Talk:Suggestions/15th-Jan-2007

From The Urban Dead Wiki
< Talk:Suggestions
Revision as of 17:34, 24 January 2007 by Funt Solo (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigationJump to search

Kill Counter

Timestamp: Darkvengance 08:19, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Type: Profile Addition
Scope: Everyone
Description: In your profile, under the field that shows how many times you've died, there will be a new field marked "Kills". This shows how many other players you have successfully bumped off. Zombie/survivor kills will not be differentiated; this totall will only display the overall tally of all kills your character has made. This will be visible to the owner of the profile ONLY and not the whole world. This addition would simply be used for a reference for the player.

Discussion

What, really, is the point then? Can't you just keep track of it yourself? Quite easily, I might add? All ya gotta do is call up a notepad or something (some scratch paper?) and make a tally. It isn't like you get SO MANY kills in any given session you'd run out of paper.--Pesatyel 20:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

That's true but you have to think that not everyone does that, and if you forget to do it just a few times then your count would be off. Plus not everyone wan'ts to have to call up notepad (vim?), or get scratch paper, plus since I actually have a life I'm not gonna write down a kill everytime get one (OOhh!! I gotta kill!! I need to write that down!!) no offense to people who have jobs, girlfreinds, etc.. Especially when the game's database can keep track of it for us.

True, but why waste time having the computer do something you can do yourself? Besides, as I said, even if you get up to THREE kills in a single session, you can't keep track? "Not everyone wants to "call up a notepad." WTF? It's a computer! The "Notepad" is built in! It isn't like you gotta hook up another computer just to activate it. It takes, what 2 seconds to do? Now, if others could see your kills, sure, but this is pointless waste of computing power.--Pesatyel 02:16, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
I'll agree with Pestayel with this instance. Your count may be inaccurate, and you may "accidently" overcount your kills...but it's only for you that gets to see it. If it was public, then yes, but now that it's private, it serves no use.--

ShadowScope 05:30, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I just want to butt in and say how humourous I found this. For starters, the point is that it's "nice to know". It's the same reason you kill Zed's or Harmanz in the first place. It's something fun to do. There is no "point" with anything you do in this game as none of it really makes any difference. You could, for example kill all the Zombie's outside of a Mall but you haven't saved it. All they're going to do is stand back up again and pick up where they left off. Likewise you could kill all the Harmanz inside the Mall only to have them get revived and come back. I personally think having an idea of how many Zeds or Harmanz I've killed is nice, rather than having to make a mental not of it (and let's face it, is anyone opening up Notepad or whipping out a piece of paper and keeping track already?).
The second point is on computing power. As I understand it, the database is updated every time you spend an Action Point (recording the decrease in your available AP's by 1). In which case it'd take bugger all effort to - while you were there - update the kill count if you've also happened to kill something. But the issue of time was what I really liked. The database would perform an update query in under a second. In fact, probably in even less than one tenth of a second. If opening up Notepad on the other hand and manually recording the kill takes 2 seconds, then that's effectively 20 times longer.
The only issue I have though, is that if it's going to be keeping it personal, I want it broken up in Zeds and Harmans killed as a Zed and vice versa as a Harman. And while we're there, start recording the other interesting "facts". Amount of HP healed, total AP's spent, generator's destroyed, generator's installed, generator's refuelled. The whole kit and kaboodle. At least then it'd be something players could share with each other if they choosed to (Malton Telephone employees could try and out-do each other in restoring power to Mobile Phone Mast's for example in order to win "Employee of the Month" awards on their wiki page and so on). It'd add a lot of role-playing opportunities and allow people to have more "fun" if they so choose.DarkUnderlord 11:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
This is the only reason I was suggesting the server to keep track so it would be fairly accurate. If you accidently overcount every now and then, after a few months the numbers could be off, you could be off by 20 or 30 (depending on how much you kill per session). And this is not a waste of computing power as it uses less than just calling up notepad, all it could possibly use up is a few more MBs of space. Darkvengance 19:22, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
What the fuck? Did someone else vandalise this so it got kicked off the suggestions page? I DID NOT FUCKING CHANGE THIS ON THE SUGGESTIONS PAGE AND I DON'T AGREE WITH THE CHANGES YOU TOOK THE LIBERTY OF MAKING. --c138 RR - PKer 09:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
lol wow..now this is funny, isn't that sad that a 16 year old is acting more mature then you? all I did was simply take a suggesting change it a little and submit it for discussion. As you can see your suggestion and this one are not one in the same (although very simular). Plus this is a free...wiki..if you don't want someone to make changes to something then don't put it up here.Darkvengance 19:22, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Keyword here is acting, kiddo.
"All I did was simply take a suggesting change it a little and submit it for discussion."
No, you actually submitted it to the official submissions page, without leaving any kind of note that it was MY suggestion that you copied + pasted then slightly altered. I seriously would NOT have minded if you'd said "kudos to c138 for the original version of this idea", if you'd asked me for permission, or if you'd re-written the suggestion completely by yourself. For fuck's sake, you even kept the same suggestion name.
"If you don't want someone to make changes to something then don't put it up here."
You know, it's true that people can, and probably will, modify anything that's put on a wiki. But that does NOT cover copying someone else's work without crediting or notifying them. It also doesn't cover editing other people's suggestions on the Suggestions page. To give you a rough idea of what I was feeling this morning when I saw this where I thought my initial suggestion had been, imagine you came up with a nice, simple idea, then stuck it up on the suggestions page after getting feedback on it for a couple of days. Then someone you don't know comes along and changes a core part of it into something you oppose.
For fuck's sake, if you'd asked me if you could take my suggestion and reword it for resubmission, I'd have said "yeah, go ahead." In my spare time I make art resources for Photoshop users, and I take photographs for people to use as royalty-free stock photography, so it's not like I'm a fucking Scrooge with what I create. But the difference between that and this is that I appreciate it when people RESPECT my ideas and work by crediting me when they re-post what I've created.
The official legal term for what you've done is plagiarism. This means copying part or all of someone else's work and claiming it to be your own, or neglecting to include adequate acknowledgement of your source. Learn this word well, because I get the feeling from your overall attitude that you don't have any respect for the intellectual property of others. Learning from this experience could save you from failing to graduate from high school, being sued for every earthly posession you have, getting kicked out of college, or being fired from your job later in life for repeating the tiny little action of taking something someone else wrote, then re-using for your own purposes without saying where you got it. --c138 RR - PKer 20:07, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Personality conflicts aside, this is a version I wouldn't vote against. It would still encourage pissing matches (I can imagine people posting screen shots to prove their kill totals) but it doesn't outright PROVOKE pissing matches, or seem open to potential meta game abuses. If I could, I know I'd target people with high counts, both as a zombie and a PKer... --Swiers 20:56, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

