Developing Suggestions

Developing Suggestions

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

Nothing on this page will be archived.

Further Discussion

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

Please Read Before Posting

• Be sure to check The Frequently Suggested List and the Suggestions Dos and Do Nots before you post your idea. You can read about many ideas that have been suggested already, which users should be aware of before posting what could be a dupe: a duplicate of an existing suggestion. These include Machine Guns and Sniper Rifles.
• Users should be aware that page is discussion oriented. Other users are free to express their own point of view and are not required to be neutral.
• If you decide not to take your suggestion to voting, please remove it from this page to avoid clutter.
• It is recommended that users spend some time familiarizing themselves with this page before posting their own suggestions.
• After new game updates, users are requested to allow time for the game and community to adjust to these changes before suggesting alterations.

How To Make a Suggestion

Adding a New Suggestion

• Copy the code in the box below.
• Click here to begin editing. This is the same as clicking the [edit] link to the right of the Suggestions header.

• Paste the copied text above the other suggestions, right under the heading.
• Substitute the text in RED CAPITALS with the details of your suggestion.

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

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

Cycling Suggestions

• Suggestions with no new discussion in the past two days should be given a warning notice. This can be done by adding {{SDW|date}} at the top of the discussion section, where date is the day the suggestion will be removed.
• Suggestions with no new discussion in the past week may be removed.
• If you are adding a comment to a suggestion that has the warning template please remove the {{SDW|date}} at the top of the discussion section to show that there is still ongoing discussion.

This page is prone to breaking when the page gets too long, so sometimes suggestions still under discussion will be moved to the Overflow page, so the discussion can continue.

Please add new suggestions to the top of the list

---

Suggestions

Lets smash the place up!

Timestamp: RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 12:11, 3 April 2010 (BST)

Type: Ruin Alteration

Scope: Zombies and stuff.

Description: Ruining a building automatically destroys all improvements to the building. This means not only decorations, but gennies, transmitters and internal graffiti as well. This does not alter the ability to place such items in already ruined structures, which would be foolish, and in the case of Dark Buildings make them unrepairable. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 12:11, 3 April 2010 (BST) Note Such a ruin action would not gain you the xp you would otherwise gain by smashing a generator separately. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 15:35, 3 April 2010 (BST)

Discussion (Lets smash the place up!)

Why no additional xp gain for the generator? This would be depriving zombs of a little bit of xp right? Other than that I like the idea though.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 17:08, 3 April 2010 (BST)

I think it's because you're already doing X amount of achieved damage with 1AP (the cost to ruin), so stacking all that XP gain shouldn't be possible unless you do it manually. Honestly, I wouldn't vote kill on this if it had stacked AP, but it is more balanced that way. --

 

 

 

 

17:31, 3 April 2010 (BST)

Its a trade. If I get into a Hospital or an NT its a good bet I want to wipe out the genny ASAP. Especially if I'm a rotter. What this suggestion was intended to do (Doesn't mean that's what will happen) Was skew Ruin effecieny slighlty towards zombies. At the minute what I can do with ransack for 6ap takes a survivor less to repair (unless 5 days have passed.) Taking out a genny shifts the balance the other way (especially if you factor in search costs). Plus it might encourage people to not just dump gennies in empty buildings, or maybe defend darks differently. I'm sure Iscariot can come up with a malevolent use for it. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:16, 3 April 2010 (BST)

Not off the top of my head. It doesn't really impact pinatas, given the high cades and ruin block all entry negating any benefit from the generator, so it doesn't give an immediate malevolent effect to death cultists. It doesn't harm newbies and their experience track as you need Ransack in order to gain XP from smashing decorations. It's a limited ability, meaning that you'd still need to purchase Ransack to gain the effect or else you'd have to break the generator and other fixtures the old fashioned way. It's not even going to affect the ability of survivors to retake a building as even if they drop a generator in a zombie occupied building there's no way for the zombies to 're-ruin' the building so they're forced to hit it to remove it. The thing I find most preferable is the removal of all the crap in one button press, currently a building that has ten skulls requires ten AP to smash them all, even though it only takes six AP to do the same thing to the entire building. I always hated that bias in favour of survivor interior designers. I shall have a think if there's a potential evil use for this, if I don't find it amusing I'll tell you if I think of one. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 18:27, 3 April 2010 (BST)

<Cyrus>I can dig it</Cyrus> 20:22, 3 April 2010 (BST)

---

New Weapons

Timestamp: Attila the Hunny 21:12, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Type: machete and cast iron skillet

Scope: survivors

Description: Can a machete and a cast iron skillet be added to our weapons, please?

Discussion (New Weapons)

No. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 21:44, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Thats not really how developing suggestions work. You tell us the idea and then we tell you how its flawed. Whats the damage, accuracy, and weight of these weapons? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 22:16, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Yes, they can be added to the game just as soon as you describe how they work in detail (as per Ross' comment), you put it up for voting as a suggestion, it gets approved by wiki users, it gets noticed by Kevan, Kevan is feeling like adding new flavor, and he does so. Otherwise, see what Iscariot said. —Aichon— 05:33, 3 April 2010 (BST)

NONONO ahem, what I meant to say was, a machete is like a katana. trenchies like those things waay to much, and seem to feel a bit to over-the top for a survival game. Also, is this the same skillet that you can use as a melee weapon in L4D2? --Jack Kolt ^Talk|Chars 02:55, 4 April 2010 (BST)

---

Machine Gun turrets

Timestamp: Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 20:42, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Type: Overpowered

