Guide, shitty idea for UD. Swiers 22:19, 30 August 2008 (BST)

There's nothing to develop, critique, or review. Please actually suggest things when making suggestions.--Karek^maps?! 08:44, 31 August 2008 (BST)

Private homes

Timestamp:	Nequa 17:18, 30 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	new building.
Scope:	anybody how enters it.
Description:	Why does it appear that there are no private homes in Malton? I know its a city and your more likely to find a privat home in the subburbs, but I do know there are private homes in the city. We dont really need private homes but it would add realism to the game. There could also be another benafit. Since anybody could have lived in that house, from a NRA gun nut, to some tech loving nerd, you could find anything in thear. But there should be list of items you could not find in the house. List of items you could NOT find in a house: Necrotech syringe DNA scanner Flak vest (there could be one there, but it seems hard to belive) fire ax Also here is the describtion you would see if you went in the building. -With power: You enter a well lit home, you start to feel like you were before the out break. -With no power: You enter a dark house. -when ruined: You enter a house and notice how everything is thrown apart, which grimly reminds you of what has happend here.

Discussion (Private home)

If I may ask, how long have you been playing the game? --Aeon17x 17:36, 30 August 2008 (BST)

To answer your question, about a week, I have been running around rhodenbank. Let me guess? There are private homes and I have just not found them yet?Nequa 17:39, 30 August 2008 (BST)

There are mansions, and various buildings around the city can be thought of as offices/condominiums, where you can imaging living places in.
There are other reasons why private homes aren't found on the map.

One is that they're too small, same reason why you don't put a single tree on the map (and for those that are large enough, see mansions).
Another is that with most survivors just looting around the city and zombie hordes chasing after them, most houses are in such a state of ruin that they are essentially unrecognizable, turning residential districts into wasteland.
Finally, they are quite insignificant in the grand scale of the survivor-zombie conflict that adding them now three years after the game has launched simply doesn't make the game any more enjoyable or fulfilling than it is before, and frankly it'll only be a waste of time and effort to put them in the game. --Aeon17x 17:51, 30 August 2008 (BST)

Then instead of adding homes how about updating the regular buildings to be more like apartments? Because most buildings have a RP (EX:pubs,police stations,forts) thing you can do with it, but the regular office buildings are boring. Maybe they could add my search idea without the need of a new building type?Nequa 18:19, 30 August 2008 (BST)

Your search idea is horrible. Normal buildings already do not have items; what you're doing here is the opposite in that you can find anything in them, and just for that it will be spammed. As for your roleplaying bit, that will take a much lower priority than improving UD gameplay, especially when you consider there is a suitable alternative (once again, mansions, and normal buildings aren't too shabby -- just add some decorations) and multiple other possible roleplaying locations. --Aeon17x 18:30, 30 August 2008 (BST)

There's no private homes because the private homes are usually at the outskirts of a city, and what we have in Malton...Is the big city. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{^{^{^{^{#nerftemplatedsigs}}}}} 19:16, 30 August 2008 (BST)

I usually just think of the street blocks as containing such houses. - User:Whitehouse 19:52, 30 August 2008 (BST)

Private homes are not really appropriate to the game. They can be assumed to exist on many blocks... because it's generally accepted that the block description refers to the most prominent or most utilised building on the block...

But... yeah... Nequa... please play the game for a while before posting suggestion ideas. Hang out and read this page for a while. And start playing some zombies, PKers, death cultists, whatever, as well a survivors. And join a good group or three. Barhah.com is a great board, and though it's zombie-centric, everyone is welcome. Beerhah.com is a good place to go for survivor stuff. Anyhoooo... back to suggestions stuff... --WanYao 20:47, 30 August 2008 (BST)

Display player name with broadcasts

Timestamp:	Zhani 23:24, 29 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Improvement
Scope:	Radio
Description:	Currently radio broadcasts are made anonymously. I just logged in to see a broadcast of a referrer/affiliate link for another game (spam), with no idea who it was. Displaying the player name would not only help prevent abuse like this, but it would help players get to know each other and develop a sense of community in-game. In the RP context, it could be assumed that each broadcast includes the transmitter's callsign, as is fairly standard in radio. The appearance of broadcasts would be changed to: 27.00 MHz: PlayerName transmits: "Transmission content" (15 minutes ago) The player's name would link to their profile.

Discussion (Display player name with broadcasts)

No. Being able to spread propaganda/misinformation over the radio is a vital part of many PKer groups' armoury. Also, radio spamming can be a fine art as well as a nuisance - it's a matter of perception. This would make the game less fun by discouraging broadcasts due to fear of being hunted down and killed.. --Bob Fortune ^RR 23:49, 29 August 2008 (BST)

Shrug. I agree with Bob to an extent but i think if they are in your contacts you should recognise their voice and be able to recognise who it is, mutual contacts would be a possibility but i think just having them in your contacts (ignored excluded) should be fine.--x o x o 01:46, 30 August 2008 (BST)

I would go even further. Currently radio messages read as 'Frequency:"Message."' If the broadcaster is a contact, I would change that to 'Frequency:A familiar voice says, "Message."' No other clues, no other changes. That way, PK-hunters will be given a slight boost in knowing what disinformation is being spread, but casual survivors wouldn't be able to tell the difference. How often are you immediately able to place a voice you might not have heard for years? -- Galaxy125 05:06, 30 August 2008 (BST)

I'll vote keep if the above commenter's suggestions where implemented. Downright giving out names would make BH-ing too easy and people would not spread messages over the radio, in case it annoys someone and they get shot. Linkthewindow 07:44, 30 August 2008 (BST)

In this case, realism should take precident over convinence. --BoboTalkClown 02:44, 30 August 2008 (BST)

No. Just bad. Even if you know who the person is, it doesn't mean that you would recognize them. These are not commercial radio station transmitter. They are military style radio's, and that would make it very difficult, if not impossible to recognize who is talking. And it doesn't do anything. Its anonymous in the same way as spray paint. - tylerisfat 04:53, 30 August 2008 (BST)

It's a dupe, no? ~Ariedartin • Talk • A KS J abt all 11:44, 30 August 2008 (BST)

Actually, I think for realism's sake, you WOULD be able to recognise a familiar voice on the radio. However, any changes to the system are going to nerf PKers and death cultists and anyone else who uses radios for misinformation. To be honest, anyone who's paying attention can usually figure out the difference between spam/misinformation and a real broadcast. You can also identify yourself... post an iWitness to you broadcasting... there are ways to verify your identity if you're broadcasting, if it's really important for you to do so... Thus, this is totally unneeded as well as being unbalancing. --WanYao 20:53, 30 August 2008 (BST)

What about recognising mutal contacts and hearing a familiar voice for the others? Or if you've heard someone broadcast from the same building, And/Or since you last heard/saw that person. How long would you remember? _■^■ 22:57, 30 August 2008 (BST)

Well, no. Bob Fortune summed it up right at the outset. And I explained a way to ensure a broadcast's authenticity if it's really THAT important for you to do so. Radio is a mass commication media, it's intended to get a message out to lots of people, fast. And properly used it is a VERY powerful tool in-game. But it can also be sabotaged and usurped and misused for disinformation, propaganda and just plain blatant lies -- and if you don't believe me, go watch Fox News to how that works... --WanYao 23:08, 30 August 2008 (BST)

Ok, if anonymity is important to the game and must be preserved, shouldn't any character wearing a balaclava or other disguise (zombie mask!) simply be identified as "A survivor" rather than by their name? Presumably, if any person didn't want to be identified by other survivors, they could prevent it. For example, someone in a balaclava free-runs into your safehouse, knocks down your barricades, and leaves. How would you know who they were? --Zhani 01:57, 31 August 2008 (BST)

These are unrelated topics. You could start a new topic for discussion about masks, but don't use that as reasoning for why your voice is recognizable. - tylerisfat 08:42, 31 August 2008 (BST)

Found the dupe Linkthewindow 05:29, 31 August 2008 (BST)

Body Dumping Paranoia in the Dark

Timestamp:	Midianian^{\|T\|T:S\|C:RCS\|} 21:33, 28 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Mechanic change
Scope:	Bodies in dark buildings
Description:	Got a sudden inspiration reading Kolechovski's suggestion below. I doubt he'd adapt his suggestion to this, so I'm gonna make it as my own. Dumping in dark buildings is successful only 25% of the time. Other times it gives the message You can't find any bodies in the dark. The "dump" button is always available in dark buildings. You still can't see the bodies.

