Bases in unturned II (Addendum 1)

[ekhoalfa]

Bases are a topic I don’t see a lot of suggestions for, so here’s my two cents.

With UII having more of a focus on survival, instead of the large, ugly castles, or the grotesque mass of timber and steel that is freeform building, I propose more humble abodes. In most survival games that allow freestanding bases, the system to build them revolves around a sort of, panel system, now that I think of it it’s quite hard to describe, but you know what i’m talking about, the building systems in U3, Rust, Ark, and many others tend to follow a very similar template (with their own differences of course but generally they tend to resemble each other).

There is also the building system seen in The Forest, which operates off of fixed blueprints for structures, albeit with custom buildings that function similar to the system described above.

Both of these systems have their own merits and drawbacks. A “forest style” building system looks better but might to be more restrictive to players who want to build a cool base, whereas a panel style building system offers lots of flexibility but might result in massive bases that kinda ruin the whole “struggling to survive” vibe.

For UII, I propose a hybrid system, smaller sheds and cabins, as well as palisade walls could be built off a fixed blueprint, larger bases would use a panel based system, however, there would be a structural integrity metric, both so that skyscrapers aren’t as easy to build as they are in U3, and so that you can’t bridge right over somebody’s perimeter defenses (walls, minefields, etc.). Maybe there could also be a system that tracks how big a base is, so that larger turned hordes would attack it.

I also think that implementing better systems for traps could help with getting raided early on.

Addendum 1) Interiors

Just because the undead are hunting you day and night doesn’t mean ya can’t get cozy, bases in 3.0 (and a lot of other games) can feel pretty bland, rugs, chairs and lights might help with that. Perhaps even a “comfort meter”, not being comfortable wouldn’t have any negative effects, but a higher comfort stat would come with benefits such as food and water not depleting as fast. Maybe a radio to quell those old world blues and get info on coalition supply drops.

Thanks to y’all for reading, I undoubtedly missed a few things so I would love to hear criticisms and suggestions down below.

[Froggo]

I’d like to see more reclaimed structure bases. I really enjoy being able to board up a house or wall off a small part of Seattle for my base. Realistically, most people aren’t going to default to log cabins when an apocalypse hits. The big problem with them is that they block loot spawns and can be used to grief high-tier locations. This also results in them being extremely easy to raid (in current 3.0). I hope there’s a way to properly implement this part of the game so that reclaimed bases are as viable as player-built ones.

[ekhoalfa]

Same here man, I usually make my bases in barns. I think one way to prevent people from building in high-tier locations would be to have heavy bandit and turned resistance, i.e you can build a base there, but something will come and wreck it.

[rockey]

In my opinion, and since U2 is being developed on the Unreal Engine instead of the Unity Engine, I think a more robust structure physics system would greatly help in reducing the frequency and size of megastructures currently seen in Unturned 3.0. What I mean is that if the game were to have a tad more realistic physics that take into consideration weight and balance, megastructures such as skybases and extremely tall T-bases would be impossible to build for the architect has to factor in the building’s weight distribution and symmetry, else the building would just tip to the side and fall. I’m not sure if this is at all possible to implement though.

[The_Futurist]

A great suggestion, but i think the construction of two story buildings are also a great idea.

[TigerSurvivor]

I agree with basically everything you said, megalomaniac bases are a tremendous immersion break and that often hinder a player’s progression.

[ekhoalfa]

Yeah, two-story buildings and even three story buildings would work, as long as they were built well, the systems I’m talking about are mainly meant to keep players from building a 1 to 1 replica of the Burj Khalifa.

[JoaquinJAR]

More modular bases should be REALLY expensive or should have a limiting mechanic, I believe construction on unturned should be more fortify an abandoned house instead of build your own giant box house in the middle of nowhere. With unturned 3.0 there are few locations that you can fortify in multiplayer and also zombies still spawn, while in Unturned 2 maps will probably be bigger and it will be more focused towards survival so I see setting up a base in an abandoned farm (for example) a more logical thing than making a full house on the middle of a forest.

[The_Futurist]

true but i think it should be possiblle to build two story buildings in U2, but as you said the recaliming old houses is also a great idea.

[MrObi]

I’d love it to be like ARK. But then without their buggy snapping system that fucks your placement up sometimes. It gives you soooooo much freedom to make special forms things.

[The_Berrie-Man]

@ekhoalfa

Maybe there could also be a system that tracks how big a base is, so that larger turned hordes would attack it.