Scope: Newbs

Description: I've seen this idea before, and I'm sure it's unbalanced! But wait! Done a preliminary search, and couldn't find this exact thing. And I've taken a crack at balancing this. The Idea There are now Machine Gun turrets outside the gatehouses of forts. Obviously, you can only operate them if the gatehouse is powered and unruined. Now, for the crazy balancing part. Crazy Balancing Part? My Machine Gun Turret always has a 65% chance to hit, even for newbs. No skills effect this whatsoever. It deals 10 damage, or eight with a flak or flesh rot. Hence, this is as good as a fully powered shotgun. Except it's stuck in one place, outside, and needs to be powered. So, Yonnua, you're telling us this suggestion is useless? No! It just doesn't effect fully levelled survivors. Since it's only usable outside, it doesn't really effect the zombies. Who does that leave? The Newbie survivors, of course! Now, they have a very easy way to level up, if they go to a specific place and stuff. Zombies need a boost first! Well, that really has nothing to do with this, as this doesn't effect zombies. If you really care, I'm working on something similar for zombies. Perhaps a balanced rehash of Boxy's old rocket launcher suggestion? Input Now it's YOUR turn!

Discussion (Machine Gun turrets)

Yes, I would vote for it--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 20:45, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Have you ever participated in a fort siege as a zambah? I have, and one gets already headshot enough by the various Lvl41 trenchies (who wouldn't need the experience, so there's not even that excuse). To bolster that by handing them a free, permanent shotgun without any need for searching, reloading or encumbrance would make matters even worse. Therefore, I'd immediately spaminate this without further adieu. --Spiderzed 21:00, 2 April 2010 (BST)

^That. 21:58, 2 April 2010 (BST)

And shooting zombies outside suddenly makes a difference because...?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:10, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Oh, and while I'm at it, I'd be open to making this require ammo. It would just be a matter of clips v shells, and how many it can take.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:15, 2 April 2010 (BST)

It plainly annoys the hell out of zombie players, as it forces them to spend 5 extra AP to spring again into action, and is made even more annoying by the fact that is tactically pointless (AP to shoot a zombie vs AP for the zombie to stand up again etc.), and thus grieving for grieving's sake. If you want to adress that practice, make the machine gun unattractive for experienced trenchies by providing a.) a lower accuracy than with a maxed out marksman, and b.) making it ineligible for headshots. That would yet help new survivors, while at the same time not encourage trenchies to pointlessly headshot zombies outside. --Spiderzed 23:18, 2 April 2010 (BST)

This makes sense, since aiming for a precise headshot with a large-calibre automatic weapon would be pretty damn difficult. 23:57, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Sorry, I forgot about headshot. Naturally, that would be stupid, so this shouldn't effect headshot. How about 50% accuracy?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:00, 3 April 2010 (BST)

Dupe. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 21:04, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Link me.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:10, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Terrifyingly, I kind of remember it. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 22:20, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Im not really trying, but 2006, See Funt's comment and 2007, See Grim's Comment and 2008, see Funt's comment again.--Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 22:31, 2 April 2010 (BST)

2006: The Gun was in the armoury, which is inside the fort. Mine is a massive difference in that it's outside the boundaries of the fort, and is outside the gatehouse. 2007: Portable turrets. This is a fixed turret. 2008: Portable. Most of the comments on the 2008 one actually illustrate my point that shooting outside is useless, and so this would really only help newbies. I feel I've distinguished this enough from the dupes; do you have any ideas about balancing this further (I did what I could in five minutes before lost), or are we gonna call this dead in the water?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:41, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Personally I think its Chrissie Watkins, but go ahead and tweak it if you feel you can make it work. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 22:47, 2 April 2010 (BST)

My general idea at the moment is suggesting things which are totally insane in an attempt to use DS as an actual medium for balancing suggestions, because most suggestions here either stay exactly as they are or don't go to vote at all. I deliberately started with something unworkable. :P --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:50, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Before Iscariot burns me at the stake, I actually do intend to take this to vote if it becomes balanced.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:51, 2 April 2010 (BST)

It would be harder afterwards. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 22:52, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Are you quite sure you want to put yourself through this kind of abuse? -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 15:52, 3 April 2010 (BST)

The likely net result would simply be that zombies wouldn't log out in the square outside the gatehouse. Which is actually kind of cool, because then the zombies (and anybody who comes outside to use the gun) would know how many zombies were actively attacking at any moment. I can see a few ways to help make this balanced enough that I;d support it. First, to attack with the MG, you have to go to the armory and construct a link belt for 10 AP; the armory needs to be powered for you to do this, since you can't work in the dark (Armories are one of the dark building types). This grants 1 xp. That makes it slightly useful, but not much so. The link belt takes up 20% encumbrance, and has a 20% chance of being used up each time you make an attack with the MG. Second, hit or miss, no matter the target, you don't get any XP for using the MG. That might slightly discourage trenchies, assuming XP stacking is their motive. Third, it can be used to attack the barricades with the same effect as a melee weapon (so net 25% to do damage). That makes it fun for death cultists, even if there aren't any silly trenchies around to shoot with the MG.  :)  Swiers 01:49, 3 April 2010 (BST)

Let's give the survivors yet another way to gain XP without ever having to see a zombie(!) What a brilliant idea(!) Next up I'm suggesting knitting for XP. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 15:54, 3 April 2010 (BST)