Discussion (Body Dumping Paranoia in the Dark)

I would vote for this if you bumped it down to 20%, and added in a 20% chance to "stumble over" a dead body, getting the message While searching for bodies you trip over something soft. This fits paranoia better, because occasionally players will find a body but run out of AP before they can dump it. -- Galaxy125 21:44, 28 August 2008 (BST)

I don't think that works well. If you trip over the body, you should be able to dump it. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 22:04, 28 August 2008 (BST)

Good idea mechanics wise. I suppose a smart player would only try to dump a body if they themselves had killed somebody (and thus knew there was a body to dump) but I can see others wasting much AP trying to make sure the building is "clean". Swiers 22:19, 28 August 2008 (BST)

If you just tripped over a body the chance increases? Or possibly the chance to dump something increases. Or maybe you can just dump it next time. Or maybe, It or you hear it skitter away from and/or squeak. You dump the rat, Or it gets away from you. You stub your toe on a fancy urn. You run into a wall. You dump a cat outside. _■^■ 00:45, 29 August 2008 (BST)

How's about something REALLY simple? ... If a body is in your contacts list, you can see it. And if you can see it, you can dump it. A 50% failure rate for dumping is optional, I don't care either way. --WanYao 02:26, 29 August 2008 (BST)

I'm sorry wan yao, but thats really silly. If i know you, how is it going to make it any easier to find your dead body in the dark? Just because i could recognize the person means that i have a psychic connection? plus, you could just add the person just before they die, or if it happened in between turns, add it from the notification area or whatever.

Midianian, i think i'd vote keep. makes a lot more sense the the complete inability. i'd prefer %20, and no bonus after bumping into a body. if you're paranoid and frantically checking a room, you can get all disoriented easy, especially if its all broken down, with rubble and growth everywhere. - tylerisfat 03:25, 29 August 2008 (BST)

Because my friends glow!!! ;P --WanYao 07:48, 29 August 2008 (BST)

That's what happens when nuclear physicists get interested in bukkake. -- Galaxy125 07:53, 29 August 2008 (BST)

Hey, that glowing excuse might actually work. Surely someone who died in a fire (*cough*fuelcanplusflares*cough*) would still have some hot embers on their corpse for quite a while. --Aeon17x 12:22, 29 August 2008 (BST)

Ok, so if someone is in your contacts, and is killed by a fuel can and a flare, then you can see them in the dark due to the embers for a full 36 hours after death. Thats a pretty simple game mechanic solution. - tylerisfat 20:07, 29 August 2008 (BST)

Fires die fairly fast when set on humans. They would certainly not generate embers. --BoboTalkClown 02:46, 30 August 2008 (BST)

I was certainly kidding. - tylerisfat 04:47, 30 August 2008 (BST)

Tripping = nah. This suggestion = pretty kewl :) --x o x o 04:42, 29 August 2008 (BST)

I think the tripping over stuff should also be able to happen at random while you're barricading the place in the dark. That would be logical as while you were barricading you would be wandering around. Though the percentage should be much less than if you were specifically looking for the bodies.--SirArgo ^Talk 04:58, 29 August 2008 (BST)

How about any time you are in the dark and you barricade, search, or make an attack, you have a chance to "stumble across a dead body" equal to 5% x number of bodies present in your location, +50% if you just killed somebody. When you do, you get the option to dump a body. Body dumping (at least in dark buildings) would have to work like barricading does (IE, have an unpredictable rotating action url) for this to be implemented, but that doesn't seem a major obstacle.
Mind you, the above would totally replace the mechanics suggested by the OP.

Swiers 20:37, 29 August 2008 (BST)

So there would be no search for body button? That makes sence. That may make it a little more fair to a zombie that is remaining as a dead body till the coast is clear.--SirArgo ^Talk 21:04, 29 August 2008 (BST)

I don't like that, as essentially you'd get the body searching as a bonus to other activities that are already useful by themselves. Let's say a zombie breaks in. Somebody kills him and you start barricading. By the time the building is at VSB, it's quite likely that you've already bumped into the body. There's no paranoia there. Finding a body would be a nice surprise while doing other things, not an extra task that might or might not be necessary. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 22:46, 29 August 2008 (BST)

Dump dead bodies from dark buildings

Timestamp:	Kolechovski 20:48, 28 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Restoring normal ability
Scope:	Dead bodies and dark buildings
Description:	Under current game mechanics, you can’t dump dead bodies from dark buildings. How does this make any sense? You can get in and out of the building, even through Free Running, yet somehow you can no longer remove dead bodies? Or do the exits magically close somehow when you try to remove someone? Currently, you can see anyone hiding in the shadows of very dark buildings, but you can’t see/dump dead bodies. Even if you just killed the thing, you somehow can’t find its body, even though you’d be tripping all over it!? Once again, it doesn’t make sense. Only once you light up the place does it become possible to dump the dead. Since I see no reason for it to be physically impossible to find or dump dead bodies, they should always be recognizable and dumpable.

Discussion (Dump dead bodies from dark buildings)

A possible explanation is that people in dark buildings are found and attacked because they're breathing so loudly and their hearts are thumping. Similarly, standing zombies are wheezing. However, dead bodies emit no noise, and if you're tromping through a building hoping to step through a ribcage, you should be spending AP to do so. -- Galaxy125 21:48, 28 August 2008 (BST)

Or because they are fumbling with heavy furniture in the dark to barricade the building, or shooting guns, or...

Swiers 04:48, 29 August 2008 (BST)

Group Bonus

Timestamp:	Squid Boy 16:22, 28 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Balance change
Scope:	All denizens of Malton who belong to groups
Description:	OK, so while I used the template, I’ve brought this to the discussion page in a fairly informal manner because I don’t pretend to be a programmer and I don’t pretend to know what is possible. I like this idea, but I can see my own problems with it from a technical standpoint – and I’m hoping that others here might be able to help with the solutions on that front. Here’s the basic idea – in the real world groups are much stronger than individuals. People en masse accomplish much more, whether it be construction projects, armies, or lobbying government. Organization has an additive effect to efficacy - pretty much every time. Also – there is a benefit to being part of an organization for humanity. There is community, the transfer of knowledge, the advancement of the overall ends of society. With that in mind, I think there should be an in-game bonus for group activity. This will encourage folks to join groups, which in turn will raise the overall level of gameplay across Malton. This bonus would apply to ANY group working in concert – be in human, PK’er, death cultist, or zombie – so there are no powering issues between warring factions – only a power difference between the grouped and the ungrouped. Given there are few restrictions to joining or forming groups, the ungrouped would hardly become a put-upon constituency. So how to do it? Originally, I thought a simple tiered bonus for group size measured by the number of folks who have a common group name in their profiles. Say a 5% to-hit/search/cading bonus for folks part of groups from 25-49 members, and maybe 7.5% for 50-74 members, and 10% for over 75 members. The problem there would be that it encourages a new form of zerging. Folks would make “Group Scarecrows” that they would park far away from active group activity, but who have the group name in their profile. They’d technically not be in violation of alt abuse, and it would be very hard for group leaders to prevent, and of course the incentive would be to do it. So, I am wondering if the UD engine would be able to detect proximity effects and award bonuses that way? In this case, I’d lower the numbers required for the bonuses a lot – say 10-24 for the 5% bonus, 25-39 for the 7.5% bonus, and 40+ for the 10% bonus – and say that if you’ve got that many folks operating in one XX block radius, you get the bonus. Is such possible? If so, I think it would reward all the right behaviors in this game, and be pretty darn cool. My parameters are suggestions - they could be lowered, raised, modified. I am really interested first and foremost what folks think of the concept, THEN hammering out rational details that might actually be taken to voting. So, first "Is there a reasonable way this could work?" then "Would we want it if it could?" then "How exactly should it work?" What do you think?