This would be sick and I have had a post on it still in draft, Nelson has mentioned something about possibly having turned attack your home, and it never being safe in his last two interviews.

I wanted to comment a couple days ago on a post but forgot about claim flags, claiming old bases, and decay systems. I think U2 could do well with a decay system that revolves around zombies rather than just a timer along with the old suggestion about zombies building nests in homes. And like you said the closer you are to a military zone or high loot area the harder the zombies and more frequent they would be.

Zombies outright couldn’t just eat your house like they do in 3.0 because they would just delete offline bases, but rather I think they could come in waves like every 30 mins or so and deal damage do your home, consuming themselves in the process, i.e. some kind of bomb zombie or zombie that spews bile/fastigum and dies in the process. So a nice base could last days (IRL) but still be overtaken if unwatched. And traps like barbed wires and spikes could prolong your bases health even longer.

@ekhoalfa

With UII having more of a focus on survival, instead of the large, ugly castles, or the grotesque mass of timber and steel that is freeform building, I propose more humble abodes.

I would love to see an addition for pre made houses or boarding up old areas, but feel like the game should always have the panel system we see in 3.0 and many other survivals. They do look ugly from time to time but allow for so much diversity in base design and plays a huge role in raiding.

Nelson could implement new building items that may make bases look less ugly cube like, like some kind of triangle roofs or add things like wooden 2x2’s look more like a log cabin then a brown box.

Some building just look shitty and boring like this box,

Also for example, say Nelson adds concrete as a building tier compared to metal and wood. This image still could fit the panel free form building of 3.0 but additions could be made to make the building look less like a box, with the angled corners on the roof and sides.

The Unturned II Building Bible

I’ve been away for some time. Have this and enjoy. [BaseBuilding_Introduction] An Introduction

A Summary

The Building Bible In summary, the Building Bible will propose use of new building tools, new materials and a new station to use for producing building materials. New structures and buildables will also be proposed for Unturned II.

Building Tools & Functionality

Functionality of Building Tools I would like to vouch for the hammer (And perhaps a makeshift variant) to become the m…

This has always been my favorite post about building and tiers on this forum, if something like these tiers where added I would be pleased. Instead of solid metal walls we would have something like concrete and composite concrete. I think with some elbow grease and additions things like boring 2x2’s could look pretty good.

The problem that always comes back is the how players will overtake buildings and block off looting for the rest of the server. Something like DayZ can get away with stuff like this cause the map is SO MASSIVE. But I feel U2 map will not be that massive. But if Nelson had this is mind maybe he could add a lot more shitty buildings for players to build base in and not really take away from the looting experience.

[ekhoalfa]

First of all, What’s your secret dude? How do you pump out these massive comments?

but feel like the game should always have the panel system we see in 3.0 and many other survivals. They do look ugly from time to time but allow for so much diversity in base design and plays a huge role in raiding.

My thoughts exactly, and in my opinion panel bases can still look just as good. Bases in rust, even big ones, still look like the belong in the setting. I don’t think pre-made stuff should outright replace panel bases, they should supplement and accent larger panel bases, and be used as small starter bases, with things like watchtowers and gates remaining useful later on. In general, I think the best way to make panel bases look good is to break up the lines a little bit, maybe with the panel models, I remember there were two asset packs for 3.0 that vastly improved the visuals for wood and metal bases. I also think a system that scales difficulty with base size would incentivize building multiple smaller buildings instead of one huge brick.

Nelson could implement new building items that may make bases look less ugly cube like, like some kind of triangle roofs or add things like wooden 2x2’s look more like a log cabin then a brown box.

Peaked roofs would be one way to do this, they have them in rust, the problem is no one outside of RP uses them because they are of little use. One idea to solve this would be by making peaked roofs decrease the rate of decay in a base.

The problem that always comes back is the how players will overtake buildings and block off looting for the rest of the server. Something like DayZ can get away with stuff like this cause the map is SO MASSIVE. But I feel U2 map will not be that massive. But if Nelson had this is mind maybe he could add a lot more shitty buildings for players to build base in and not really take away from the looting experience.

My idea for this would be to have bandits patrolling or even occupying high-tier loot areas. In addition to preventing fresh spawns from running in with no gear and coming out armed to the teeth, it would also prevent one group from taking over the military base and ruling the server with an iron fist. In addition to this, maps could be made so that in general, high-tier loot is far away from everything, making a full-time base there somewhat impractical. You could also have high-tier loot spawn in buildings that are bad candidates for fortification (bad sight lines, lots of windows, etc.).

