I used Rust as an example. Its the closes game you can compare Unturned with and its mechanics are way better than any other survival games.
Bases shouldnt get wiped after a certain amount of seconds like it is now, instead they should decay with time. Heres the ideas that I came up with:
Idea 1:
In Rust you have a tool cupboard that prevents random strangers from building next to your base. The bigger the base is the more resources it takes to keep the base up and secure it from decaying. Bigger groups/clans would have to spend way more time to keep up their base and solos/duos require way less. This would not only balance bases in general but also nerf zergs from taking over a server, making it harder to maintain their base. If the cupboard is out of recourses, the base starts to break (lose HP over time). The walls and roofs could start to “crack” or whatever when the base reaches certain amount of HP, making it visible to players how low health the base is at. Players can easily repair the base again.
Idea 2:
Pretty much number 1 but with the exception that you wont require more recourses the bigger the base is, instead you require X amount of recourses per player that has access to the base in some way. (possibly per bedroll or per user having acess to doors)
Idea 3:
Every X amount of seconds the base health decreases once a base member is offline for more than Y amount of seconds.
Vote for what you like the most and let me know if you have other ideas on how to handle base decay.
I think Idea 3 is good, but it would be incredibly annoying and time-consuming to keep repairing every part of the base.
Idea 1 works well for Rust, I think the general concept would work for a game like Unturned too.
Idea 3 is the best idea, but I think it should be tweaked a little. I would far perfer it to be an insta-delete, because if you use explosives for raiding, and they deal flat amounts of damage, the meta would be logging in every so often in once the amount of explosives needed per wall or what have you would decrease, effectively HP gating your base. Instead, I think it should be an auto delete system and not a degradation system, and you could probably make it hinge on the more time you play on a server the more time you can be away from the server, which would prevent people from just logging in and leaving to keep their base, and if they are AFKing, they would be afk inside of the base. This would have a cap though, so you cant just AFK for a super long time and have you base stay a super long time.
As an example, you and your friend make a lil house, you both play for an hour, you now have 2 hours in total of group playtime, which is divided by two, so you have one hour of group playtime, which would translate to X amount of time until your base dies. I think this would be better than ripping off rust, without punishing solos for building larger bases, or making a small base meta like 1
Idea 2 is anti-group pro-freelancer. I definitely do not want to watch the game crumble down into tribal warfare, and I would like to see group-play expanded - as I said in this post (that Nelson liked ^^)
I’d just like to point out something I’ve seen happening in this forum which is pretty annoying: If you vote in favour of an idea in the poll, consider liking the post, otherwise you’re just leaving OP confused.
I’m not a huge fan of any of these. Once a wall is built, you shouldn’t need additional resources to keep it going. I’m fine with other core parts needing resources; advanced electronics should require repairs from time to time, but your base shouldn’t just crack because you got offline. I’d much prefer bases to decay once clan members haven’t been on for weeks. It’s super easy to offline raid bases anyways.
Rust is a completely different beast than unturned, I don’t think they make that great of a comparison as Rust has a far different “culture” than what I am hoping UII will have, although we can’t really say for sure, but nelson has wanted to make a survival game.
I think the lack of likes spurs from the fact than Panda3d made the exact same post, got the exact same critique, and almost the same amount of people “agreeing”
Also, sadly for some reason not liking posts is just sort of forum culture. (with exception of badge-whores)
I wouldn’t necessarily compare Rust and Unturned since they both have different styles. However, I have always been fond of the upkeep mechanic where you need a certain amount of resources to keep bases/storage units. I liked it because it keeps the players on their toes, trying to get resources.
Not only that, but it also solves a HUGE issue from 3.0
COMMON ITEMS BECOME UTTERLY USELESS, that being wood, metal scrap, nails, and the like. Other than expanding what you already have, these items are useless. However, this mechanic will make it outright mandatory to have them if you wanna keep your base intact. Not only that, but it also gives the server a break from keeping all these afk bases taking up space and memory. This is all I can think of as of now, might expand when Im off work
I feel like you wouldn’t know, considering 4.0 hasn’t came out. I think you’re trying to make assumptions of 4.0 based on 3.0, which is not the best thing to do.
“culture” as in player-base? That doesn’t have much to do with anything. Rust can’t change their player-base, Unturned can’t either
Speaking of HUGE issues
ATTENTION BUDDIES
This would basically solve the dumb issue of random useless buildables being strewn about the map. This would partially help stop those who block off buildings, etc. It’s aethetically beneficial, beneficial to client and server resources, beneficial to movement, and so on.
This is just wrong, and I assume you know it, but I guess that’s irrelevant because I’m talking to you! 100% right until 100% wrong right? Either way we are on the exact same page. Refrain from replying to people just to feel something.
I have to agree with @anon67155151, While 4.0 most likely isn’t going to be like 3.0 I dont think that 4.0 is going to be like Rust. Sinc Rust is mostly just about pvp (If im not totally wrong) and 4.0 is going to be more of a survival game then I dont think mechanics from Rust will work all to well in 4.0. I actually think 3.0 and Rust are going to be more similar to each other than what 4.0 and Rust will be.
I think that the “culture” of the game will depend on how the game is made, 3.0 is in the pvp state that it is in now sinc there isn’t to much other to do than pvp and raid, and same with Rust (I dont play Rust but thats the view that I’v got of the game). So if 4.0s mechanics and features are designed for survival then i think the culture of the game will be diffrent from 3.0s.
Personally I think that rust is not for survival and neither for realism, but for pvp, so I believe bringing a lot of things from rust will eventually turn Unturned II into a pvp game.
Instead of the decay of the base, I think it would be more interesting than the hordes of zombies (which I am not mistaken, were confirmed) attacked the bases that were in front of them, for example, the various random bases that we find on the servers. That would force us to try to make alliances with people, to build more reinforced and piecemeal bases. Bringing us so much more Pve than Pvp.
Letting the base dacay after a while doesnt have anything to do with pvp. Of course, if you copy most of the pvp mechanics, it will somewhat turn into a pvp game. Base decay however forces you to take care of your base wich is a survival mechanic.
That is very true, thank you kind sir.
Thats why we need “sleepers” in the game. Basically you go “sleep” everytime you log off a server.
This way everyone is forced to build a base, just like it works in a survival game. This encourages players to stay on one server istead of switching every day. The servers will have their own communities where players know each other and interact more, isnt this what everyone in this forum wants?
Well…
Maybe we dont need something like a base decay over time.
Instead only raided bases should start to decay to keep the map clean. Lets take current Unturned as an example: You build a base - get raided (within minutes lol) - and build a new base. The old base will always remain on the map and is not being used at all. There should be a way to determain if a base is raided or not, maybe if theres no bedrolls in the base anymore or the claimflag/cupboard is destroyed.
With that being said, I would really enjoy if players have the opportunity to take over bases. Lets say they destroy the claimflag or something else that claims the base, players can then start to put in their own doors and live in it. This way you can also keep maps cleener as raided bases will be “recycled”.