Discussion Group Bonus

I'd vote kill, simply because you are not given a hidden bonus in real life from being in a group. Moral boost, maybe. But the rest you accomplish by working closely with your group. - User:Whitehouse 16:34, 28 August 2008 (BST)

Impossible. proximity detection would kill the server. Assume a 5 block radius, the game would have to, on every action, harvest information on userlists for 81 blocks (inside and out), run zerg detection routines on that information, and it would have to then count the number in the group. Now, imagine this happening to the server 30,000+ times a day. You would basically increasing server load more than a hundredfold all up (Quite probably by a factor of well over a thousand). As for the rest, without proximity detection, it collapses under the obvious zerg abuse you mentioned. Proximity detection is a myth, despite claiims to the contrary. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 16:41, 28 August 2008 (BST)

I think Grim_s is right - without some radical reorg of the account system it's just not possible. I was hoping some genius might have a work-around, but I bet he's right that there isn't one. Whitehouse - thanks for the comment - but I disagree with you. In real life you DO get the bonus - the door opens for the AARP in Washington that would never open for the unaligned individual. The group can clear a forest while the individual could spend a lifetime chopping a grove. I think it's moot though. --Squid Boy 16:59, 28 August 2008 (BST)

Even if possible, the advantage to being in a group should come from coordinating with other group members to do difficult tasks that an individual couldn't do. You get a big advantage from being in a well-organised group. You don't deserve an advantage from a bunch of people all spelling the group name correctly. This suggestion is a reward for crap metagaming, which we don't need. Garum 17:24, 28 August 2008 (BST)

You misunderstood my point. And Garum probably phrased it better than me. You get those advantages from working together, not from simply being in a group (at least not the type of advantages you were thinking of). Being in a group is a moral boost, working together with it creates results far better than that of individuals. - User:Whitehouse 17:34, 28 August 2008 (BST)

Oh I see, you're saying that giving an incentive for group behavior beyond already existing benefits doesn't have merit. OK, thanks. Fair enough.--Squid Boy 17:45, 28 August 2008 (BST)

If you want to encourage group work, then find ways for groups to work better together instead of just giving people buffs for having the same group tag. Zombie hordes have scent death, recently someone suggested a way for zombies to sniff out their buddies. Such suggestions, which strengthen the ties of a group, will give good results, the good results are the incentive. - User:Whitehouse 18:50, 28 August 2008 (BST)

Technical details aside, this simply isn't appropriate. This is an RPG, and in RPGs the benefits of groups are simply those of multiple players co-operating. When members of a group communicate and co-operate, they are more effective. If they don't, then they aren't- just like real life. Swiers 20:07, 28 August 2008 (BST)

i haveno clue about all the technical aspects, but this just isnt a good suggestion. kinda sucks to be on of those people who likes to stay unaffiliated, cause they get screwed on the deal.--Themonkeyman11 17:19, 29 August 2008 (BST)

If this was implemented, it would be possible for a user, for example, to put the name of a large group into their profile, and get all the benefits, without being a member of the group. --Jared^{Talk W! P!} 21:45, 29 August 2008 (BST)

This is illogical. The only bonus people should recive from being in a group is having someone to cover their back. No magic bonuses. No special abilities. Just that. --BoboTalkClown 02:48, 30 August 2008 (BST)

Restaurants

Timestamp:	Anotherpongo 15:12, 26 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	New building
Scope:	People who take notice of buildings
Description:	If Malton has pubs, it really should have at least a few fancy restaurants, which could potentially replace a few of the pubs in the richer areas of town. The Maltonians can't all have only ever eaten/drunk beer, peanuts and crisps outside of their homes. Mechanics Restaurant Dark building Can be barricaded, ransacked, ruined and have equipment installed normally. Internal description Unpowered You are standing inside an abandoned restaurant. The once-busy dining area lies in darkness. Powered You are standing inside an abandoned restaurant. Ransacked You are standing inside an abandoned restaurant. The chairs and tables are overturned, and cutlery and napkins litter the floor. Search rates (normal, if dark condition were not applied) Knife (3%) (kitchen knives) Wine (6%) (the finest in town) Mobile Phone (1%) (some careless people...) Menu (6%) (Flavour item, when used displays "The menu reads: <random fancy dishes>", and flavour text "You think about them hungrily" (currency not specified).) Clothing a chef's hat (white) (obviously) an apron (white/black) (waiters) standard generic formalwear (maitre d'hôtel, sommelier, general higher-ranking service staff)

Discussion (Restaurants)

Can we have one at the corner of the map? We shall call it, "The Restaurant at the End of Malton"... :3 --Aeon17x 16:44, 26 August 2008 (BST)

I don't see why not --Diablor 01:53, 27 August 2008 (BST)

*Whines* Pubs (Arms) aren't fancy enough for you?
Mah Pubs not fancy enough for you, foo? Only if there is a Pub at the end of the world.. Already.. _■^■ 02:51, 27 August 2008 (BST)

I like it, but I think the menu should be just like a newspaper with different flavour text. For that matter, would newspapers be suitable to be found here? I Am Sabbo 03:07, 27 August 2008 (BST)

A dark restaurant? Dunno about where you're from but around here people put big ass windows on restaurants coz ppl like to see outside...also a stupid idea. Pointless and you would have to think up some ridiculous way to explain why everyone in malton thought it was a pub but it turned out to be a restaurant.--x o x o 04:54, 27 August 2008 (BST)

It was always a restaurant and nobody ever thought it was a pub. And 2+2 has always equalled 5. And we have always been at war with Eurasia. And darkness really depends on the restaurant, but good point. --Anotherpongo^Where? 11:45, 27 August 2008 (BST)

Not pointless. Knives are the best weapons for newbies, yet malls are the only places with > 1% chance of finding them. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 12:02, 27 August 2008 (BST)

As much as I hate suggestions that don't seem to solve any problems, we do need a TRB for knives, and this seems like a great way to do it. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 16:33, 27 August 2008 (BST)

Absolutely! TRP for knives, and logical and fun flavor. --UCFSD 17:17, 27 August 2008 (BST)

a suggestion so simple that it makes sence lol i say yea bring on the restaurants!--Fanglord2 02:37, 28 August 2008 (BST)

I Always vote for building suggestions-always love a change Linkthewindow 09:46, 28 August 2008 (BST)

Vote all you like, I'm pretty sure a building change suggestion has never been implemented. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 10:04, 29 August 2008 (BST)

Kevan has talked about doing it before_{(it's in his talk page archives for those curious few)}, it's not entirely out of the question.--Karek^maps?! 08:51, 31 August 2008 (BST)

I like this suggestion.--Themonkeyman11 17:16, 29 August 2008 (BST)

Asum(awesome)!!! Lol! --BoboTalkClown

Brain Rush, aka Insomnia, Final Draft

Timestamp:	User: Not completely terrible 21:12, 25 August 2008 (EST)
Type:	Skill
Scope:	Zombies, humans if they buy it as a zombie.
Description:	Similar to the body building skill but in reverse. Zombies who have the skill brain rush will get a rush of adrenaline, something zombies did not have before, as zombies are constantly developing. If revived, the player can still use this skill, as they will have even more adrenaline as a human. This skill adds 3 action points on to the maximum limit, giving you 53 action points when fully charged. The skill is in the zombie skill tree for 100 exp. Edited: deleted 75 exp for starting zombies, added ip limit solution, 3 action points.

Discussion (Brain Rush)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active conversation. It is marked for deletion in 3 days.

people might think its a bad idea, because of the "balanced" everything, but i would love having a bit more AP The only problem is - IP hit limit.--Piskus99 02:15, 26 August 2008 (BST)
I'd vote for this Shooty08 02:24, 26 August 2008 (BST)

None of the zombie skills ever cost 75XP, neither should this. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 02:25, 26 August 2008 (BST)

how are dead organisms making use of adrenal rushes? - tylerisfat 05:42, 26 August 2008 (BST)

I doubt the point as to whether zombies have functioning adrenergic receptors has been discussed, possibly because of the nonexistance of zombies. --Anotherpongo 15:38, 26 August 2008 (BST)

Should be 100xp like all Zombie skills, and should have 55 not 53xp (rounding up.) Other then that, it's fine. Some survivors might kill because they have to turn into a zombie to get it. Linkthewindow 07:10, 26 August 2008 (BST)

isn't there a rule that says dont mess with AP? i may be mistaken, but i thought there was.--Themonkeyman11 14:39, 26 August 2008 (BST)

According to the FAQ: There may eventually be character skills which modify the maximum AP and its recharge rate, but the basic starting-character settings will remain the same. Linkthewindow 09:46, 28 August 2008 (BST)

According to a paper I found in a NecroTech facility, This is untrue. Dead, Decaying Organisms, Their Bodies, Muscles, Nueral Pathways and Receptors. Humans with more Adrenaline, Couldn't that kill you? Zombies are constantly developing? Still 3 AP is fairly irrelevant, Leave the game be. _■^■ 02:34, 27 August 2008 (BST)

Add encumbrance section to the FAQs

Timestamp:	Kolechovski 01:41, 26 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Improvement
Scope:	The FAQs.
Description:	The FAQs does not include any information about encumbrance, and it is a common question among newbs as to what it means and how it works. So, I recommend adding the following paragraph to the game’s FAQs. What is encumbrance, and how does it work? Encumbrance is based on what items you’re carrying, and how much. Each item has a set encumbrance, based on its weight and bulkiness. As you accumulate more items, your encumbrance increases. When it hits or exceeds 100%, you will be unable to pick up any more items until you use or drop some of the ones you’re carrying. Dropping items doesn’t cost any AP. If your encumbrance is 98%, and you pick up a generator (20%), your encumbrance will equal 118%. You will always be able to pick up any item before reaching 100%, no matter how far over the limit the final item takes you.