No actually I never did submit it to the official page. Itellectual property of others?? You have to be kidding me, if added into the game this wouldn't be your property it would be kevans! Also thank you very much but I pass with A's and B's in highschool and I am taking a coorospondance course in Law, as well as Psychology. Also you know what this is getting rediculous, we are here to discuss suggestions for a FREE game not to dispute personal issues. So with this final comment I bid you adieu.Darkvengance 22:52, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Alright, dipshit. I know it's difficult to accept the rules that everyone else is bound by when you're too busy being a mid-puberty punk rocker, but turn the shit off your speakers and pay attention for a minute, before your ADHD gets the better of you and you go back to cutting pentagrams into your wrists.
You copied and pasted word for word what I had written, edited one line, then resubmitted it as your own original work without noting whose text you'd copied. Now you're trying to intimidate me with the fact you're taking a foundation course in law? It's just as well you're taking that law course - hopefully it'll teach you the basics that you're lacking right now. "Failing to graduate from high school" is not a reference to grades: it's a reference to you getting kicked out for being discovered using uncredited (translation: STOLEN) sources in your essays. I'm not bullshitting here - at least four idiots in my school before me have had ALL of their exam results for that year revoked, and all they did was use other authors' work in their English essays without crediting their sources. That can be as much as copying an entire essay from "free essay resource" sites on the internet, or as little as using a quotation or passage from a magazine without including any kind of note that it wasn't their own creation.
"if added into the game this wouldn't be your property it would be kevans!"
Read. My. Fucking. Comment. It's copying the exact wording of my suggestion that is the problem here, NOT taking the basic idea and mixing it up a bit. You're free to do that as much as you like, but you're NOT free to just copy and paste what I posted before you, unless you've asked my permission to use my suggestion as I wrote it, or if you included a note explaining where the text came from. You did neither, and that's what this fuss is about.
"No actually I never did submit it to the official page."
I was looking for my own suggestion to see what the votes had been, and on the Previous Days' Suggestions page for the day when I thought I'd submitted it, the 15th of January, there was an entry named "Kill Counters", and it had been relocated to this page by one of the wiki mods because it had been edited after voting began. I quite understandably thought it was my own suggestion, hence my initial comment here, and I thought it had been moved because someone else other than myself had edited it to suit their own preferences, as I haven't touched the Kill Counter suggestion I submitted myself. Perhaps you just posted it on the wrong page and it got deleted, because I can't find any trace of it now...
"not to dispute personal issues"'
This isn't a personal issue. You stole someone else's work. Admit it, fix it, and let's get on with more important things. --c138 RR - PKer 00:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
"Alright, dipshit. I know it's difficult to accept the rules that everyone else is bound by when you're too busy being a mid-puberty punk rocker, but turn the shit off your speakers and pay attention for a minute, before your ADHD gets the better of you and you go back to cutting pentagrams into your wrists."
Hey FUCK OFF!! Get over the fact that you got pregnant at 17 and you have nothing better to do then sit at home playing a game while your boyfreind is out fucking your freinds! You didn't have to bring this to insults but I am just sick and fucking tired of all those stereotypical bastards such as yourself! Get over the fact that you're PMS'n and have to insult others to make yourself feel better!
"I'm not bullshitting here - at least four idiots in my school before me have had ALL of their exam results for that year revoked, and all they did was use other authors' work in their English essays without crediting their sources."
Well that sucks for them then doesn't it....but last time I checked we didn't have to post the sources for our suggestions here.
I can't find any trace of it now...
Because I never submitted it for suggestions!Darkvengance 10:10, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately I'm asexual, haha. Research your retorts next time please, they're more effective when you hit a nerve. All you're showing me now is your own insecurity in your past fortnight-long relationships with girls (or perhaps guys... do you swing that way, or both ways?) who only used you for your dick, then left you when they realised nature didn't send your package to the right address... Hot damn, this is too easy.
"last time I checked we didn't have to post the sources for our suggestions here."
Last time I checked, people didn't copy + paste each others' suggestions and take the credit for what they didn't write. To most people, excluding your good self, it's common courtesy and common sense to add a note when using someone else's work.
Anyway, you're boring me now. You can go back to your wrist-slitting and Shitknot now, and credit "your" suggestions to their original authors in future. --c138 RR - PKer 18:42, 22 January 2007 (UTC)