Another way to ensure the looting experience doesn’t suffer would be to have variety in the ways problems are approached, for example, say group X has boarded up the gun shop, no problemo, find some tools at the hardware store, read some instructional books at the library (I’m planning on making a post elaborating on this), and build a gun yourself.

In regards to map size, I remember Nelson saying on a youtube interview that UE4 could support maps twice as large as 3.0’s insane size maps, but it would be hard to do just because it would take an eternity to make a well designed and detailed map that large. I think in general map size will increase though, I remember seeing on the discord AMA blog post that the planned amount of players per server was 50-100, so maps would have to get larger otherwise everyone would constantly be on each other’s doorstep. I think a large-sized map might support 50 players, but definitely not 100.

[Bestfriend]

Then base raiding would be way too easy. Canceling Honeycomb, different base designs that allow the person raiding be confused on where the loot is, and creativity. Just please don’t add set bases keep it the same and please don’t allow to build in City’s as said before it makes the cities look overall trashy with random structures placed and potentially blocking thresholds that access you to loot. Plus in my opinion make bunkers or structure around the map that are high valued bases such as the map Elver has did, and please make base raiding much harder making a blueprint system like rust has done creating ways to prevent finding raiding loot in a couple of mins with good rng, so being able to find some common components and some rare components in creating your blueprint item instead of straight up being able to find the item.

[ekhoalfa]

@Bestfriend

Then base raiding would be way too easy. Canceling Honeycomb, different base designs that allow the person raiding be confused on where the loot is, and creativity.

You’re completely correct, as I said above, I don’t think panel basebuilding should removed altogether, “forest style” buildings would serve as early game shelter and later game could supplement panel bases, you would still keep your loot in the panel base.

@Bestfriend

please don’t allow to build in City’s as said before it makes the cities look overall trashy with random structures placed and potentially blocking thresholds that access you to loot

I think that buildings in cities could work, but you make good points, a lot of the time, city bases do look ugly and they might block access to loot. I guess my solution to this would be, first of all, heavily neutered freeform building, in 3.0 I think that it looks bad, ignores physics, and it is stupid easy to just wall off all the good loot locations in the city. I’m not sure how exactly to keep bases from blocking off important loot, so I’m open to suggestions there.

@Bestfriend

making a blueprint system like rust has done creating ways to prevent finding raiding loot in a couple of mins with good rng, so being able to find some common components and some rare components in creating your blueprint item instead of straight up being able to find the item.

A Rust-like blueprint system would work well as a progression barrier, however I’m not sure about crafting raiding gear, I think it might be pretty hard to balance, Rust did it, but I think it would be better to come up with a more unique system instead of just copying Rust’s system. I do hope to make a post about crafted weapons sometime in the future, but in this post I’ll stick with looting. Just because raiding gear could be found doesn’t mean it would be easy to get, as I said above, having lots of hostile AI at high-tier loot locations would keep fresh spawns from just running in, and there could be other ways as well, like having good gear in a deadzone, or underwater so you would need diving gear to get it.

[Bestfriend]

@ekhoalfa

A Rust-like blueprint system would work well as a progression barrier, however I’m not sure about crafting raiding gear, I think it might be pretty hard to balance, Rust did it, but I think it would be better to come up with a more unique system instead of just copying Rust’s system. I do hope to make a post about crafted weapons sometime in the future, but in this post I’ll stick with looting. Just because raiding gear could be found doesn’t mean it would be easy to get, as I said above, having lots of hostile AI at high-tier loot locations would keep fresh spawns from just running in, and there could be other ways as well, like having good gear in a deadzone, or underwater so you would need diving gear to get it.

No of course I understand straight up taking the idea from rust is a bit off putting but allowing to build in cites and putting sentry AI’s in them would just allow the player to place down some sort of structure not be visible to the sentry to not get shot, etc, so I think those cancel each other out. Plus the rust blueprint-system was just an idea of what the Rust creators have done to not make their looting system based off nrg eventually dropping something high tier. Look all I’m saying is try to find something creative so some of the high tier raiding items can’t just get within a couple of mins to an hour because of rng make something that’ll benefit not being raided in a day and that’s stable.

[ekhoalfa]

@Bestfriend

but allowing to build in cites and putting sentry AI’s in them would just allow the player to place down some sort of structure not be visible to the sentry to not get shot, etc, so I think those cancel each other out

By hostile AI I meant bandits, I wouldn’t want them to be just sentries, they would move and attempt to outflank the player, the idea is, they would come and attack your base if you built it in an area occupied by them, building bases in these areas wouldn’t be impossible, it would just be far more trouble than it’s worth, between bandit attacks and more player attention. Bandits would only full-on occupy high-tier loot locations that you don’t want people to build in.