Discussion (Add encumbrance section to the FAQs)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active conversation. It is marked for deletion in 4 days.

Good idea. But there are always people who are negative .--Piskus99 02:17, 26 August 2008 (BST)

This doesn't go here. Go harass kevan on his talk page.--x o x o 06:39, 26 August 2008 (BST)

Well...It's still gonna be a suggestion, none-the-less. And since it is, here's a Reviewed dupe. Now I wouldn't know about this dupe if it wasn't one of my 100% keeps suggestions. :P --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{^{^{^{^{#nerftemplatedsigs}}}}} 15:06, 28 August 2008 (BST)

I see. I'll harass Kevan some more; thanks for the link.--Kolechovski 20:29, 28 August 2008 (BST)

Insomnia

Timestamp:	User:Not completely terrible 13:43, 25 August 2008 (EST)
Type:	Skill
Scope:	Survivors, and zombies if they buy it as a human.
Description:	This is similar to the body building skill. This skill adds 10 action points on to any person's AP, giving them a maximum of 60 action points. Though it will take longer for a person to be fully charged, I don't see much of a downside in that. Also being similar to body building, a zombie that wants to have insomnia can go get themselves revived and buy this skill as a human, then kill themselves from a window and go back to being a zombie. Since this will be a major skill, it will be expensive, at the cost of 300 experience points for any class.

Discussion (Insomnia)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active conversation. It is marked for deletion in 3 days.

Oddly enough I put this exact same thing in a few months ago but with different justification (AP buffer (+10 max AP, no change to regen)) and people started with the don't mess with AP argument. I'd still say yes to this although 300XP does seem a little high. --Kamikazie-Bunny 20:58, 25 August 2008 (BST)

There are players out there with >10000XP. To them it doesn't matter. High XP cost is not going to make it balanced. --Anotherpongo 15:40, 26 August 2008 (BST)

Simply no, ap is the way it is to prevent one-man armies. Someone could go from Dulston all the way to Yagoton (I think) if they had 60 ap. --Diablor 21:03, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Its an interesting idea, though for people who have played forever, they have more than enough XP for this skill, and new people will have trouble fighting against others who get more actions per day and have more HP. Not to mention people who have honest multiple accounts (e.g. three roommates with separate accounts) will have problems with the IP hits. I assume this is going to get shot down. Shooty08 21:08, 25 August 2008 (BST)

This would be very powerful in situation where people can safely regen to 60 AP. I essentially makes a well-played zombie 20% stronger; 60 AP is enough to tear down 15 levels of barricades, which is most buildings under EHB. 60SP uded n conjuntion with DIRTNAP makes that tactic more powerful, too. And it clearly makes scouting and building repair more effective / less risky.
My guess as to the ultimate impact is that people would double the number of characters they play, playing them on alternate days, using 60 AP each day, or something along those lines. And I think that is a bad thing.

Swiers 21:46, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Make it a zombie skill that crosses over to survivors, and I'll consider. Maybe cap it at 55 AP instead of 60. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 22:03, 25 August 2008 (BST)

As Midi. --BoboTalkClown 00:19, 26 August 2008 (BST)

Perhaps, if the 'extra' 10AP came at a reduced rate, e.g. 1 hour for 1 AP? --Blake Firedancer ^{T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T.} 02:01, 26 August 2008 (BST)

For FAQ sake, already!! --WanYao 06:40, 26 August 2008 (BST)

Exactly! From the FAQ: There may eventually be character skills which modify the maximum AP and its recharge rate, but the basic starting-character settings will remain the same. -Pesatyel 07:39, 26 August 2008 (BST)

wan you is pun-ny.--x o x o 09:25, 26 August 2008 (BST)

Will have problems with IP hits and balance. I like the idea about slower recharge that an above editor placed, though. Linkthewindow 07:10, 26 August 2008 (BST)

Yeah, that is kinda nifty. It might work to allow characters that idle out to re-join the game with 70 AP or some such IF they are not corpses. Simulates them doing something with their time.

Swiers 05:10, 27 August 2008 (BST)

No! Make this a zed skill and I'll consider. --UCFSD 17:23, 27 August 2008 (BST)

Bandoleer

Timestamp:	Kamikazie-Bunny 13:13, 25 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Humorous Items
Scope:	Trenchies!
Description:	The Bandoleer (Bandolier to you Americans) is the ultimate trenchie must have fashion accessory this season! Location: Forts 2% Encumbrance: 16% Ammo Capacity: 16 shotgun shells Purpose: None (arguably inventory management) Features: Up to 16 shotgun shells can be placed in a bandoleer, shells in a bandoleer have 1% encumbrance. When a trenchie has a bandoleer clicking on a shell loads it into a shotgun, if no guns are available then it is loaded into a bandoleer. Clicking on the bandoleer removes one shell from the bandoleer and places it in a shotgun, if no guns are available then the shell is loaded into a bandoleer. Notes: In the event that someone is incapable of the basic maths 16% encumbrance + (16 shotgun shells at 1%) = 32% encumbrance. 16 shotgun shells at 2% encumbrance = 32% encumbrance. Bandoleers are always found empty, previous trencie raiders emptied them of their contents before they engaged their brains!

Discussion (Bandoleer)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active conversation. It is marked for deletion in 1 days.

"Purpose: None" Do I really have to say anything else? --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 13:45, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Also, ammunition doesn't weigh anything when they're loaded in a firearm. Shotguns are 6% both empty and fully loaded, pistols 4% likewise. Making them weigh something when they're in the bandoleer is inconsistent. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 13:49, 25 August 2008 (BST)

I could give it 24% encumbrance and drop the shell weight if you want it serious and with a purpose (allowing you to carry 33.3% more ammo) but then I'm sure people would scream "TRENCHCOATER!" and it wouldn't be so humorous... --Kamikazie-Bunny 13:54, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Jokes about Trenchcoaters are edgy and cool./sarcasm --Nitro378^{T JNL} 15:06, 25 August 2008 (BST)

It comes from the Freedom "bandoulière," so American spelling is always better. -- Galaxy125 16:40, 25 August 2008 (BST)

I know what the translation is (roughly) but what do you mean by "It comes from the Freedom" the freedom bit is confusing me? --Kamikazie-Bunny 17:47, 25 August 2008 (BST)

France = FREEDOM! Because in France they have actual democracy, and active citizens, and socialised health care. And they're also very open about sexuality and tend to be well-educated and literate, and are just generally pretty progressive and cool and stuff, taken as a whole. And, I think there were some Americans a few years ago, who were all, like, jealous of that, and so they made up some bad names and said some nasty stuff about France... And forgot that chips were actually invented by a Belgian. And some stuff like that. I think that was what he was referring to. --WanYao 07:35, 26 August 2008 (BST)

Since this has no game impacts, you could just code a greasemonkey extension to do the same thing. And people pretty much have. Swiers 18:42, 25 August 2008 (BST)

i think its a good sugestion except for the shells weight in the Bandoleer.......Canada rules!!!!!!!!!!!!!!--Fanglord2 13:07, 26 August 2008 (BST)

Doors on the outside

Timestamp:	User:Whitehouse 12:23, 25 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Building change.
Scope:	All buildings in the city, everyone.
Description:	Currently it would seem that barricades are constructed on the outside of the buildings. This is evident because barricades are destroyed first, then the doors can be opened once the barricades are gone. This suggestion simply proposes to make it so that the barricades are on the inside and can only be attacked after the doors have been opened. This change would have to be accompanied by "open door" button being added to the zombie interface for those who have memories of life. Another thing that would change with this is that doors are no longer automatically closed upon the addition of a barricade level, it is an action that must be done first, or else the cades are open to attack from newbies. Pros: Easier to spot which buildings newbie zombie will be able to successfully attack and enter. Higher level zombies can move around suburbs opening the doors of all buildings making them "attackable" for lower level zombies. Makes sense, although that might not be a pro if it comes in the way of game mechanics. Cons: AP cost for attacking buildings and entering goes up by one AP, because the action of opening the door is no longer automatic upon entering, but an action taken previously. Newbie feral zombies can't help an uncoordinated attack on a building with doors untill someone opens the doors (a horde of newbies would be at a disadvantage, but they are today too unless someone has memories of life). AP cost for barricaders is up by one AP, because they have to secure the doors to be safe from newbie attacks (no longer automated). Not sure if this is pro or con considering barricade to deconstruction rate. I checked Peer Reviewed and had a quick search but didn't find any similar ones, anyone know of any dupes? If not, is this suggestion a possibility or should I just toss it out? Criticism please. User:Whitehouse 12:23, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Discussion (Doors on the outside)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active conversation. It is marked for deletion in 4 days.

