Suggestions/13th-Sept-2006

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Revision as of 00:32, 25 January 2007 by Vantar (talk | contribs) (Added Category)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigationJump to search

Closed Suggestions

  1. These suggestions are now closed. No more voting or editing is to be done to them.
  2. Suggestions with a rational Vote tally of 2/3 Keeps over total of Keeps, Kills, and Spams will be moved to the Peer Reviewed Suggestions page by a moderator, unless the original author has re-suggested the Suggestion.
  3. Suggestions under the 2/3 proportion but with more or equal Keeps to Kills ration will be moved to the Undecided Suggestions page.
  4. All other Suggestions will be moved to either the Peer Rejected Suggestions page or the Humorous Suggestions page.
  5. Some suggestions may not be moved in a timely manner; moving Suggestions to Peer Reviewed Suggestions page will take higest priority.
  6. Again, DO NOT EDIT THIS PAGE IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM. It will be used as a historical record and will eventually be locked.
Suggestion Navigation
Suggestion Portal
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

It's Fisting Time!!!

Removed By Author, Daily Edit

  • I'd like to thank the voters for their mature voting I read each and every vote for input/concerns, not a single spam vote so all of them thought it had some degree of merit! But insisted the "about the body" portion needed to be dealt with for abuse potential.. I agree, it's 95% done, but that has to be dealt with before implimentation. Tally - 13 Keep/15 Kill (No spams very carefully thought out voting! Many kill votes implied a Keep if it was fixed, or wanted to vote Keep but it had to be fixed 1st.) MrAushvitz 19:10, 13 September 2006 (BST)

DNA Extractors Can't Scan Survivors

This suggestion was found to be a duplicate of this peer reviewed suggestion with 4 Dupe votes.--Gage 17:19, 13 September 2006 (BST)

Syringe Manufacture Alteration (2nd Modification)

Timestamp: 18:32, 13 September 2006 (BST)
Type: Balance Change
Scope: Syringe Manufacturing in NecroTech Buildings.
Description: Since it appears that people are very opposed to the idea of XP from syringe manufacturing, I find that the only way I will be able to make a suggestion balancing the manufacture vs searches that people will support is if I suggest that the two become essentially the same.

There is currently no reason to manufacture syringes. A powered NecroTech building (a requirement for manufacturing syringes) has about a 12% search rate for syringes, meaning it takes an average of 8 AP to find one, versus 20 to create one. Therefore, I propose that syringes should only cost 9 AP to manufacture. The extra 1 AP (versus searching) accounts for the higher convenience of manufacturing.

