Suggestion:20070910 Attack Another Zombie

	Closed
	This suggestion has finished voting and has been moved to Peer Rejected.

20070910 Attack Another Zombie

ShadowScope 05:31, 10 September 2007 (BST)

Suggestion type
Zombie Hunter Skill.

Suggestion scope
Zombie Hunters.

Suggestion description

This is a 100 XP Zombie Hunter Skill. Basicallly, instead of attacking "a zombie" at the top of the stack you can also attack/interact with a "different zombie" (read, the next zombie in the stack).

The zombie at the top of the stack is the closest one to you so you instinctively seek to kill that one first. But a Zombie Hunter can overcome that and be more discriminate with his attacks. Basically, you can tactically attack a different zombie and help the human race. At the same time, you distrubte the damage to both zombies, so both zombies are only half-weakened. It allow for different tactics that zombie hunters can use.

DNA Scanning however would work as normal, as DNA Scans do not scan the top of the stack, but only the zombies that haven't been scanned yet.

(Please note that I was only editing in the justification for such a change, I am not changing the actual mechanics of what I am suggesting.)

Voting Section

Voting Rules

Votes must be numbered, justified, signed, and timestamped. # justification ~~~~ Votes that do not conform to the above may be struck by any user.

The only valid votes are Keep, Kill, Spam or Dupe. If you wish to abstain from voting, do not vote.

Keep Votes

1. This idea has been circling amongst my group and friends on UD. In my opinion it is a great idea and would give survivors a leg up, which is needed at the moment.--MichaelRead 05:44, 10 September 2007 (BST)
2. Change As long as the Zeds get an equivilent skill Sockem 07:31, 10 September 2007 (BST)

   Zombies already have the equivalent. They can choose to target individual survivors already. -- Pavluk ^A! 11:26, 10 September 2007 (BST) Non author re The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 13:01 10 September 2007 (BST)

3. --~~~~ [Talk] 10:05, 10 September 2007 (BST)
4. Keep - While I may not agree with Read on that statement, this would also make it easier to use certain tactics in some situations.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 10:52, 10 September 2007 (BST)
5. Keep - Potentially useful in clearing out zeds from buildings. This skill would let you weaken the zombies on day 1 and kill them on day 2. That's better than killing zed 1 on day 1 and zed 2 on day 2 because you'll likely find on day 2 zed 1 will have come back in, so you would need to kill him again. --Toejam ^{A Stats Graph} 13:53, 10 September 2007 (BST)
6. Keep A brilliant idea. For all you people saying it affects zombie anonymity, it doesn't look that way. It's just so if there's a bunch of them, and one has a flak vest, or you're low on ammo, you can shoot or whack the next one in the stack. In terms of realism, a zombie hunter would have grown much more calm then just shooting the first zombie he sees. A brilliant idea indeed. --Medico 21:26, 10 September 2007 (BST)
7. Keep - Neat idea. --Kikashie ^ELT 02:50, 11 September 2007 (BST)
8. Keep- Most excellent! This will give more satisfaction to the Zombie Hunting experience! --Vkkhamul 03:14, 20 September 2007 (BST)

Kill Votes

1. Change - If it affected DNA scanning as well I would vote yes. Otherwise, it's not needed. --Uncle Bill 07:03, 10 September 2007 (BST)
2. Kill - zombie anonymity: it's part of the mechanics, the game balance, and part of the flavour and ethos of the scenerio. however, you can already target any zombie on your contact list, we don't need this. get out there and DNA scan. or walk the Big Man zmobbie hunter walk and mix it up among hordes of active players whose profiles you can add. --WanYao 09:50, 10 September 2007 (BST)
3. Kill - I don't really see the point in this. --Hhal 11:13, 10 September 2007 (BST)
4. Kill - Being able to attack individual zombies is unnecessary. The only time you should be shooting zombies is to clear them out of a building, and at these times you should aim to kill one instead of wounding two. --Pavluk ^A! 11:41, 10 September 2007 (BST)
5. Kill - Since this doesn't affect DNA Extractors, I can see only one small use for this. A higher level survivor could use it to weaken two Zeds so that a lower level survivor might be able to kill both for more XP. That's not enough of a reason for this to exist. --Steakfish 12:36, 10 September 2007 (BST)
6. Kill - I fail to see the tactical advantage of attacking "another zombie" The preceding signed comment was added by boxy (talk • contribs) at 13:18 10 September 2007 (BST)
7. Kill - I always visualised the rationale for this as there being a mob of zombies - in zombie movies, people don't have the luxury of digging through that mob of grasping hands to attack particular zombies. If this ability differentiated between firearms and melee weapons as well as the number of zombies, it might make more sense. --Pgunn 16:40, 10 September 2007 (BST)
8. Kill - I agree with previous Kill reasons and see this just as an easy way for XP hounds to get around having to battle the pesky flak jacketed Zed that is invariably at the top of a stack. --Shazzelim 17:56, 10 September 2007 (BST)
9. Kill - As above, also tool to find rotters.--Karek^maps?! 21:34, 10 September 2007 (BST)
10. Confused How do you "distribute the damage between the two"? Simple thing, I think, would be instead of attacking the top of the stack you can attack one other zombie at random as if they were top.--Pesatyel 02:11, 11 September 2007 (BST)
11. Kill - I'm the same as Boxy, I fail to see the point of this suggestion. --_Ducis ^Dux_Sloth^Talk 03:24, 11 September 2007 (BST)
12. Kill - I can see the tactical advantage for taking out a zombie that his higher level than another or something like that. However, you can already select which zombie to attack if you have them in your contacts (if I'm not mistaken). For 1 AP, you can start building your list. --Ryiis 16:05, 11 September 2007 (BST)
13. Nope Confusing and unneccesary. Kalir FTW! _{Z/S UD Potato Words} 19:33, 11 September 2007 (BST)
14. Change - I can think of at least one reason off the top of my head to attack the second (or third, or fourth, etc) zombie in the stack rather than the first. For one thing, the first zombie might have a flak jacket and the second one not. Furthermore, the second zombie might have a lot less health and therefore be easier to take out. If you have enough AP left to take out the second zombie but not the first, this would be very useful. However, I don't buy the "distribute the damage between each zombie" part. If I shoot a zombie with a pistol, how does it hit both of them? Are we to assume that I'm so good with the pistol that I'm able to hit the zombie in such a way that the bullet ricochets off a bone or something and hits the second one? And what if I punch the zombie? Does it do 0.5 damage to each zombie? Get rid of that part and I'll vote keep. --Reaper with no name ^TJ! 19:46, 11 September 2007 (BST)

    Reaper, I meant it the same way you do. I meant that a person may choose to attack both zombies with the same amount of ammo, attacking one zombie 50% of the time and attacking another zombie another 50% of the time, spiltting the potential damage between both rather than targeting the zombies. But you DON'T have to do it that way, you could just choose to concerate all firepower on the second zombie in the stack. The only reason I added it in is to make it clearer the use (which utterly failed)...so, um, is it possible for you to still change your vote, because what you are saying was indeed what I had in mind?--ShadowScope 23:13, 12 September 2007 (BST)

15. Kill -as others.-- Vista  +1  21:48, 13 September 2007 (BST)
16. unneeded.--Vow 17:37, 22 September 2007 (BST)
17. Kill Add the zombie to your contacts and DNA extract the next one, then add to contacts and blast them, then delete.

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Sorta nerfs big zombie hordes, doesn't it? --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 21:39, 11 September 2007 (BST)