Good point. OK, no XP at all. Really, I can live with the Headshotting and the trenchie factor, because the only folks getting headshotted by MGs would be those who AP out while standing in front of the gatehouse; any player with half a (rotted) brain would just step to another square before they run out of AP. Which makes perfect sense- the PURPOSE of a MG is to keep an area clear!
BTW, flamethrowers powered by fuel cans could work equally well, with no need for a new "ammo belt" object. Searching for fuel doesn't net any XP, so.... Swiers 01:29, 4 April 2010 (BST)

Ok, I thought you were kidding, Yonnua, so I was ready to come in here and strongly approve with my tongue planted firmly in my cheek, but now it seems like you're actually halfway serious. As you already said, this suggestion is unworkable, and I'm inclined to agree. It may help survivors burn AP on a wasted proposition, but I don't believe in giving people more ways to undermine their own side's chances of victory, especially when it makes the game less fun for the other side. And that's exactly what this would do, since it is incredibly frustrating to find out that you've been headshot again by an idiot trenchie when you're sieging a fort. Sure, it was a waste of their AP, but that doesn't make it fun for you. That makes it annoying, and annoying is bad. —Aichon— 05:31, 3 April 2010 (BST)

Assuming you are serious I would (at the very least) want to see survivors making belts for the machine gun... 1AP and 10 pistol clips. Accuracy fixed at 50% and only getting 20 shots. Absolutely no chance of headshots is also a must. Oh and the turret should be ransackable as a separate entity.--Honestmistake 11:03, 3 April 2010 (BST)

You can't be serious with this. I'm reluctantly assuming you are, but am too tired to actually list the problems I have with your suggestion, so when I find myself back here tomorrow I'll give it a go. --

 

 

 

 

17:35, 3 April 2010 (BST)

Good, it'll save me doing it. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 18:13, 3 April 2010 (BST)

I'm more hoping to see DS used as it was actually intended, rather than have this particular idea implemented, so yes, please list as many faults as possible, preferrably with possible solutions. :) --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:25, 3 April 2010 (BST)

---

The Winter of our Discontent

Timestamp: Verance 18:38, 1 April 2010 (BST)

Type: Weather

Scope: Survivours and Zombies

Description: Malton has weather. It isn't updated by the day, but we know it snows sometime every winter. I would like to suggest that this winter, the month of January, be a particually nasty winter. I am proposing these changes for January. My idea revolves around a bad cold snap in the area of Malton, plunging the temperature into the negatives. The changes would be as such. The first part will focus on suggested survivor changes, the second on suggested zombie changes. Powered buildings: No changes so long as the generator keeps running. No changes in search rates or anything else. Unpowered buildings: Day 1: You are standing inside (building name). Frost is starting to form on the window. (follow with normal description, survivors, and so on. No change to searches or any other mechanics. Day 2: You are standing inside (building name). Frost has covered the window, and the room has gotten cold. (normal description). There would be a 5% reduction to searches in the building. Day 3:You are standing inside (building name). You are shivering in the cold. (normal description) 15% reduced search, and 5% reduced accuracy. Day 4 and beyond: You are standing inside (building name). Frost has covered the room, and you are shivering violently in the cold. (normal description). 30% reduced search, and 1 hp lost every half hour due to the temperature. Accuracy is decreased by 10% more. Ruins: A couple of assumptions. For the most part, ruins have the doors wide open and have been "damaged". This would exacerbate the cold in the building. Day 1: You are inside (building). Cold air is seeping in, and snow has blown in through the door. It is cold inside. No changes beyond a normal ruin Day 2: You are inside (building). You are shivering in the cold. Snow has piled in the room, and a layer of frost covers everything. +1 ap/day to to repair from this point per day. There is a 1 HP loss per half hour. -5% accuracy Day 4 (yes, 4) and beyond: You are inside (building). You are shivering violently from the cold. +1 additonal ap/day to repair from here on out. - 10% accuracy. The difference in ruins would be additional AP to repair and a HP loss from sleeping in the building. Outdoors: You are in (location) It is bitterly cold, with wind blowing snow everywhere. You shouldn't stay out for too long. The effects from the cold would be as follows: -15% accuracy outdoors. It is snowy and windy, and that would hinder attacks. There would also be a decreased search in the outdoors due to the weather (not that people search the streets for much, right?). Revives: Here is where I thought for a bit. People will still want to revive and be revived. I do not think a jog out into the weather and stabbing 3 or 4 or 5 people would make a big difference. Aside from the flavor of the weather, I don't propose a change. What I suggest is that for every day you are a body, it takes one more AP to stand up. If you stand up within 24 hours, it is still only 1 or 10 AP. January is 31 days days long, so if you are stabbed on January 1st and stand up on January 31st, it would be 31/41 ap to stand up. EDIT: The bodies freezing would apply to people becoming zombies as well. Indoor combat: I am working this from the following assumption: It is cold, the zombies are breaking at your door, and they have smashed in. You get to fight them. Have fun. You are standing inside (building). The cold air is seeping in through the open door. If the door is open more than it is closed for a day, the room becomes cold, and the survivour attack accuracy decreases. In multi-block rooms, a cold "corner" would tell you that cold is seeping from another corner of the building. If both corners are cold, there is no "seeping cold" message. Okay... fairly involved and became bigger than I thought it would. Now for zombie changes. Outdoors: Zombies can still follow footprints, but the wind carries moans 1.5 times as far. You would hear "The wind carries a (moan description) from (location). EDIT: ADDED AFTER DISCUSSION BEGAN - Blood: Blood on the cold ground, instead of drying, would freeze. This would create "Smears of frozen blood on the wall" and "trails of blood frozen on the floor" Attacks: I will admit I was thinking about the cold affecting zombies negatively, but I decided against that idea. I think it would be more challenging if the cold makes the arms "more solid" giving +2(1) damage to maul attacks. Once the zombies "warm up" by being in a warm building for 24 hours, their damage goes back to normal. That would mean the initial siege hits harder, but if survivors hold the inside warm, the zombies go back to normal damage. If the zombies break the defense and ruin the place, the zombies are guaranteed to win. Discussion point: I am thinking the gatehouse in Creedy could be an "outdoor" gatehouse, and Perryn would be an "indoor" gatehouse. This would cause a more challenging fort to hold for survivours, and a classic fort for survivours. I would like to discuss that before I place this suggestion for voting. Other ideas: If you have any other ideas relevant to the game and the cold you would like to see suggested, I would like to see it. This is a big suggestion, I admit, and a bit game-breaking in the differences it would cause. The January I propose to the community would favor zombies, and I think this should not be permanent, thus why I suggested it only affecting January. If the community so wishes, I would like to see this additional challenge to survivours on month every winter. Community... prime your pepper spray... *puts on anti-flame goggles*