Hindered Passage

Timestamp: --SporeSore 18:24, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Type: Improvement(?)
Scope: Zombie effect on Survivors
Description: I am trying to come up with an idea that will convey the spirit of some of the previous suggestions regarding zombies holding buildings. This is pratically impossible since most pro-survivor voters will say 1)don't mess with free running 2)don't make it too complicated for beginners 3)don't have area effects 4)don't have effects that depend on numbers present 5)don't encourage zerging. Something has got to give since this will(and has) rule(d) out nearly every suggestion. Complaining about zerging is hopeless. Zergers will zerge.

My idea is that the passage of survivors would be hindered inside buildings relative to the amount of standing zombies inside. Urban Dead is set up so that zombies not acting as a horde are ineffective, but there are no horde effects upon survivors. I would suggest the following mechanics: 5-15 zombies, 1AP spent to exit a building. For 16+ zombies, 2AP to exit. This penalty would be in addition to the regular movement cost.

Why only this effect for zeds upon humans? Humans can already hinder zombie passage by constructing barricades, and zombies by definition are a horde. Humans scatter, hide and strike out as opportunity presents. The suggestion could be modified for the ratio of humans to zeds, but I think that would be too complicated. A message would need to show up beside the number of zeds in a building that would tell survivors the AP required to exit. I know a lot(if not all) people are going to hate this idea. I encourage those people to think of a better idea.

Discussion This has been suggested before, though I don't have the time to look. People will argue that if you have a horde of like 30 zombies, the "risk" is getting attacked 30 times, which is bullshit. You might want to have a maximum of, say 5 AP (at most) to movement. If you do it by every 10 zombies, you would end up at 11 AP to move with a horde of 100 zombies. That's just too much. And this would affect Free Running, right?--Pesatyel 20:21, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I like it actually, though I'd place a cap on the maximum AP expenditure (likely +2/+3). It would make assaulting zombie held buildings more perilous, though clearly not impossible- the biggest impact would be on travelling through suburbs like Ridleybank, which should be difficult. It fits RP wise too. A keep from me, but the spammers won't turn up until voting is required. --Karloth Vois RR 20:48, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