Votes

  1. Author Keep - I don't see any other way to balance it out that people might support. --Reaper with no name 18:35, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  2. Kill --People's Commissar Hagnat [cloned] [mod] 18:37, 13 September 2006 (BST)
    • Invalid vote struck. You must justify your votes. Wait can I do this as a non-mod? Youronlyfriend 05:25, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  3. Kill - There is a point to spending 20AP to manufacture a syringe - you're guaranteed to get one. There is no guarantee if randomly searching: there's only a chance. 9AP (in my opinion) would flood the market - nobody would bother searching. --Funt Solo 18:54, 13 September 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Why wouldn't people bother searching? It takes an average of 8 AP to find a syringe. Sure, it might take more, but there's just as much chance it would take less, so that balances out. Either way, you're going to end up with a syringe. It's just a matter of whether or not you want to take a gamble on getting it for less than 9 AP but risk failing and using up more than 9 AP.
      • Re - Choice A: average 8AP + 8IP vs. Choice B: solid 9AP + 1IP. That's what I call a no brainer. --Funt Solo 21:59, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  4. Kill - But, why not a compromise at 12 or 15 ap? - Bango Skank T W! M! 19:16, 13 September 2006 (BST)
    • Re - That defeats the whole purpose of the suggestion. The point is to try and make syringe manufacture worthwhile without being overpowering towards syringe searches. If the AP cost is less than syringe searches, then there would be no point to them. But if the AP cost to manufacture a syringe is more than one or two AP more than the average AP required to find a syringe, then it's not worthwhile to bother producing one.
      • Re - Refer to discussion page.
  5. Kill - As Bango Skank. --Sgt. John TaggartUNIT 11/5 NEVAR FORGET WCDZ 19:36, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  6. Kill I agree with Funt Solo. And in response to Reaper's Re on his comment, I would gladly spend nine AP instead of search - many players have no idea what the "average find rate" is for items, and as such would have nothing to base it on but their own experiences. And mine (One experience of mine: 30AP=5 GPS Units, 3 DNA extractors and 1 syringe) would most definately lead me to manufacture not search. If it was 15AP, I would consider it, but only just. - HerrStefantheGreat 19:39, 13 September 2006 (BST)
    • Re - And how many other times have you searched but found a syringe almost immediately? I've done it many times. If the average find rate for a syringe is 8 AP, then there are going to be roughly just as many lucky breaks as unlucky ones! It means the cost might as well be 8 AP! No one seems to understand this simple fact. When it comes to the big picture, there is no difference between an average cost of 8 AP and a fixed cost of 8 AP.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Reaper with no name (talk • contribs) .
      • Re Actually, you don't understand. Most people don't see search odds, they see luck. Then they say "Oh look, cheap syringe manufacture!" When it comes to the bigger picture, people like the comfort of certainty. If faced with the choice between searching for a syringe, when there is only a chance they might find one, and instant manufacturing for 1AP more than the "find rate", they will take the extra AP. It ain't broke, so don't fix it - HerrStefantheGreat 17:57, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  7. Kill - you pay for conviniece.--Gage 19:43, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  8. Kill - The convenience cost is far too little, not to say that revives don't need any buff. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC☺T☺+1 20:04, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  9. Spam - What gage said. Also, this suggestion is retarded. Searching and Manufacturing syringes is not the same thing, and shouldn't become the same thing. Why not we make every single character exactly the same apart from what 'side' they happen to be on? That will be great fun won't it? – Nubis NWO 20:30, 13 September 2006 (BST)
    • Re - They still won't be the same. One will be more convenient and cost an extra AP as a result. And even if they were, that would be better than one being many degrees better than the other.
  10. Keep AP spent maufacturing syringes cuts down on server load from searching. Good for server, good for game. He's right, revives are hard to come by, and when you make one you can get 10 XP when they're used.. so speed up the manufacture, scientists need those XP man. --MrAushvitz 20:45, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  11. Kill - Once again, manufacture should be less effective. I might keep if you made the cost a little higher. LIke 15AP or maybe a bit less. 20AP might be a bit excessive. --Rgon 20:54, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  12. Kill - i think eventually with this we will reach a balance. Right now if the average is 1 in 8 then 9ap is too close to it,1 in 8 is just an average but it could take 10+ to really find it. I think manufacturing a syringe for 10ap is good, but then again I'm a survivor and it would suit me, but in terms of game I think around 12ap is good- I think its about fair... --MarieThe Grove 22:17, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  13. Kill- 15 is a good number, but 9!!! That's like suggesting 7 ap! --Officer Johnieo 22:23, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  14. Kill - --CaptainM 23:59, 13 September 2006 (BST)
    • Invalid vote struck. You must justify your votes. Youronlyfriend 05:28, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  15. Kill - Stop saying that there's an extra 1ap cost for the convinience. There isn't. There isn't a set difference between the AP most likely to be required to find one syringe and the AP required to manufacture. Because SEARCHING ISN'T CONSTANT. I need one syringe very quickly to revive someone for whatever reasons. I manufacture. I'm just doing the rounds and stockpiling on syringes, i'll search. --BBM 00:22, 14 September 2006 (BST)
    • Re - It may not be constant, but the fact is that for every possibility where you get less than 1 syringe per 8 AP (say for example, searching 32 times and only getting one), there is a possibility just as likely that you will get more than 1 syringe per 8 AP (like searching 8 times and getting 4 syringes). So for every possibility where you search an X amount of times and get Y syringes, there is also an equal probability of searching and getting the exact opposite. Therefore, when it comes to game balancing purposes, a constant of X AP is equal to 1/8 chance per AP.
  16. Kill - Too little AP. CaptainM? Why do you have a link to the logout page? --Pinpoint 00:44, 14 September 2006 (BST)
    • Re - Dunno. Might have something to do with the fact that I haven't made myself a page yet, so it may just instead transfer to the logout page.
  17. Kill - Wrong again, the AP needs to be higher this time (almost there though!) And its NOT a fact that you get a syringe every 8 AP because it can vary. 8 AP is just a calculated average.--Mr yawn 07:45, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  18. Kill- I like the idea I really do and you WILL get a keep vote off me but ONLY if you change it to 10 or 15. Probably 15 because everyone else seems to like it Blazefire 10:55, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  19. kill - 10 or 12 sounds like a better number. The Mad Axeman 11:58, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  20. Kill - Still too overpowered. Shaving 5AP off the current manufacture limit I would agree with, but not 11AP. That's just over the top. --c138 RR 12:05, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  21. Kill - Manufacture and find rates don't need to meet. --Max Grivas JG•T•M•F! 18:12, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  22. Kill - You might as well just search. The Badman 20:46, 14 September 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 2 Keep, 20 Kill, 22 Total. --Funt Solo 14:07, 16 September 2006 (BST)