Discussion (The Winter of our Discontent)

Mentally Huge. Scanning through, I'd say lose the HP loss. Lets not punish casual players, I like the frosting ideas and the reductions without power, likewise the ruin increase. If its freezing both damage and effort needed to repair would be increased. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:42, 1 April 2010 (BST)

As for zombie bonuses, I think being immune to all the other effects is good in itself. Perhaps a bonus for attacking survivors outside, as they are less able to defend themselves? Plus it teaches survivors to stay inside. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:44, 1 April 2010 (BST)

I agree with Ross. I also think that it would be interesting if lightning would flash during stormy weather and possibly damage the radio antennas. --TheBardofAwesome 19:29, 1 April 2010 (BST)

Well, thunderstorms are not a part of this suggestion. Anyway, Ross, regarding the weather and HP loss. If the genny runs out of fuel, it takes three days before the cold starts taking HP from the victim. I do agree that casual players might take a dent, but feel that three days before the HP loss would not be a big issue. Verance 21:58, 1 April 2010 (BST)

One massive, OP, survivor nerf. I was actually looking at this suggestion seriously until I realized how massively you were both hampering survivors and boosting zombies. One sided buffs=fail. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 01:14, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Looking at the fact I suggested boosting zombie damage, I do agree more with Ross saying I should just not affect zombies. It is true that the suggestion would more heavily affect survivors, but the important thing is that it would do so for a month only (it doesn't stay cold forever). I agree that this would be too much of a survivor nerf to stay for the rest of the game, but I would like to ask exactly what you perceive as being a too-large nerf. This is developing suggestions, after all. Verance 02:18, 2 April 2010 (BST)

The only way to counter it is with a generator?--Pesatyel 02:25, 2 April 2010 (BST)

My suggestion is that a running generator holds off the cold, yes. Verance 02:50, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Weather suggestions aplenty have been made. I know I personally made one that had effects for cold, hot, and stormy weather. Sure, none were just like this, but they all had the general theme that weather would affect game action percents, etc. Approved or not, none have been implemented. So... yeah.  Swiers 01:31, 3 April 2010 (BST)

---

Revive Corpses

Timestamp: V darkstar 17:10, 1 April 2010 (BST)

Type: Gameplay Change

Scope: All

Description: I have waited a few days hoping that my team members would stand up so I could revive them so I thought that it would make since for a human revive a dead body since a zombie is just a walking dead guy. so for only 5 AP you can revive a dead body (because then aren't moving or trying to eat your brains it takes less effort.) Any help building up this is appreciated.

Discussion (Revive Corpses)

Lowering revive costs isn't going to be a good idea. Also, this kills anti-headshot measures. Zombies before sieges or strikes often maul each other to avoid the headshots, standing up to strike with 49 AP and not 46. For the low low cost of 5 AP a pop, survivors can avoid the zombies entirely, forcing unrotted zeds to choose between being AP ineffecient or being cheaply CRed at any time. It's unbalancing. 17:20, 1 April 2010 (BST)

How about if it was still 10AP?--V darkstar 17:21, 1 April 2010 (BST)

There's still the threat of combat revives at any time, though. It's generally not a balanced idea. It forces zombies to take brain rot, and cripples death cults, which I'm personally against since I run one. Also, flavour-wise, a corpse isn't a zombie. 99% of the genre would reflect this - even in Romero's "every death creates a zombie" world, there's the transitional period before they reanimate. 17:27, 1 April 2010 (BST)

Also you can't do anything to a corpse as such. Even feeding on one causes no effect to the player lying down. Why could you revive a body, and not heal it, or shoot it again? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:17, 1 April 2010 (BST)

As has been said this kinda screws up the whole "Shock and Graggh" tactic. Most of the danger in sieges (even at the small scale) comes in waves when dead zombies hit 50 AP and stand up again. Being able to spend five AP each to convert a downed zombie is way too easy, even ten would tip the balance to the humans. -Devorac 21:47, 1 April 2010 (BST)

Also, I'm pretty sure I came across something similar in rejected whilst I looked for dupes. And damaging corpses (or reviving them or whatever) just isn't a good idea; when you die, you die knowing that you have downtime, a period where you'll be safe from guns, axes, claws and bananas. --Enigma^talk 00:23, 2 April 2010 (BST)

NOTHING makes you safe from bananas!--Honestmistake 18:25, 2 April 2010 (BST)

---

ganster 2.0

Timestamp: Richerd joshepson 01:49, 1 April 2010 (BST)user richerd joshepson 18:30, 31 March 2010

Type: new class

Scope: new players

Description: I tihk improve my last suggestion, my first laguage is spanish, asi que no se fijen en la escritura sino en la idea, maybe the class is overpowered, then, the new suggestion, shotgun, 2 shells and the shotgun training skill, the knife, pay 75 exp for militar skills, 75 exp for civlians skills. and 200 exp points for science skills, looks more balanced, or not? the convict class and punk class are not criminals,but the ganster class is a criminal class, this game is based in the imagination, anyone needs tell his part of the history, even the criminals.