"Currently it would seem that barricades are constructed on the outside of the buildings. This is evident because barricades are destroyed first, then the doors can be opened once the barricades are gone." - Actually, all the in-game text points to the fact that barricades are constructed on the inside... But that actually does point out a logical inconsistency, because they why ARE doors the last thing to open? Unless you assume, as I often do, that you're not just dealing with outer walls and one room... Instead, think of all the zombie movies where the survivors are getting overwhelmed and move further back inside, closing doors behind them...
"Newbie feral zombies can't help an uncoordinated attack on a building with doors untill someone opens the doors" -- This is unfortunately simply horrible. Sure, newbies can't get past doors atm, but they can tear down cades and wait around for someone to notice and go inside... In any event they can still contribute to "the cause"... With this change, you's take all that away... it's a HUGE newbie nerf, ultimately.

Nice try... and the whole doors mechanic is messed up, IMO, all round... But I don't think this is the way to fix it. --WanYao 12:44, 25 August 2008 (BST)

While I do agree that at first this might seem extremely cruel to newbies, it also does point out to them where they should and should not attack. A building without doors (churches, junkyards) are good choices, because newbies normally can't get the cades down in the first place and once they do the doors are always waiting. And we know that levelling on cade destruction takes too long anyway. So if you think about it, survivors going outside to close the doors is highly unlikely, meaning that once the doors have been opened they'd be likely to stay open longer anyway. But I see your point about the benefit to the overall cause. Also, interesting point about outer walls and inner doors, never thought of that. - User:Whitehouse 12:55, 25 August 2008 (BST)

So, you couldn't close doors from the inside after the building has been barricaded? That would probably result in most EHB buildings having open doors, because closing them would be a lot of work. More than the 3 AP to close doors on a VSB building (exit, close, enter). I think I like this. Would the status of doors be visible inside? There would be the barricades in front so you couldn't see them properly... --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 13:06, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Yes, the idea was that you couldn't tell if the doors were open or not from the inside (thus resulting in a cost to check and fix it if they were open), but from the outside it would be made very clear. Although it seems that I missed a few things when I began to think about this suggestions.. now I don't know if you would be able to see barricade level. That would require glass doors.. and that would be a huge problem. - User:Whitehouse 13:09, 25 August 2008 (BST)

The way I see it, the barricades get built just inside the building entrance(s), and when those fall, survivors take shelter in rooms that have secured doors. Churches typically have only one interior room of any significant size... Swiers 18:47, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Yeah, I'm beginning to see it that. And this suggestion got more complicated that I had expected because of obstruction view of barricades.. and the fact that it adds one more AP to both sides in the eternal AP struggle.. I'm not really seeing a way of fixing this. - User:Whitehouse 18:56, 25 August 2008 (BST)

The only hope of truly fixing it would be a dual layer system, where lightly and below is counted as whats done on the inside, and done first, while above is counted as outside (things dropped out of windows, etc.), and newbies can attack down to lightly, but from there the door must be opened first. Unfortunly this has questionable methods to it, as well as the inconsistancy pointed out with survivours retreating further inside, but then again this could be countered with the fact only one door must be opened...--G-Man 05:13, 26 August 2008 (BST)

I really don't think your using logic well if you think things dropped from windows would equal strong barricades, while things built strongly are light. i think swiers has it right, the cades and doors are not nearly as flawed as most people think. the front doors might not even be there any more, but rather, the street front of the building is caded as a whole, and when that is broken through, the survivors are holed up behind a door. thus, you can't cade while zombies are inside, because its more then just dragging something in front of the door. - tylerisfat 05:35, 26 August 2008 (BST)

Very interesting. I like the idea...helpful for new zombies. Just to clarify though, can you close a door from inside if the building is barricaded? Because it wouldn't make sense if you could, but would mean almost all doors would end up being opened by older zombies if you couldn't... -- Ashnazg 1017, 26 August 2008 (GMT)

Instead, think of all the zombie movies where the survivors are getting overwhelmed and move further back inside, closing doors behind them... Well if the were several rooms in the building (wich makes sence) couldent the survivor just barricade each room?????? that would be unfair but it would just be common sence or the survivors could just try to hold the door closed.....--Fanglord2 13:01, 26 August 2008 (BST)

yes, it makes sense. but you can't do that for the same reason you can't have multi level buildings. Maybe survivors are hiding in those buildings that have 2 doors to go through before you get inside, and cade the space inbetween.--Themonkeyman11 14:50, 26 August 2008 (BST)

It aso makes sense just to assume that multiple levels of barricades add up to EHB. Plus, you only find so much stuff to pile up. Barricade strength really depends on the total mass used, and it won't matter much if its in one thick layer or multiple thin ones.

Swiers 15:20, 27 August 2008 (BST)

May as well make a door attackable to begin with, don't you think? I'll bet that no matter how many hinges and locks you put on that thing, it's got to be more flimsy than an extremely heavily barricaded hallway. ~Ariedartin • Talk • A KS J abt all 16:39, 26 August 2008 (BST)

yes, it makes sense. but you can't do that for the same reason you can't have multi level buildings. i thought there was multiple levles seeing that you can jump out of a building window and get hurt or fall out of a building that is ransaked and get hurt, so there is multiple lvls because the most you cna get from jumping out of a 1 story buildings i like i dont know a twisted anckle... just thought id say that....Fanglord2 02:32, 28 August 2008 (BST)

No More Piñatas

Timestamp:	Aeon17x 04:09, 25 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Mechanics change
Scope:	Everyone
Description:	You know, I just realized that the whole concept of buildings turning into piñatas doesn't make sense when you consider how ruin works in the first place. Think about it. When you ransack a building, the lockers get punched, the desks get overturned, and the whole place is ruined. But wait! What exactly did you destroy when you ransack the building? The lockers. The desks. These are the exact same stuff you use to build barricades, and they are the ones that are explicitly wiped out when a zombie ruins a building. So I propose something. Whenever a building block is ruined, then all the barricades it had before will instantly fall down to nothing and the building is reverted to secured door status.

Discussion (No More Piñatas)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active conversation. It is marked for deletion in 1 days.

Makes no sense. They are damaged, not destroyed. Thats why they can be fixed. The other two problems with your suggestion is that first, barricades are needed before the building is ruined, so they were already built. Second, is the fact that even damaged stuff ca provide an effective barricade. Dont belive me, go to a junkyard and try to walk through a garbage mound. Leave pinatas alone. They are not common, and dont take much time to disable and repair. After all, you only need to get them down to VSB before you can walk in and fix it. Boo hoo, it costs you 20ap or so, who cares. Across the city that will be given to maybe one person a day. Given the thousands and thousands of spare people, it doesnt hurt. So stop whining and see that it isnt a problem, and is actually a really interesting method of resource denial. To prevent pinatas, try not to leave zombies inside a barricaded building. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 04:57, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Unfortunately the people with the task of spending that 20ap are the same ones who don't have the spare ap because they spent it repairing buildings for 80ap+. All these little pro-zombie things work fine because if you divide the cost by the 20000 survivors out there they are nothing, when however you look at it in terms of the few people who actually bother doing anything rather than shooting zombies outside it becomes apparent that actually pinatas do cause problems. I like 'em coz they've got character but don't just write it off as 'its .0000001ap a day each', coz its not.--x o x o 06:59, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Dont belive me, go to a junkyard and try to walk through a garbage mound. >> I know someone who tried this before, it wasn't a pleasant experience... (nail went through safety boot, ow). Anyway, I guess I agree with you on leaving piñatas as it is when you said it's a method of resource denial. --Aeon17x 11:37, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Dupe. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 11:39, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Why one earth is everyone trying to nerf pinatas? [...] Couple of points re: pinatas

They are actually quite hard to actually pull off in practice. They almost always require 2 or usually more people to coordinate closely.
At most you're dealing with maybe 10 barricade levels to get a pinata down from EHB++ to VSB++ ... Meaning it's not that bad.