New Lab Bench (repeated Syringe Manufacture slightly lowers cost)

Removed, with a re. Rheingold 04:58, 14 September 2006 (BST)

  1. Kill - I almost voted Dupe, as this is close to Cooperative Syringe Manufacture in spirit, if not mechanics. (I think Co-op Manufacture is better anyway.) --Sgt. John TaggartUNIT 11/5 NEVAR FORGET WCDZ 00:13, 14 September 2006 (BST)
    • Re That one was also mine. Rheingold 04:58, 14 September 2006 (BST)

It's Fisting Time!!! (Edited for television, "abuse-free" version)

Timestamp: MrAushvitz 19:51, 13 September 2006 (BST)
Type: Punching out survivors
Scope: The punching out (KO) of a fellow survivor is non-lethal!
Description: The edit from today...

What a horrifyingly inappropriate name for a perfectly good suggestion, and yet.. we must move on.

Punching Edits, KO's For "Survivor On Survivor" Bouts:

There are times, when your fellow survivors need a beating, and yet, if you kill them... You are labeled a muderer (PK).. and even worse, have added a body to the zombie horde. What is to be done? Where's the "Justice" in Malton, when cops, prison guards, lawyers and judges are too busy using their nightsticks on zombie hordes?

  • Non-Lethal Punch Attack (KO): Whenever a survivor finishes off another survivor with a punch attack, the result is non-fatal.. a KO!
  • Headshot Limitation: Headshot does not apply to people you KO from punching, that would be "griefing" your fellow survivors, especially newbies.
  • Basically the survivor goes down, but is not considered a body. They are under a special effect, they are "like" a body in the sense that those who see them see "You see X unconsious survivors", and it will cost them AP to stand up. But they are not a dead body, they don't get tossed outside when you click the "dump the bodies" button (that would be griefing, and murder as well.) Anyone can tell the difference between an unconsious man and a dead body, a revived one is a bit trickier...
  • When a survivor stands up after being KO'd they always have 5 Life to start with... because you aren't a zombie you don't heal up to full. If you are infected, this doesn't give you much time to work with, which is why it's 5 Life and not higher. ("I'm infected, knock me out!" - No, no abuse.)
  • KO Restrictions: You are only "ko'd" if there are no zombies at your location, and you can only be ko'd if there aren't zombies at your location! What this means is you can't "save" someone by knocking them out before a zombie finishes them off (abuse, stealing kill XP from zombies, bad.) And you aren't even alllowed to knock someone out if there is a zombie at your location (if you punch away their last Life, you killed them, out of panic.) The zombie presence is a definate panic inducer, and a "friendly fistfight" cannot happen when zombies are present.
  • Free-Stand: Whenever a zombie enters a location that contains unconsious humans... they all "stand up" for free! Yes this "saves" Ko'd survivors AP for standing up, but... being an unconsious body does not save you from getting eaten. Far from it, if anything this is the most "brutal" punishment (often reserved for zombie spies) survivors place on their fellow man under these conditions.. leaving a stunned man behind to be dealt with by the living dead. it is a group form of "murder" which, is "legal" (we didn't kill him the zombies did!) Needless to say "zombie spies" can expect to be Ko'd at times just before the zombies make it in.. if the zombies are in already, a point-blank headshot will suffice.
  • Lowered Killing XP Bonus: Normally, you only gain 5 XP grant for KO'ing a fellow survivor. As this bonus is less "risky".. but better respected in most of human society. (this is half the usual 10 XP kill bonus.)
  • There is one building-related exception to this rule.. inside a powered Arena: You get the full XP grant as that of a kill! 10 XP! If you KO another survivor either inside or outside of a powered Arms or Club... you gain 7 XP, almost a full bonus! These buildings are considered more of "natural" setting for a proper fistfight.. contributed to perhaps by the presence of alcohol. Not that the occasional police station, church, or overcrowded mall doesn't experience some tension periodically.

"Let's take it outside buddy..."