Discussion (ganster 2.0)

Step 1: Make a survivor

Step 2: Edit his description

Step 3: ?

Step 4: Profit! Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 03:25, 1 April 2010 (BST)

How is a convict NOT a criminal? Even if you only consider "organized crime" as "real" criminals? Maybe I'm nitpicking. But there is NO logical reason to alter the experience points costs. What makes this class so special that the cost of skills wouldn't be the same as the other classes?--Pesatyel 05:15, 1 April 2010 (BST)

Why wouldn't you just be a cop? You start inside a police station and could get a shotgun very easily. Plus in the long run, the xp costs are much lower to level. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 09:31, 1 April 2010 (BST)

Alright. You know those nifty things called skill categories? And the three types of classes? Those are what you're going to have to base it off of. Your earlier logic stated that they know how to shoot, so they are good with guns, and they can act like civilians, so they get 75 xp for civilian skills. Logic flaw: You know who else is good at being a civilian? Civilians! They don't pay 75 xp for civilian skills. Just make it a civilian class that starts with a shotgun, at least. Then we can talk. --Enigma^talk 15:52, 1 April 2010 (BST)

Flavour-wise, Malton is quite English (also the game is from England). Traditional 'mafia' representations of gangsters don't really hold sway there. Look at films like Eastern Promises, The Krays, Get Carter or The Long Good Friday. To better represent the English 'gangster' you'd be looking at a cross between the Scout and Consumer classes, probably. Starts with a knife and a mobile phone, and the free running skill. Pays 100 XP for any skill, like civilians. Even that, that's going to be pretty damn strong, but at least a lot more flavoursome. 15:59, 1 April 2010 (BST)

Yeah I think there are enough classes already, and more classes won't add much to the game since class only affects lower level characters. If you want to play as a gangster just pick Civilian and edit your description. Also I think it would increase PKing.--V darkstar 17:16, 1 April 2010 (BST)

Why would that be a bad thing? -Devorac 06:58, 2 April 2010 (BST)

I was going to ask that earlier, but I was feeling lazy and cba. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 15:16, 2 April 2010 (BST)

---

Deface (skill)

Timestamp: 14:57, 31 March 2010 (BST)

Type: New zombie skill

Scope: Zombies/Ruins

Description: Took a search, couldn't find anything matching this, but I'm still sure it's probably a dupe. But, I've been thinking about decay. It's a zombie's friend. It's also the friend of everyone who isn't pro-survivor, in various ways. But it's a very passive mechanic. This suggestion is a for a new zombie skill, a sub-skill of Ransack, named 'Deface' This skill will allow zombies to further tick up the decay count as follows - every 24 hours, when the decay count adds 1 AP to the repair cost of a ruin, it also resets an unseen 'deface flag'. If this flag is present, the building functions as a current ruin does. If it is absent, the building can be further ransacked - again, four 'ransacks' but with a 'deface' option replacing ruin, with everything involved functioning exactly as ruin does now, including the 1 XP granted for the initial ransack. Successfully defacing a building will add a further 1 AP to the building's repair cost and trip the 'deface flag', meaning the building cannot be further defaced until the decay tick occurs again. Essentially, the buidling can be decayed twice as fast, only it will require an active zombie presence and will involve more AP spent than it would cost to repair the building. However, this is still a bonus for those who can hold a ruin for a few days, further enhancing their grasp on territory. The flavour text of this will reflect the zombie causing the building to seem more charnel and well-trodden, as opposed to actually destroying things. The overall flavour is that of the 'smarter' zombies (ie, those with Memories and Ransack) coming to realise that property and shelter are important to the harmanz, and instinctively seeking to deny them access to these. Possible flavour text for the actions involved could include: You smear gore and filth across the walls, further defacing the building. You daub blood in familiar patterns across the floor, further defacing the building. You gouge and tear at what little fixtures remain, further defacing the building. Thoughts?

Discussion (Deface (skill))

There's something similar in the archives in regards to increasing repair costs from before the decay update.

The whole notion is pointless. You put AP in for a year, the repair cost is over 9000, it still doesn't cost me any more to reset that clock with a suicide repair. Anything over 50Ap to repair is pretty much pointless to the zombie side. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 17:47, 31 March 2010 (BST)

A 9K AP expenditure though would put that character out of action for more than half a year, how many players are willing to bite that bullet? -Devorac 18:44, 31 March 2010 (BST)

For the glory of leading the big ruin repair board forever? You'll find some. Also there's nothing to stop people asking friends who like to go for glory to create a character and join their group for that one event. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 18:52, 31 March 2010 (BST)

After a year it would only be 730, not 9000. 18:53, 31 March 2010 (BST)

The point is that over a number that allows them to cade or run back to cover, the total is pointless as the survivor accepts death to reset the clock and make it easy to retake the building. A better skill would be one that forces the survivors to do it in 50AP blocks, making them die lots of time knock the total down. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 18:57, 31 March 2010 (BST)