The idea is excellent but does need a fair bit of work. Free running should already cost 2AP just to reflect the additional dificulty involved, if that were the case this would not be needed! But as the chances of such a NERF to freerunning are extremely improbable this should be workable. I suggest making the numbers multiples of 25 for normal movement and 50 for free runners both with a maximum of +5AP. A warning would be a must, something like "there are so many zombies out there that tremendous care must be taken to avoid harm (+3AP for movement)" I would be happier still with the option to avoid the cost at the risk of being caught by the horde! "making a poorly timed run for it you are mauled for x damage and driven back!" That would make it a risky proposition but well worth it if your desperate! --Honestmistake 21:29, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the positive feedback. Free running would still work, but the penalty would also still be incurred. That is, a free runner could still leap from building to building, but the exit penalty would still be incurred. I wanted this to enhance the fear effect of being a survivor and entering unknown buildings. The thing is, there is rarely more than a few zeds in a building, so I wanted to set a lower limit that might still actually occur sometimes. If the lower limit is over 10 it will never happen, except during seiges, which was not the effect I was aiming for. I do see the benefit of setting an upper limit. An AP penalty greater than 2 would never get passed, not that this suggestion would ever get passed anyways. Why is it so many survivors feel that zombies are overpowered? Having played both I feel the opposite is the case, if you play smartly.--SporeSore 21:39, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
So, how about something simply like this: 5-15 zombies +1 AP, 16+ zombies +2 AP (or, perhaps 5-20 and 21+). As for the argument tnat zombies are overpowered, its because zombies don't have to worry about searching and inventory thus the are, technically easier to play.--Pesatyel 00:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Don't you think a lower limit of five would cause the suggestion to get spammed into orbit? (Although I agree that 5 is a reasonable lower limit, because even that number is rare in non-seige conditions). Any suggestions on how to fend off the anti-zerging arguments? --SporeSore 15:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Zerging? Forgot about that. Well, look at it this way if you only have 5, all it takes is 1 dead zombie.... It's a kinda subtle balance. to low a minum and it is easily abused. Too high and it is ineffective (trying to get all those zombies together). I think the possibility of zerging is low since the effect is minimal (the target is already leaving the square). Unless the also applies to ENTERING the square, then we would have a problem. Plus the anti-zerge features would lower the chances of zergers getting hits. That might be enough.--Pesatyel 04:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Would not want to implement it both entering and exiting. Too risky. I prefer to think of it as a lobster trap, easy to get in, not so easy to get out. Wish some ultra-pro-survivors would comment. I guess I will just have to wait for the spamming! --SporeSore 14:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, like I said, it would be a bit too complicated for entering as well (thought it WOULD make sense, to a degree). If you want "survivor" comments, you'll have to submit it since most of them (I don't just mean "survivor" players) don't vist here.--Pesatyel 04:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I didn't think I would, but I quite like this idea. If i see it come up I'll vote yes. --Brendoshi 17:02, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Another idea i have had regarding this is to make any attempt to leave a building subject to a free search for an exit. Exits should be found 100% of the time reduced by 1/2% per zombie present! The search penalty for free runners should be 1% per zombie to reflect the difficulty of climbing through a window while a zed is chewing your leg. As this will only really affect people during a seige it might be fun, I mean just look how many zombie flicks include a scene of survivors trapped inside. during a mall seige free-runners might have no choice but to brave the streets and it should actually make hordes scary instead of '48AP shootin fishies followed by 2AP to get clear of the area' Anyway If/when this fails i suggest opening a full discussion on the topic of free running to see if other survivors (i play 2 & 1 zed) fancy the extra challenge! --Honestmistake 17:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

So, basically, for every 10 zombies there is a 5% chance of NOT being able to leave?--Pesatyel 03:03, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
if the zombies are inside the building then pretty much YES! i suppose giving it a buffer of the 1st 10 zeds not entering the calculation might seem fairer but then again i wouldn't mind it as it is.--Honestmistake 17:34, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
This suggestion doesn't roleplay well for me at all. Consider a mall - with multiple exits, both standard routes and free running routes. How many is that? Well, I don't know - and neither do you. Now, consider the zombie horde - what is it? It's a group of hungry animals, basically - their target is living flesh. They're not going to meet up in the lobby and discuss the best tactics for covering all the exits. In terms of crowds of zombies slowing down survivor movement - there is already the peer reviewed Crowds Slow Movement suggestion. --Funt Solo Scotland flag.JPG 11:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Your argument about zombies being just a group of animals after food doesn't hold to well in Urban Dead. But it doesn't matter. The dupe link you provided is more than enough.--Pesatyel 08:07, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Not got time to check the link but I will, for now though remember that we are talking about leaving the building so in the mall all 4 spaces would need to be swarming to cause any real problem (50+ zeds per square only stop you 25% of the time!) and while there may be many entrances and therefore exits if they were fully caded i very much doubt the zeds were breaking through more than 1 or 2 of them! At the end of the day even if the other one is better it does no harm to discuss otherways of doing stuff!--Honestmistake 17:34, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Although the spirit is the same, I think it is not a dupe because the implementation is different. The peer-reviewed crowds slow movement got passed because it is so weak it is practically ineffective. Having a random AP penalty is not a good idea, IMO. Don't think of a mall, think of a smaller building, and then think of any zombie movie you have ever seen. Humans trying to get out while pursued by zombies. Never ever do all the humans make it out alive. A lower limit of 10 zombies is too high. Ingame that never happens except under seige conditions. The idea is to give an element of fear for survivors entering an unknown building. Somehow this thread has become derailed from my original suggestion which has no randomness, and has become a discussion of HonestMistakes comment. Honest please start your own thread if you want to sell your idea. Thanks.--SporeSore 17:41, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Talk:Suggestions/15th-Jan-2007&oldid=534655"