This anti-pinata trend is just survivors whinging -- and trying to nerf some small but sometimes useful zombie tactic/mechanic -- because they can't do everything all on their oddy knockies. Again. And people wonder why the "trenchcoater" label keeps getting tossed around... --WanYao 11:42, 25 August 2008 (BST)

STOP WITH THE ANTI-PINIATA SUGGESTIONS!!! As a survivor I like piniata's it allows for some good roleplaying such as the last survivor barricaded himself inside starved to death for fear of facing the zombies and is now looking for a different kind of meal! My only problem with them was when I was trying to repair a ruined building, spent most of my AP getting in, killed the zombie, dumped, repaired the building and had major -AP so that when I finally could do something the zombie had rose, broke in, killed me and re-ruined the building! Apart from that they're fun in a bun. --Kamikazie-Bunny 12:15, 25 August 2008 (BST)

And I suggest: No More Barricade Strafing. ~Ariedartin • Talk • A KS J abt all 16:51, 26 August 2008 (BST)

Pinata Decay

Timestamp:	Swiers 02:25, 25 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	adjustment
Scope:	barricaded ruins
Description:	The barricade level on any ruin would drop by 1 per day. This prevents pinatas from being a long-term problem (while leaving them a viable short term nuisance) and also rewards zombies from holding onto malls for a log time by getting rid of 'cades on the 3 "non-entry" corners for free. Ruin descriptonas already seem t imply things fall down over time; it make sense this would apply to barricades.

Discussion (Pinata Decay)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active conversation. It is marked for deletion in 1 days.

Any pinata nerf I'm good with and Swiers tends to make sense --Diablor 02:30, 25 August 2008 (BST)

I'd support it, I'm tired of having to look around for a ruined mall entrance as a zombie. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 02:56, 25 August 2008 (BST).

I disagree with an automatic level drop. What about, instead, zombies just get a bonus to hit?--Pesatyel 03:46, 25 August 2008 (BST)

I think this is more to aid survivors dealing with pinata's, and although I like the susgestion, I would rather see a larger time period then one level per-day. Seems like it'ed make it a bit too easy to take back the suburbs long behind zombie territory, as starting from inside a green suburb supplying without AP wasted on conflict, it'ed already be well on its way by the time you arrived, considering the current system. It would however help those on site a bit better.--G-Man 06:12, 25 August 2008 (BST)

I could go for a bonus to hit, or maybe better, all hits destroy two levels. And that would be ALL hits, both from survivors (lessing the impact of pinatas) and zombies (making emptied malls easier to clean up).
I don't see how the decay of 'cades would make re-taking zombie held burbs easier. Its not pinatas that stop survivors from moving in and setting up camp in Riddleybank...

Swiers 06:44, 25 August 2008 (BST)

A good idea. Don't like the bonus hit thing, it benefits all the good guys and doesn't screw over anyone. Balanced and good. Another quality Swiers suggestion.--x o x o 07:02, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Swiers = Suggestion gold.--Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 09:48, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Why one earth is everyone trying to nerf pinatas? Even you sweirs?!?!? The end truly is nigh... Couple of points re: pinatas

They are actually quite hard to actually pull off in practice. They almost always require 2 or usually more people to coordinate closely.
At most you're dealing with maybe 10 barricade levels to get a pinata down from EHB++ to VSB++ ... Meaning it's not that bad.

This anti-pinata trend is just survivors whinging -- and trying to nerf some small but sometimes useful zombie tactic/mechanic -- because they can't do everything all on their oddy knockies. Again. And people wonder why the "trenchcoater" label keeps getting tossed around... --WanYao 11:40, 25 August 2008 (BST)

For a maxed survivor it takes an average of 50 AP to take down 10 levels of barricades. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 11:55, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Just to clarify, that doesn't mean I want Piñatas removed. The 50AP can easily be spread over several days and it cannot be increased by anyone in the meantime. Just saying that it's not a small cost to fix them. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 12:08, 25 August 2008 (BST)

WanYao- trust me, I know exactly how difficult it is to establish a pinata, and how little obstruction they are to survivors reclaiing an area (if you do the math, they arguably HELP survivors). That's one of the main reasons I'd favor a logical nerf to them; it would discourage zombie players from wasting time on them, and reduce survivor whinging abut unrealistic zombie tactics. Instead, this suggestion gives them the REALISTIC advantage of FREE BARRICADE DESTRUCTION on ruined buildings! That means any "not quite pinata" that was only VSB+++, or any mall corner that zombies didn't tear down the barciades on, would now require MORE effort for survivors to reclaim as a well 'caded fortress.

Swiers 19:06, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Personally I don't find Pinatas to be that great. Funny little prank and that is about it. Now, seeing as barricades are oddly enough on the outside of buildings (doors are the last to fall..) it makes sense that they are supported by the walls, and that when the walls begin falling and crumbling that the barricades would suffer too. Either instability (extra levels falling per successful attack) or simple decay (levels falling over time). - User:Whitehouse 11:59, 25 August 2008 (BST)

The only good and realistic anti-piniata suggestion... It makes sense that as a building collapses the things on the outside (the barricades fall of). --Kamikazie-Bunny 12:19, 25 August 2008 (BST)

I don't like the message this gives to survivors. The message being "waiting is good". Every day you wait, the average cost to fix a piñata would drop by 4 AP (5AP saved per barricade-level dropped, 1AP increse in ruin-repair). This makes fixing piñatas now instead of later a bad tactic. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 12:43, 25 August 2008 (BST)

And what, allow survivors to keep their counterpart to pinantas? I'm sorry, but I cannot agree. This is only going to make one of the most difficult tactics even harder to chew. I've accidentally found myself in pinatas before, and I actually like being a little prize sweet. What I don't like, though, is not being able to bring up the barricade levels to annoy the survivors desperately knocking at the very defenses meant to protect them. I suggest barricade decay applies to all buildings. At one level per day, it won't be a big difference to survivor communities, but it'll reduce the effectiveness of both pinatas and barricade strafing. And let us remember, a pinata is the harder one to pull off, not cade strafing. ~Ariedartin • Talk • A KS J abt all 18:43, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Computers

Timestamp:	Nequa(Link:http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/User:Nequa) 5:01 (central time), 24 August 2008
Type:	improvement.
Scope:	Humans.
Description:	As most people know. When you enter a NT building you can acess the necro net if you have the right skills. So why not have regular computers? I belive having a computer would be great. People would be able to send emails to other buildings across Malton. Another possibilty would be the ability to store info (EX: in police stations the Malton Police deparment can have a computer and allow people to see a in game rogues gallery and check for Pkers in the area). Computers could also have security so only people with a password can enter, that or you have the hacker ability which allows you the chance to hack the computer. To balance things out, computers would need power (obivous one), a internet connection for emails, they can be destroyed, they could have a viruse and thats all I can think of right now. If you have any sujestions on how to improve this idea, you know were to put them.

Discussion (Computers)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active conversation. It is marked for deletion in 1 days.

Explain to me exactly how a city under military quarantine, sparsely powered by Portable Generators, and under constant attack from Zombies, has city-wide internet access? What's more, You haven't told us what problem in the game your suggestion solves, or why it needs to be done. This is a zombie apocalypse, not a quaint modern city with a small problem with the undead. This suggestion is just never going to pass in any way shape or form. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 23:30, 24 August 2008 (BST)

I'd vote keep, assumig you could also play World of World of Warcraft. Swiers 23:38, 24 August 2008 (BST)

I dont know, explain to me why the necronet works? Any way you only need the internet to email people. You can still store stuff on computers without the internet. User:Nequa/Sig 5:53 (central time), 24 2008

How would the password be set? Could the hacker change the password? What skill tree would the hacker be under? How would zombies disable this? If disabled how would one repair it? Would there always be computers or would you have to set them up? If so, where could you find computers? How much ap would it cost to use them? Questions like these you must answer fairly quickly before you get spaminated. But as for your suggestion it's a possible dupe, however I do like the idea of computers. --Diablor 01:30, 25 August 2008 (BST)

I think this is a fine idea but like Diablor said you need to flesh it out some. My main question is; what is the hacking for, is it like radio operation and is required to use the computer or what?--Ninja13 03:12, 25 August 2008 (BST)

No, its for bypassing the security. My idea alows you to have security so no spies can see what you have in ther TO easly. User:Nequa/Sig 9:23 (central time), 24 2008

Necronet, I believe, is a hardened mainframe computer inside the necronet buildings. From what I can read of your suggestion, this is merely another, uncessary, form of communication. Granted it IS ingame communication, survivors already have enough to not need this overlycomplicated way of doing it.