Numbers that high are liable to lead to characters being abandoned to this purpose, though - 700 AP is a full two weeks of being unable to do anything, and that'd only be for one building. 19:09, 31 March 2010 (BST)

Just so you know, my Knight is currently in the SW looking for anything over 130 to repair, if you can make me a 700 AP one I'll be your bestest friend ever. Two weeks of downtime is over in two weeks, glory is forever. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 19:12, 31 March 2010 (BST)

Suicide Repairs are rubbish at the minute. The 404 remnants spent ages looking through the ghost towns, but their all safe, stupid wiki. North Blythville Wasn't Bad, but its just darks at the minute. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 12:12, 1 April 2010 (BST)

Yeah, I know. It sucks. Perhaps we should set up a reporting facility where trenchie and other survivor groups that don't like being down for a week can tell us about the juicy high repair values. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 12:22, 1 April 2010 (BST)

I've been toying with the idea for a while, some kind of central page for idiots. I can name at least 6 suburbs with no organised survivors, which stay ruined long after the mob passes through. I did go through a period of like a month with 404 where we tried to get several survivor groups to alter their "Area of Operations" So they meshed and overlapped. Likewise suggesting new survivor groups tried to set up in areas of high trp/medium zombie numbers. You can imagine how that went. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 16:52, 1 April 2010 (BST)

I like it. It's a zombie counterpart to barricades that doesn't upset AP balance for survivors. My zombie character would love the chance to have a whole new level of destruction to unleash on buildings now that he's maxed out; my survivor character enjoys having more challenge and prestige from the lowly repair-work he does. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 22:10, 31 March 2010 (BST)

Survivors should only be able to repair in blocks of upto 50AP, anything more to fix should only be "tidied" up (reduce the decay status) If that gets implemented then this would be a fine addition.... as is its pretty much a pointless zombie AP sink! --Honestmistake 23:11, 31 March 2010 (BST)

You might want to include a limit of some kind.--Pesatyel 05:16, 1 April 2010 (BST)

*raises hand to volunteer for a 9000ap repair* --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 09:33, 1 April 2010 (BST)

See? I told you there'd be volunteers. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 11:58, 1 April 2010 (BST)

---

Binocular/Ruin nerf

Timestamp: --         12:46, 31 March 2010 (BST)

Type: Balance?

Scope: Survivors

Description: Binoculars are always a helpful thing (for me anyway, I've always been a bit of a fail loner in UD). Of course, something this simple must have been suggested before, but I'm thinking that towers/buildings/hotels/motels that have been ruined should be unusable as binocular surveillance posts during the period in which they are ruined. At the point where they are repaired, they can be usable again with binoculars. Trying to use binoculars in said ruined building type would just display a message explaining that the tool doesn't work in ruined buildings. A couple of issues- Flavour? I don't care much for flavour, so perhaps in your critique of the suggestion you could help think some up, else I won't listen to you cries of flavour illegitimacy- I've always cared more about gameplay ramifications than that of the overzealous logic nazi. Should using binoculars in ruined building cost 1AP? Personally, no, but if users (in the masses) deem that it should, like other similar "fail" actions, then why not. Should this be for HB+ buildings too? I'd like it- I luuurve small survivor nerfs, but tevs. Let's keep it small. Probably a dupe. I searched "binoculars" through the Suggestions Namespace, but even so, could have been done before. If so, say so please.

Discussion (Binocular/Ruin nerf)

It's a reasonable idea, mechanic-wise, but who really uses binoculars in ruins? Saying that, if you can't freerun up a ruin, I don't see why you should be able to climb up to use binoculars, and I like the idea of not being able to use them in HB+, if only because I'm biased and look at overcading as borderline n00b griefing. Doesn't really make the game any more fun, otherwise. --OnlyKillingZombiesIsRacist 14:01, 31 March 2010 (BST)

When looking for an observation point, whether the building is ruined or not is a null consideration since both harbour the same binocular mechanics. An example. You might need to look from a building closer to, say, the Blackmore Building to be able to have a look at its status (without wasting the +6ap getting there and back via walking), but the only buildings in range of binocular vision are ruined. Currently, you can just run in, look at the Blackmore Building from the ruined tower, and then run back, in terms of scouting it saves AP to do it this way, under my mechanic they wouldn't be able to use those ruined buildings. It adds a very small tactical advantage to ruins for Zombies. Not enough for them to target a building over something else, but you know. --

 

 

 

 

03:13, 1 April 2010 (BST)

<Cyrus>I can dig it.</Cyrus> 14:18, 31 March 2010 (BST)

wtf not? Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 22:11, 31 March 2010 (BST)

Logical.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:13, 31 March 2010 (BST)

Perhaps not an all out NO! make it 50% chance to fall and take damage and i would like it a whole lot more. --Honestmistake 23:14, 31 March 2010 (BST)

You may not care fo flavor, but it IS still a factor. What is it about a ruin that is stopping you from using binoculars? Ruin affects your ability to free run into a building (instability), barricade (lack of useable barricade pieces), change clothes (clothes too damaged I presume) and search (too much debris). So your presuming that there is what, too much debris to stand or kneel without moving to hold the binoculars steady? Perhaps. But similar to what Honestmistake said, make a chance of failure ("you can't find stable enough footing for viewing") or a chance of falling.--Pesatyel 05:06, 1 April 2010 (BST)