Punching Game Mechanics Additions... Slight Punching Buffs:

  • To make the human fist a considerably less useless "weapon" for non-lethal diplomacy,survivor negotiations, justice, defining "rank", and recruiting/de-rercruiting purpouses: The "Starting Punch Attack" is raised from 10% to 15% (which becomes 30% with "Hand To Hand") a very slight benefit, but every single hand weapon in the game (even the crowbar) is deadlier(metal and wood are good for that.) You may have to take several swings to KO your target, later skills may buff this, but for now this is quite fair.
  • Consecutive punch attacks: Anytime you "hit" with a punch attack, your next punch attack is at +5% to hit, and will give you 1 XP if it was made on another survivor. (Thank you... Marie, an excellent suggestion addition!) The reason why is without the XP from each and every punch attack you really won't be gaining any XP for actually doing only punch attacks on a survivor (1 Life damage, halfed, is 0.) So this is the "beatdown bonus" applied to punching if you're on a roll, you keep pounding on them (if you have the AP to do so, it still takes a long time.) Note: Neither the +5% to hit for consecutive punches AND the XP bonus apply to zombies! They aren't alive and don't have the nervous system (KO) vulnerabilities of the living. No one can KO a zombie.

Intended Game Effect: Well, not just for RP purpouses, it is an unfortunate element of the game that there are "zombie spies" and yes, you can kill them, but then they become zombies again. This is one non-lethal method of dealing with traitors to humanity, as well as "enhancing" the role playing experience.. surely we can settle this like men?

In all seriousness, this has great potential to add to the gaming experience.. but nobody dies! This is one way to "reward" a survivor for breaking your safehouse generator.. and the like. Zombies won't complain about human beings beating on one another, they will just keep doing what they do, indifferent to the social habits of their food.