And, lastly, if your going to sign your posts, just add ~~~~ at the end.--Pesatyel 03:58, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Necronet is less of an internet sort of thing and more of a database. Plus, patchy radio makes more sense for an apocalyptic setting. --Shawn O'Hara 20:43 Aug 25

Tracking

Timestamp:	Kamikazie-Bunny 20:31, 24 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	More things to do!
Scope:	Scientists/Zombies
Description:	A recent software update by Necrotech has enhanced the NecroNet to enable tracking of tagged zombies. (Ingame justification) As every good scientist knows the NecroNet is very handy for tracking the local zombie presence. This update now allows Scientists with NecroNet Access to attempt to locate known tagged zombies... In addition to the current actions in NT buildings a new button labelled 'Locate' next to a drop down list of the users contacts is added. When the user selects a contact and clicks Locate a response is generated with either of the following response: "Error: Target not found. Subject may be out of range/untagged. "Target located at (xx,yy) - (location name) - (suburb)" In order for a contact to be located it must be dead, tagged and in range of the NecroNet (that means within the 9x9 grid of a powered NT building).

Discussion (Tracking)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active conversation. It is marked for deletion in 1 days.

I'd like to point uot some huge problem with it, but (aside from dubious flavor logic) I don't see any. At worst it maybe allows PKers to be located a little to easily (when dead.) If anything, that might encourage them to hang out in the NT dead zones as zombies. Nice tactical challenge.
Of course, there's always the griefer angle. Somebody could use this to track down your character every time you were waiting for a revive (especially if you were in a group that never left a certain area) and kill you as a zombie before you could get revived. Ugh. Swiers 23:46, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Yeah, Seems pretty Grieftacular... Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 00:09, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Not so much so I don't think it shouldn't pass. --Diablor 01:33, 25 August 2008 (BST)

It makes since to me as I never quite understood the point of DNA extraction in an of itself. Question I have is what are the chance of success?--Pesatyel 04:01, 25 August 2008 (BST)

You don't understand the point of DNA extraction, WTF??? Are you for real????!

Why oh why didn't I just stay away from this page? like i said i would......... --WanYao 11:45, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Wan... was WTF for me/idea or Pesatyel? Either way don't suppose you have any improvements to suggest. Damn EdConflicts! --Kamikazie-Bunny 11:55, 25 August 2008 (BST)

That was for me. I KNOW what the extractor does, I just don't see the logic behind it, from a roleplaying/realism perspective. I see a zombie and use the extractor....then what? I get his name and I know if he has brain rot or not, so I see the gameplay application, but what does it DO exactly? From a "realism" perspective, the infromation is being sent to the central NecroTech computers (seeing as how if I scan a zombie, YOU can't scan the same one as the information has already been processed). So what is the point of collecting the information?--Pesatyel 02:07, 26 August 2008 (BST)

I was thinking of a guaranteed success and 1AP cost, all it does is provide a location which a scientists still has to spend AP getting to and even then there's no guarantee the target has not moved on.
As for the grief aspect... as far as I'm aware you become untagged the moment you drop below 1HP (death is such an inappropriate word for a zombie) so griefers would still have to seek out their targets to tag them or hope that someone else does it for them, but please correct me if I'm wrong. --Kamikazie-Bunny 11:51, 25 August 2008 (BST) Huh, I cant really see any problems with it. Sounds like a pretty cool feature. --Nitro378^{T JNL} 12:05, 25 August 2008 (BST)

I think you are partly wrong. Yes, somebody would have to have scanned the zombie, but the Necronet seems to track their actual location even after they move, so for valid (tagged) zombies who are in range of your NT building, this would in fact always give the actual, current location.
How about a zombie version of this, that gives a zombie the location of any contact within scent death range, IF that contact is a zombie or corpse?

Swiers 19:14, 25 August 2008 (BST)

What I meant was even if the target is scanned, by the time you've walked to their location they may have moved on. --Kamikazie-Bunny 20:44, 25 August 2008 (BST)

I see. I think that's unlikely (it essentially requires you both to be actively online at the same time) but it does happen, yes. Anyhow, thanks for the inspiration on the zombie version, ie "Dead Reckoning"!

Swiers 23:25, 25 August 2008 (BST)

Clear!

Timestamp:	Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 14:31, 24 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Faintly Ridiculous Item.
Scope:	People.
Description:	Right. Its a defibrillator. Encumbrance 8% Found only in powered hospitals, replacing newspapers in the search rates. Can only be used by people with diagnosis. (Doctors know how they work) Relies on hand to hand accuracy. Does 5 damage regardless of flak (not designed to stop electrocution) Same chance of running out after each use as spray can, at which point automatically discarded.

Discussion (Clear!)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active conversation. It is marked for deletion in 3 days.

Defibrillators are incredibly bulky, and most have to be pushed around on carts or in ambulances. 8% doesn't do this justice. What's more, 5 damage doesn't really seem like it'd be all that worth it (especially if you increase the incumberance). Up the encumbrance to around 30%, the damage to 10 and add a max accuracy rate of 40% with HTH (only loses a charge when it hits of course) and I'm sold. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 16:08, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Yeah, kind of made the figures up entirely. Also, has no effects on barricades or decorations. As for radios and gennies, Im sure I can think of something crazy. --Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 17:15, 24 August 2008 (BST)

i like it, but what exactly are you aiming the defibrilator to do? being used as a ombat weapon? i was think more along the lines of medical things, as an alternative to using a syringe but the dead body can only be 2 hours old at the most, or it can be used to revivify dead bodies on a fixed success rate. its a good idea, and yes it would be reusable, unlike a syringe. i really like the idea, add a little more to it! 13:15 24 August 2008 (EST)

Too difficult to implement. What if they stand up after one minute?, it would also be ridiculously cheap compared to the cost of revives. --Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 18:20, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Techerizer is wrong about defibs being bulky. The old school ones are, but modern portable ones are about the size of a 12 pack of soda cans. Unfortunately, they also are designed in such a way that they need to be held against the skin long enoughto monitor the heartbeat, and then will only trigger if the heartbeat is abnormal, in order to prevent accidental triggering on people who show the symptoms of cardiac arrest, but have some other problem. Of course, that means they might work OK against zombies....
But as the suggesstor says, this is largely rediculous, and mostly makes sense as a homage to the recent Romero film. I'd expect to see glass jars of acid (1 shot weapon, HTH / melee skill, 10 points damage, no flak) as well, if this were deployed. Swiers 19:55, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Perhaps a defib could be used to bring a corpse (read: killed survivor, not killed zombie or revivifying zombie) back for just long enough to FAK 'em? --Blake Firedancer ^{T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T.} 02:41, 25 August 2008 (BST)

No, because that would force the person you defibbed and FAKed to stand up. There's reasons they may not want to do so, a primary one of which is they may WANT to play as a zombie. It also would HUGELY buff the "FAK packer" defense tactic; currently the only way zombies can outpace an active healer is to put survivors down for good (although zombie cade blocking makes such defense slightly less relevant these days).

Swiers 23:50, 27 August 2008 (BST)

Face Rot

Timestamp:	Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 15:21, 23 August 2008 (BST)
Type:	Zombie Skill, subskill of brain rot.
Scope:	Zombies with Brain Rot.
Description:	The rot has spread, now it shrivels and distorts the facial features. The person underneath is hard to recognise. In game terms, its a buff for zombie anonymity. Unless the zombie is in your contacts you cannot recognise him if. He stands up Destroys barricades/equipment Kills or injures. His profile can still be gained through a successful scan, or if you recognise them via your contacts. (You could be familiar with his limp, a watch or other item, his groaning etc.)

Discussion (Face Rot)

Go on. Savage it, like my horribly ruined features. --Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 15:21, 23 August 2008 (BST)

I like it, what better way to implement Zombie Anonymity than through a skill? Plus. it promotes the Brain Rot! :D --/~Rakuen~\^Talk

I Still Love Grim 18:54, 23 August 2008 (BST)

How would this work when they're alive? --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 19:38, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Then their profile just states they look like Gary Busey --{User:Galaxy125/Sig}}20:52, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Bloody Brilliant!!! --BoboTalkClown 22:27, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Good, apart from one thing. How do you explain not being able to recognise a corpse you just saw die when it stands up. This case would only be when you are in the same location for the period of time in which a character dies and rises (in the case of first being a survivor which is recognisable to all anyway). Explanation could be that the face rot while cleared up by the revivification effect while alive, takes hold again almost instantaneous. But that still wouldn't change the fact that you saw that body die and rise, thereby knowing exactly who it was. - User:Whitehouse 23:36, 23 August 2008 (BST)

A good idea, except that Whitehouse's point might need addressing. How do looks change so quickly? ~Ariedartin • Talk • A KS J abt all 06:22, 24 August 2008 (BST)

I don't like this idea. It's balanced and innovative but it disregards the true zombie mentality. Yes, I love zombie anonymity. But I am always in the belief that true zombie characters should be willing to do the *above* three actions and have their anonymity threatened to whoever wants to use it, in order to succeed their goal. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 12:04, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Interesting points. I'm off to make a ridiculous suggestion, and I'll think about this. --Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 14:24, 24 August 2008 (BST)