Suggestions with a chance to punish you are rarely well received, especially so if the initial action is supposed to be a failure in the first place. When freerunning into a ruined building, the payoff to the pain is the fact you didn't have to spend 2 ap to reach the same location (ie. leave your building THEN move to desired square). In fact, it's a chance I take 90% of the time. However, with this mechanic, it isn't fair or feasible to add a chance for damage onto the suggestion in its current state. Having "You can't use binoculars in Ruined Buildings" changed to "You can't use binoculars in ruined buildings. By, the way, you just took 5HP damage too! Ha Ha!" is a real fuck-you to the player, I don't want to do that. Besides, adding a chance-self-damage mechanism requires me to work out balancing mathematics, or at leased give them thought, and I don't like doing that. I'm just intent on keeping it small for now. --

 

 

 

 

09:13, 1 April 2010 (BST)

Consider the fact that it presents a new method of suicide for zombies, thats a bonus... sort of :) --Honestmistake 16:31, 1 April 2010 (BST)

Wow. All civility aside, I don't think you realise how fucking stupid that comment was. As far as I'm aware Zombies can't even look through binoculars, so why would them trying yield a chance of failure/pain? Besides, using the precedent of Free-Running pain, you can't even die by free-running into a ruined building, the lowest HP you can get for doing it is 1HP, or so it was last time I tested it in 08. I sincerely hope you weren't being serious Honest. --

 

 

 

 

14:12, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Well, if the zombie is in a state that requires suicide then he is also able to try using the binoculars... you're right about the not dying bit tho, I had forgotten about that :(

However I was being a little facetious.... --Honestmistake 18:29, 2 April 2010 (BST)

I wasn't inclined towards damage either. Simply a chance of failure. "You can't find stable enough footing for viewing".--Pesatyel 02:20, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Oh, fair enough. Honestly, I think giving it a "chance" to fail doesn't make the suggestion significant enough to actually warrant putting it up, and yes, I know what you're thinking: I entered this suggestion on DS without much intention of modifying it at all. Whilst true to an extent, the more important input I was hoping for was dupe possiblities as well as just general opinions of the balance change. Sorry if it feels like I'm blocking your opinions out, I don't mean it personally. --

 

 

 

 

14:12, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Just say no binoculars in ruined buildings. I can dig it. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 15:17, 2 April 2010 (BST)

I agree. Lets get survivors repairing more buildings! --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:07, 2 April 2010 (BST)

Ehh...I'm not particularly keen on the idea of eliminating binoculars from use in ruins. I think it's a bit extreme for those groups that do actually employ scouts and the like, since it severely limits their capability, and binoculars already see little enough use as it is. That said, I could get behind the idea of limiting the range a bit, such as only being able to see up to two blocks away, instead of three.

To provide some quick examples, if a character is at 10,10 and looks SE, they would currently see the 3x3 square from 11,11 to 13,13. Instead, maybe they would only see a 2x2 square from 11,11 to 12,12 (i.e. they'd get 5 less blocks of scouting information). Looking in one of the four cardinal directions (north, south, east, and west) would result in seeing a 2x3 grid (using the previous example and looking south, they'd see the rectangle from 9,11 to 11,12). The logic behind it could be that they can't reach as high a point in the building due to ruins, but could still get up part way. I also like it because it's consistent in its application (unlike suggestions about possible damage and whatnot), and it doesn't totally nerf a mechanic that probably needs to see more use from people anyway. —Aichon— 05:26, 3 April 2010 (BST)

In a holistic point of view survivors need several sorts of small nerfs given to them (this is obviously my opinion, though I think we can all agree on the fact survivors have been too far ahead for almost a year or two now). This doesn't forbid survivors from playing/acting in a certain way, rather than shaping their methods of achieving the same goal. Either way, any semi co-ordinated survivor group won't give half a damn about this anyway (because in a minor scenario it will only amount to a few extra AP spent for one account on the whole group/striketeams behalf), but it works on a personal level with survivors and just gives them a bit more limitation to what they can achieve/view without actually having to go outside.

Essentially, I guess I'll just be frank, I'm not really trying to change your opinion as much as I am simply explaining where I am coming from when I reject all the suggestions some users have given me... After reading the feedback and other ideas, I'm still confident that the original state of this suggestion would be the easiest for Kevan to grasp and liken to, and that's even if he bothers reading this namespace anymore (which I've always publicly doubted... but w/e). So, yeah. Obviously, don't hesitate to vote against this if you want to, I wouldn't be surprised the way I've turned my back on you, Honests and Pesatyel's contributions, but I'm gonna be headstrong with this! I'll probably submit it sometime tomorow. --

 

 

 

 

17:28, 3 April 2010 (BST)

---

New class: Ganster

Timestamp: User:Richerd joshepson/Sig 06:34, 30 March 2010 (BST)

Type: New class

Scope:New players and old players who needs more variarity

Description:In this incredible game, you can decide be a survivor or a zombie, if you choose be a survivor, you can be a militar, a scientist or a civil, the civils are Doctors, Police officers, Firefighters and Consumers, everyone fighting for they own life, but, how do the criminals to survive the outbreak, or theres no crime in the city of malton? As a ganster, you starts with shotgun training skill, a shotgun an spare ammo(4 or 6 shells) and a knife or a melee weapon and the hand to hand combat skill(a real ganster should be better equiped) and you pay 75 exp points for civilians skill and military skills(the gansters knows who attack like soldiers and act like normal people) and 150 exp points for scientist skills, obviously, they are not the smarter guys of the town, and the startup message could be You are in a job, there is a dead body near you,the job is not very nice, but it gives some money, then, there are a lot of activity, shots, screams, cops and soldiers everywhere, you think, maybe a gang war, but,the body in the room rises, he tries to attack you, you run out of the building, and you dicover a ten thousands worser scene, zombies, with blood in their mouths and your patners are dead in a crash car, you take a weapon from the car, you leave the block, running for the city, at least, you find a safe place,then you think, if the hell exists, it moves to malton. or a shorter version of that. Notes If someday includes machine-guns in the game, this class can starts with that weapon. the shotgun training skill can be swapped for tha basic firearm training skill.

