Add Russia to 4.0


Hey guys, so I saw people talking about adding PEI to Unturned 4.0 so I thought why not to add Russia, it is a big map with many cool memories for me and also always when I play on it there is such a good feeling, but mostly people dont play it because the map is too big and everybody wants PvP, since Unturned 4.0 will be more Into survival this map would be fantastic for it!
Hope you like my suggestion, also I didnt say the map shouldnt be changed :wink:
~ Oli


i mean, russia the actual country is… pretty big
maybe it should be split up into different locations in russia, based on different regions. that would make it way better. you could have one map in a pine-forest area, one in mountains, a deciduous forest, etc.


Why should we stick and remake an entire map from 3.0 to 4.0 just because it’s “pretty cool” when we can just make an entirely new map with a similar feeling and experiences that of russia, at the very least. Heck, maybe a new concept for it.

Maybe it’s more fitted with a workshop suggestion, but again, no-one takes requests willy nilly.


Yeah i would like to see new maps in unturned II maybe biger than russia and like basics maps similair to PEI like in more bigger but in survival way


Russia is a map with many flaws which I do not want to see return to 4.0. Adding 3.0 maps to 4.0 is also just a bad idea in general.


Please enumerate some flaws :slight_smile: I dont know any.

  1. Upper right of the map has no incentive to go there outside of exploration
  2. The left side of the map is far to populated, the only reason people go to the right is for the firestation, absolutely nothing else
  3. Not much of an incentive to go to the silo/oil rig as the zubek and attachments spawn at volk, which is arguably a upgrade from then nightraider, so the only actual incentive is to get alicepacks, which you can very easily get from killing megas or to get a ekho/matamorez.
  4. The oil rig and the liberator are at the bottom of the map which adds incentive for already geared players to go south (where freshspawns are) to do quests, which leads to fresh spawns getting gunned down by geared players.
  5. Petersburg and moscow are complete filler locations unless you go into the subway to get the very small amount of military loot, as they have the exact same loot as the other towns. (I have spent probably 10 times more time in novobrisk than in petersburg and moscow combined)

Just because russia is better than most other official maps (pei and washington) doesnt mean its perfect.


Adding on to that Russia really messed up the weapon sandbox. It made a lot of the ranger weapons really bad or just plain weird. It also added the most powerful AR in the game (the Fus) and completely threw out any realism when it came to weapons (A FAMAS using a ranger mag? Really?).


The weird civilian/ranger/military dynamic won’t be exactly the same in 4.X, and neither will the individual weapons or how they’re balanced.


I am a big critic of suggestions of adding 3.0 maps to UII just because they were in 3.0.

We have no clue how balance and everything will be, so it is incredibly premature to suggest such a thing - especially if you are expecting the layout to be the exact same. Russia in 3.0 was also exceptionally small given how big Russia actually is, as well.


At the right side of the map you should build bases, the key to success :slight_smile:


(replying to this thread’s OP)

I think these complaints are silly, and are just not good reasons to dislike Russia.

The complaint I’ve quoted from tehswordninja isn’t his main complaint, and is just a small bit he tacked on to the far more legitimate complaint that the Arms Shipment updates broke weapon balance. Of course, that’s not actually a problem with the map either (but rather the updates surrounding it), but nonetheless the main point is valid enough.

The complaint I’ve quoted from pulpfreewater isn’t that justified, in my opinion. To start, a lot of people would say that the Zubeknakov really just isn’t that amazing (which pulpfreewater does kinda acknowledge). Furthermore, Silo 22 and the Oil Rig spawn different loot than Volk Military Base does, so “going to Volk” isn’t the best alternative.

Now, my above paragraph is rather brief in actually describing the loot differences, so I should clarify. Volk, Silo, and OR (Oil Rig) all spawn military loot. The main difference is that while Volk has about five Special_Low spawn-group item spawns, Silo/OR both have about fifty Special_High spawn-group item spawns each.

  • The two Special spawn-groups hold the map’s end-game loot. The Special_High spawn-group holds the top-tier loot of all the end-game loot. Not only does raiding Silo/OR give you a significantly better chance of finding end-game loot than Volk’s five item spawns, but there is loot that can only be obtained from Silo/OR.