Votes

  1. Author Keep "...and in this corner.. surrounded by bitches..." I wanted this suggestion to be much shorter, but I had to cover all the bases, and make it "abuse free". But you are free to abuse your fellow survivors, if they deserve it... Certain PK groups may enjoy a good beatdown, possibly ASS. --MrAushvitz 19:51, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  2. Spam Wow, it's even worse this time. Rheingold 19:57, 13 September 2006 (BST)
    • Re Yeah, all those carefully worded changes that prevent abuse certainly do clutter up the suggestion. This was what I was asked to do, I have been listening to people. --MrAushvitz 20:08, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  3. Spam Encourages survivor feud clusterfucks. This is humans vs zombies, not Gangs of Malton. – Nubis NWO 20:28, 13 September 2006 (BST)
    • Re Gangs of Malton, well some survivor groups basically are gangs. It's an option, being stuck in a safehouse for weeks at a time can be boring and I found a decent use for arenas, pubs and clubs when powered. Sorry, it's too damn good to ignore. (You can beat up my characters in UD if you like.) --MrAushvitz 20:48, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  4. Keep - Sorry to say, but I can't see anything bad or good about this.--Canuhearmenow Hunt! 20:49, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  5. Keep At least he tried to get rid of all the things that people said had the potential for abuse in the previous suggeston... I really cant see anything wrong with this. And there have been a couple of people I wanted to knock out in game... --GhostStalker 20:54, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  6. Keep I like both this and the original. It'd be cool just to beat the hell out of your fellow survivor. That name though... I think someone's been watching a few too many adult japanese cartoons... --Grigori 22:05, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  7. Kill - Just not my flavour. --Funt Solo 22:10, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  8. Keep - It will never get implented (even if it passes the voting), but sending that many suggestions deserves one keep every now and then. --Niilomaan GRR!•M! 22:13, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  9. Keep - Hah! This definitely amuses me. Karloth vois RR 22:47, 13 September 2006 (BST)
  10. Keep - Let's face it guys, not every survivor is going to be a nomad like some people want. If a survivor wants to do something besides mindless kill the unkillable, let them! --Officer Johnieo, 22:48 13 September 2006 (BST)
  11. Kill - Still only 5 XP :( --CaptainM 00:02, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  12. Keep - I like this one, I really do. Also, it gives the punch attack a use. --Sgt. John TaggartUNIT 11/5 NEVAR FORGET WCDZ 00:06, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  13. Keep - I actually liked the previous one a little more, but this still gets a keep from me. --Pinpoint 00:52, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  14. Kill - I still don't like the Survivor vs Survivor idea: You want a fight, step OUTSIDE, plenty of contendants there. Also, so many patchs to fix the suggestion makes it so messy... --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC☺T☺+1 01:12, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  15. Keep - it makes me happy.--Gage 06:50, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  16. Kill - This is zombies Vs. Survivors, not "OMG FIGHT CLUBZ!!!".It just doesnt make sense to have this.--Mr yawn 07:43, 14 September 2006 (BST)
    • PS - Heh, i thought i looked over something. What does CNR mean?--Mr yawn 17:53, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  17. Kill Great, a way to spend lots of AP to drain a little AP from your should-be allies. Someone destroys your generator you want to kill them so they become a zombie and can't reach your generator so easily. --Jon Pyre 08:33, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  18. keep kevan may impliment a modified version of this but the way it is I dont think so somehow Blazefire 11:01, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  19. Keep - I like this suggestion. If it gets implemented, people can then give a good KO to the Kill voters Kaylee Hans 11:06, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  20. spAm - What Nubis said. --Max Grivas JG•T•M•F! 18:07, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  21. Spam - Suggestion Dos and Do Nots, anyone? --Nob666 18:30, 14 September 2006 (BST)
    • Re Which is why I made the XP grant for KO's less than a kill survivors will get a lot more XP going after zombies. This is just a 2ndary option, to enhance gameplay without killing survivors. The basic game premise is still the fastest path to leveling, kill the other side. --MrAushvitz 19:18, 14 September 2006 (BST)
      • Re - Actually, I was referring to the last part. Sounds nice on the suggestion page, but who would actually KO survivors in the game? PKers use melee weapons and firearms to finish people off to get the full killing bonus and everyone else just stick to killing zombies and healing others. This would be just a bunch of rules added to the punch attack. --Nob666 11:08, 15 September 2006 (BST)
  22. Kill - Way too cluttered and too many rules and "abuse-free" things. If it needs that much, it shouldn't be implemented. The Badman 20:52, 14 September 2006 (BST)
  23. Keep - Its complicated yes, but it has depth. I like the idea of increasing punch attacks after successful attacks ;) --MarieThe Grove 21:09, 14 September 2006 (BST)
    • Re Of course you do, you mentioned it one the prior one before the edit (I credited you in the suggestion)... it makes a lot of sense! "Man, he's got him on the ropes! He's taking a savage beating.. oh God!" --MrAushvitz 21:53, 14 September 2006 (BST)
      • Re - Thanks,he he, I just thought in my strange humour that I would credit my part of it :) I like it. --MarieThe Grove 15:58, 15 September 2006 (BST)
  24. Hooray! Keep Thanks MrA1! --Gold Blade 00:29, 15 September 2006 (BST)
  25. Keep - The name is disturbing, but I love the idea! --Paradox244 W! TJ! 01:07, 15 September 2006 (BST)
  26. Keep - I've always wanted a nonlethal means of beating someone down. --Snikers 04:41, 15 September 2006 (BST)
  27. Kill - I don't think we need to knock out people. - Jedaz - 12:38/22/12/2024 11:33, 15 September 2006 (BST)
  28. Kill - the one thing I need to know for a KEEP is if the 5% bonus for consecutive hits stacks, or if it's like tangling grasp and is just one extra 5% that last as long as the hitting streak. --Kiltric 00:15, 16 September 2006 (BST)
    • Re Just like tangling grasp +5% to hit continuous, but not culmative, that would be too "luck based" and if it was culmative.. there would have to be a cap like at 80% or something. This is simple, you stun the guy +5% on the next one, hit him again? +5% again.. just keep pounding on them... --MrAushvitz 00:51, 17 September 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 16 Keep, 12 Kill, 28 Total. --Funt Solo 14:08, 16 September 2006 (BST)
  29. Spam -Promotes PKing and the "anti-abuse" thing doesn't mean squat. Plus, no free actions.--Pesatyel 02:24, 19 September 2006 (BST)
    Keep I think this is a good idea, as long as the surviver loses no health and i think the Percentage should cumulate for 3 attack consecutively and if him/her missses it starts all over again to limit the amount its used to prevent constant KO'ings another form of griefing created by this.
    Vote struck, signature needed.--Gold Blade 01:55, 26 September 2006 (BST)
  30. Keep - I like the idea of teaching a lesson to someone that needs it. Mpadfield 08:08, 26 September 2006 (BST)
    • Tally - 17 Keep, 13 Kill, 30 Total. --Funt Solo 20:08, 27 September 2006 (BST)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=Suggestions/13th-Sept-2006&oldid=535349"