Discussion (New Class: Gangster)

Emm... use the proper format first off, and gangsters are way overpowered, if they start with 4 shells, a shotgun, 2 skills, and only pay 75 xp for all but 7 of the skills in this game. --Enigma^talk 04:51, 31 March 2010 (BST)

I fixed it.-Pesatyel 05:39, 31 March 2010 (BST)

Actually you got the discussion header wrong, but it's all good now. -Devorac 06:56, 31 March 2010 (BST)

D'oh!--Pesatyel 04:56, 1 April 2010 (BST)

We already have Convict in Peer Review. Similarly, we have Punk. The problem with "new" classes is that they aren't really necessary since, by level 6ish, every class is essentially the same. Everyone takes Body Building, Construction, Diagnosis, Free Running and NecroTech Employment. Healers will take Lab Experience and combat types will take Hand to Hand (or another gun skill). Everything else is "personal preference" and, yes, I know so is the list above, but those skills are the ones everyone takes pretty quick. As for the suggestion itself, as pointed out, it is overpowered. NO class starts with 2 skills, so why should this one? Secondly, which "category" would this be in? THAT would dicatate the cost of the skill purchases.--Pesatyel 05:39, 31 March 2010 (BST)

First question, is your first language English? Next question, how do you justify a class that will out level every other current class (No class yet has two 25% cost deductions to their skill tracks), comes out hotter (two start skills), and starts out with a decent weapon on top of that (Giving gun skills and hand to hand to a newly created character is a zerger's dream). Obey the Midnight's rules. -Devorac 06:56, 31 March 2010 (BST)

Luckily for you this has already been taken apart by nice people. There is one starting class that needs two starting skills, but good luck getting that through Peer Reviewed. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 10:43, 31 March 2010 (BST)

---

Suicide

Timestamp: Jack Kolt Talk|Chars 06:26, 29 March 2010 (BST)

Type: New twist for anyone who is suicidal.

Scope: survivors, CR'd zombies

Description: Malton is a dangerous place. people are scared to death about getting eaten. so what do you do? well, if you've seen any zombie movie worth it's salt, you know there's always the person who goes and kills themself. now, there is the old standby of jumping of a building, but what if you have something that can do the job for you? this is where suicide comes in. basically, kill yourself with stuff on hand. Now, only a few items would make the cut. and they are: knife pistol shotgun When you click on an these items (when they are in your inventory) you get this message: this item has little effect besides combat (or some such) . would you like to use it on yourself? this will kill you yes/no clicking on yes will give you this text (if you use a gun, and will use one bullet/shell) placing the barrel of the gun to your mouth, you exhale sharply, then pull the trigger. there is a loud gunshot, and you collapse to the ground, dead. clicking on yes will give you this text (if you use knife) placing the cold blade of the knife to your throat, you clench your teeth and cut your neck open. blood drips over your chest, and you collapse to the ground, dead. --notes-- you do not take headshot for this regardless if you are a zombie hunter. anyone in the vicinity would see "Soandso killed themselves with a (insert weapon here)" any other weapons are far to unwieldy to warrant enough damage to kill yourself. your clothes get bloodied as usual.

Discussion (Suicide)

• Been suggested a buncha times before, but I'll let Izzy toss the list up, since he's got everything on tab. Main reason it's never been implemented was balance/abuse. Makes parachuting way too easy. A bunch of death cultists could hop into a mall and kill themselves with 48 or so AP left to kill and pinata the place. Etc RinKou 06:39, 29 March 2010 (BST)

RE Looking back on this, I'm sure didn't think this one through enough, as the amount of abuse this would get would be catastrophic. Well, good thing this isn't the real suggestions page. --Jack Kolt ^Talk|Chars 02:51, 30 March 2010 (BST)

Might as well just cut out the middleman and give zombies free-running... Hmmm :) --Honestmistake 08:55, 29 March 2010 (BST)

Suggestion:20071210 Suicide By Firearm is a good example of a dupe. And please explain how you can put a gun in your mouth and pull the trigger, without causing a headshot. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 10:03, 29 March 2010 (BST)

You know better than to use logic on a member of the DEM. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 10:33, 29 March 2010 (BST)

RE oh god, not these stereotypes again. but yes, It makes more sense to have a headshot. --Jack Kolt ^Talk|Chars 02:51, 30 March 2010 (BST)

Ross stole one of the better dupes from my files. The main reason that this is always shot down is due to barricade negation concerns, barricades are the core mechanic of this game, removing their effect in such a blatant and clumsy way is just stupid. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 10:33, 29 March 2010 (BST)

I, for one, support the idea of a 100+ zombie paratroopers freerunning over the barricades and becoming a lethal swarm of insta-death with the simple application of a knife. It just makes so much sense in terms of a zombie apocalypse, it's glorious. --OnlyKillingZombiesIsRacist 14:03, 31 March 2010 (BST)

Just a thought but, if only those survivors with infections could suicide (ie give up all hope and end the suffering asap) then it would at least be thematically pleasing. Of course there should still be a mechanism to make it a poor parachute... perhaps a 50% chance of a headshot and a 50% chance of setting current AP to -1. --Honestmistake 23:18, 31 March 2010 (BST)

---