  • And mega zombies? The mega zombies in Silo/OR use the Special_High spawn-group. Volk uses a Special_Low spawn-group mega zombie.

  • I should note that the Alicepack is a Special_High spawn-group spawn on Russia (I’ve gone and amended the wikia wiki’s article to better clarify this, since before it stated all military locations were valid). You cannot get the Alicepack on Russia without going to a deadzone.

So that’s that: pure misinformation, unfortunately. Now, the other complaints are valid enough, although mostly subjective. I would like to kinda complain about one in particular though…

The Liberator (and any safezone on a map) should be relatively near spawn. My only complaint with Russia’s Liberator would be that some player spawns are in the way. Otherwise, its location makes perfect sense to me.

I’m against adding Russia to Unturned II because these kind of suggestions typically imply a raw port. All of U3’s maps are flawed in some way regarding progression and map layout. I don’t see any justification for taking the worst parts of a game and intentionally putting them in the sequel “just because.”

What I’m not against is adding a map based on the same location as a map in U3 is. Same location? Fine. Same layout/progression/items/flaws? Not desirable. U4 is a blank slate for a reason.


…your post doesn’t seem to be that strict on such things. I would still say that you’d prefer it being as unchanged as possible, especially considering the reasons you like the map and the memories you have on it, but that’s just how it goes.

So instead of considering it as a “re-add this map” suggestion, this could just be considered a typical map suggestion, like how people want Quebec, Manitoba, Miami, China, Siberia, etc.

I’ve never really cared for random map suggestion posts, especially since most of them don’t point out decent reasons as to why it’d be a good location for a map, so I can’t really support this suggestion either for the same reasoning. Maybe at some point Russia could return, but I’d rather maps be considered one at a time following a map release, based on what new things they could bring to the game. I’d also just really enjoy fewer maps overall, that get significantly more updates than any U3 map has ever received.

Then there’s things like climate/seasons/weather/etc. systems, which would likely make me want to switch maps less frequently. Maintaining interest would be nice.


TL;DR stop sticking with the past it’s BAD and it’s the reason why Nelson’s homeland got replaced by a croissant island

We need to move forward and revolutionise


I would assume that you’re giving a TL;DR of what Molt said, except that’s not what he said at all. Don’t use someone else’s well thought out post, as a taxi for what is basically the bumper sticker politics of posts. There isn’t anything inherently “BAD” with basing content on the same references that inspired content of earlier versions. You didn’t have any complaints about an AR and a Glock being used as inspirations for weapons in yet another version of Unturned, but once someone starts talking about maps you have this simple, vague, and broad complaint about not “revolutionising?”


I think he was generalizing the general consensus of re-adding 3.x maps to 4.x, as well as joking around a bit with his wording (especially since the idea of re-adding maps from 3.x was already talked to death on the PEI thread). And again, if he was generalizing Molton’s post, it seemed to be in good humor and not actually meant to be taken super seriously as a TL;DR.

On an unrelated note, you don’t need to get so angry and defensive like he verbally attacked you and your entire family tree. Chill.


First of all, you do realise your responding to the most sarcastic, bootlegged, and the one with the most eyepatches, and also the greatest pirate of the seven seas?

Second. Double bacon cheeseburger


Aside from defending that post’s authenticity and being a sudden nut crack over a satire post, I can tell ya that adding two unexpected weapons with generic character that actually has a place in the game’s current state is entirely different to suggesting a personally-picked map chosen for the sake of nostalgia/likeness, especially with the intend of keeping its map design.

And yes I would keep my post as a simple, vague and broad ‘complaint’ whenever someone or a few have already explained/summarised my viewpoint of one’s suggestion.


Thank you bro.


The problem with your complaint being so simple, vague, and broad is that it is so broad and vague as to make no distinction between simply porting a map into a new version, basing a map on the same location as an earlier map, basing a weapon on the same reference as an older weapon, or even keeping with good old fashioned zombies.
If you were just meming, keep it in #memes. #unturned-4 is for the grown-up discussions.


Yeah, my post out of ~100s of similar ones in the past several months. That includes some of yours.

If you think you have a higher sense of judgement to what’s broad and vague, then you shouldn’t be posting something that’s no different to mine.

What’s weird about it? What isn’t the same? Very informative. You don’t provide context the same way as I do.

Now please don’t be so judgemental for no particular purpose.