In relation to Whitehouses point. How about an extra piece of text like. "Blah killed Example, their face decomposes before your eyes. "--Ross less ne s s^{Want a Location Image?} 12:37, 25 August 2008 (BST)

I saw no one pointed it out and I have a feeling you'll actually check before suggesting this. This isn't actually a buff to zombies, this is removing the one way in which zombie groups generally recruit. I like the idea of starting to get zombie anonymity back, it never should have left but, this hurts them, especially because survivors still get all the workarounds they want/use while zombies now have absolutely no way of knowing who to go to for help/advice/etc.--Karek^maps?! 09:07, 31 August 2008 (BST)

Sleeping Bags

Timestamp:	8:06 PM 22 August 2008 USA EST
Type:	New Item
Scope:	Survivors
Description:	I think we should add a new item. The sleeping bag. If you have a sleeping bag in your inventory, you will gain 2 action points per 30 minutes. Because basically what you're doing while not playing is resting. Sleeping bags are no doubt more comfortable than sleeping on the floor of Stickling Mall. Sleeping bags can not be used in the streets, because who wants to look like a hobo anyway? You can only carry one sleeping bag, and they take up a minimum of 50% of your encumberence.

Discussion (Sleeping Bags)

	WARNING
	This suggestion has no active conversation. It is marked for deletion in 1 days.

Good idea. But there should be a downside to it... such as getting out of the sleeping bag consumes 25 AP. :P

But seriously, increased AP recharge is currently categorized as a big no in the Urban Dead FAQ, read it up:

The limit of 50AP per 25 hours is to keep the game balanced and to stop too much from happening overnight; if we doubled the recharge rate, it'd mean people getting in a hundred AP's worth of actions while other players were offline, which is enough to cross the city or deal an easily fatal amount of combat damage.

So, unless you find some way to balance this for everyone, this suggestion isn't gonna work out. --Aeon17x 01:11, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Read it yourself: There may eventually be character skills which modify the maximum AP and its recharge rate, but the basic starting-character settings will remain the same.--Pesatyel 08:13, 24 August 2008 (BST)

well this sounds like good idea to me as long as the number of AP it is possible to have cannot go over 50. heres an ideac for balance, if a zombie finds a survivor in a sleeping bag and they get them with tangling grasp they have like, doubled chance to hit or something.--Ninja13 01:35, 23 August 2008 (BST)

This is a horribly one sided survivor buff that violates the most basic tennants of Suggestions Dos and Do Nots, Leave Other People's AP Alone. Techercizer^(Food)_(TSoE) 02:06, 23 August 2008 (BST)

That arguement should be used with an understanding of it, its a guideline not a rule, and suggestions can still be made. Unfortunly the AP system is set up as it is for a reason as explaned above, and as well this would screw zombies as there's no benefit for them, what would stop someone from getting this when they have 98% encumberance, and dropping it when they resupply only to repeat?--G-Man 03:56, 23 August 2008 (BST)

I dislike the suggestion too, but I believe you quoted the wrong principle. ~Ariedartin • Talk • A KS J abt all 06:24, 24 August 2008 (BST)

I'd maybe support this on one condition; getting inside a sleeping bag reduces your HPs to 2. That means any attack (except a punch or newspaper swat) will kill you with a single hit (punches take 2 hits). Because really, how hard is it to kill somebody who is sound asleep?
See, survivors ARE doing something besides sleeping when the payer is offline; they are defending themselves. Swiers 05:16, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Oh, and another condition; you have to spend AP getting inside the bag, at least 10 or so. Free AP just for having something in your inventory? Hell no.

Swiers 18:30, 23 August 2008 (BST)

For fuck sake... Read what Kevan's FAQ says about extra AP. Like, do the most basic homework humanly possible ... first... BEFORE posting here. --WanYao 05:46, 23 August 2008 (BST)

If you want this to have even a 5% chance of passing you would have to give some kind of bonus towards zombies for attacking survivors in sleeping bags, such as a x2 damage (Which pkers would love as well) or have damage go to the sleeping survivor's ap as well as their hp, ex. bitten, lose 4 hp and ap. --Diablor 06:12, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Also your suggestion lacks something very important. The actual place you could get one and the search rates. --Diablor 06:14, 23 August 2008 (BST)

If you have a sleeping bag in your inventory, you will gain 2 action points per 30 minutes. No. Fucking. Way. No matter what you do -- even if you give zombies ooze-powered hover-skis that double their movement, too -- this is a no go. Period. You can't double AP regeneration. Period. It's utterly, spam-fucking-tastically game breaking. Period. Did you not read what Kevan himself wrote in the FAQ, which I linked to??? Please don't feed this completely broken and utterly unworkable idea with comments like, "Well, do something to make it ok for zombies". Sheeeeeeeeeesh... spam is spam. Period. --WanYao 06:54, 23 August 2008 (BST)

If you have a sleeping bag in your inventory, you will gain 2 action points per 30 minutes? YES FUCKING WAY! THATS EXCELLENT. ILY.--CyberRead240 07:00, 23 August 2008 (BST)

Re The more I read the suggestions section, the talk section, what have you, the more I dislike you as a gamer and as a person. Also, you said period too many times. Lost it's punch. --Shawn O'Hara 21:37 Aug 25

I clearly remember it being said that having no AP does not mean you're sleeping. By association, that means that this suggestion is illogical in how you want it to work with the mechanics of the game (along with being bad in other ways as described above).-- Unsigned

A tent that forces you to use it outside for the effect, (not inside where in a moderate suburb in a random building your unlikly to encounter a zombie inside in the first place) would probably be more legimate. Useful for getting AP to get inside, but mostly useless for long hauls (green suburbs may vary on this rule) and encourages survivors to leave there AP more to the wind. Positive effect for zombies and survivors on a low basis.--G-Man 03:36, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Having the tent destroyed if your hit outside would help too, so its not a permanet item, and greater hit percentage before the next AP you use, even if the tent is destroyed between that time period. (your still wrapped up in the fabric.)--G-Man 03:40, 24 August 2008 (BST)

Just because THIS idea doesn't work, doesn't mean AP altering ideas won't work at all. So given what Kevan said in the FAQ, maybe we should be looking at skills instead.--Pesatyel 08:13, 24 August 2008 (BST)

I was thinking the same thing Pesatyel. It could be for both zombies and humans, and...I don't know, maybe not available until a certain level? It could be called "Power Nap" for humans and "Still as the Grave" for zombies or something. --Shawn O'Hara Aug 25 21:07

Suggestions up for voting

Dead Reckoning

Moved to Suggestion_talk:20080826_Dead_Reckoning as suggestion is up for voting. Swiers 09:46, 26 August 2008 (BST)

Cellphone Auto-Response & GPS Bluetooth

Moved to Suggestion talk:20080827 Cellphone Auto-Response & GPS Bluetooth as suggestion is up for voting. Swiers 00:03, 28 August 2008 (BST)

Nurse

Moved to voting, under the new name of Doctor's Clinic

Developing Suggestions

Developing Suggestions

Further Discussion

Please Read Before Posting

How To Make a Suggestion

Format for Suggestions under development

Cycling Suggestions

Suggestions

Feeding Drag in Large Buildings

Discussion (Feeding Drag in Large Buildings)

The Zombie Survival Guide

Discussion (The Zombie Survival Guide)

Private homes

Discussion (Private home)

Display player name with broadcasts

Discussion (Display player name with broadcasts)

Body Dumping Paranoia in the Dark

Discussion (Body Dumping Paranoia in the Dark)

Dump dead bodies from dark buildings

Discussion (Dump dead bodies from dark buildings)

Group Bonus

Discussion Group Bonus

Restaurants

Discussion (Restaurants)

Brain Rush, aka Insomnia, Final Draft

Discussion (Brain Rush)

Add encumbrance section to the FAQs

Discussion (Add encumbrance section to the FAQs)

Insomnia

Discussion (Insomnia)

Bandoleer

Discussion (Bandoleer)

Doors on the outside

Discussion (Doors on the outside)

No More Piñatas

Discussion (No More Piñatas)

Pinata Decay

Discussion (Pinata Decay)

Computers

Discussion (Computers)

Tracking

Discussion (Tracking)

Clear!

Discussion (Clear!)

Face Rot

Discussion (Face Rot)

Sleeping Bags

Discussion (Sleeping Bags)

Suggestions up for voting

Dead Reckoning

Cellphone Auto-Response & GPS Bluetooth

Nurse

Navigation menu

Search