@Bestfriend

Look all I’m saying is try to find something creative so some of the high tier raiding items can’t just get within a couple of mins to an hour because of rng make something that’ll benefit not being raided in a day and that’s stable.

I honestly couldn’t agree more, I’d love some suggestions.

[NeonPalm]

I’ll start off by saying that I agree with a blueprint system for some basic buildings, which would especially be useful to beginners, and it would make it easier to create areas like villages/camps.

Now for the freeform building argument, I have to say I disagree with pretty much everything there. The only type of base I’d consider problematic in this regard is the skybase, but that can easily be solved without neutering the building system.
Walling off areas of the map should also be allowed, because all those efforts rely on the ability of those who walled it off to also defend their construction. As we all know, building anything requires a lot of resources, and it takes a lot of time to construct something big. Meanwhile, it takes minutes to destroy anything, so large buildings shouldn’t pose a problem.

Sorry if it’s a late arrival to the topic, but I still wanted to add my contribution.

[ekhoalfa]

@NeonPalm

Now for the freeform building argument, I have to say I disagree with pretty much everything there. The only type of base I’d consider problematic in this regard is the skybase, but that can easily be solved without neutering the building system.

I guess your right, my problem lies more with plates than freeform building as a whole. Things like barricades and fortifications should remain and be expanded upon, it’s plates I think should be neutered, I think in 3.0 they’re just overpowered, they’re cheap and can easily be used to circumvent claim flags, and as a result of that things like barbed wire fences and mines are completely useless, 'cus someone can just bridge right over them. I think for walling off buildings a barricade-like buildable would fill the niche that plates do now. A way to make them less OP would be to make it so you can’t place freeform buildables on top of other freeform buildables.

@NeonPalm

so large buildings shouldn’t pose a problem

Again, I think you’re right, I just don’t want the massive bricks that people seem to be able to build in hours, I brought up bases in rust earlier because even massive bases seem like they fit in the setting, like they’re supposed to be there, but that’s not the case with 3.0, every big base just looks out of place, I think it comes down to more of an artstyle thing. There was a mod for 3.0 that I think kind of fixes this problem. I don’t think big bases should be impossible, just more difficult to build than in 3.0.

A big reason why everyone builds massive bases is because honeycombing is just about the only way to not get raided, it’s not about making a fortress that would be hard to get into, it’s about making your base as much of a pain in the ass to raid as possible, because people will get into any fortress easily. My solution to this would be, in addition to a revised raiding system, more of a focus on exterior defenses, like walls and traps, honeycombing would still be a valid strategy, but we wouldn’t have to rely on it nearly as much.

@NeonPalm

Walling off areas of the map should also be allowed, because all those efforts rely on the ability of those who walled it off to also defend their construction. As we all know, building anything requires a lot of resources, and it takes a lot of time to construct something big. Meanwhile, it takes minutes to destroy anything

I guess my concern is more that progression would just be completely blocked, A way to fix this would be to have enough different ways to progress that it’s unlikely that all of them would be blocked off at any given time, but it still leaves the problem of groups taking over high-tier loot locations, if you can only get raiding gear at one spot on the map, and a big group takes over said spot, then it would be very tricky to oust them from their throne.

@NeonPalm

Sorry if it’s a late arrival to the topic, but I still wanted to add my contribution.

Nah man, thanks for responding, I love hearing other people’s responses to my suggestions, it’s never too late to give excellent feedback.

[anon42100029]

Honestly I don’t think having “large” bases is really that bad neccessarily, it’s just that in 3.0 you can build an enormous gravity-defying monstrosity and there’s nothing stopping you. (I think it’s actually planned to have some sort of basic physics system anyway).

I think the game should impose more limitations to have it just be impractical to have a huge base as a solo player rather than simply stop you outright. Being able to inhabit towns and buildings that you’ve liberated from zombies and fortified should just be more practical in some way.

If you look at houses in 3.0, they have all kinds of ovens, wardrobes, fireplaces etc pre-built in but they can’t actually be used for storage or cooking. Perhaps in II you could barricade doors and windows and then it would be your house, and once it was yours you could be able to somehow use the appliances/storage inside the house.

• I’m pretty sure locks are planned as well, so there could perhaps be lockpicking and different levels of lock, which would be a specialized and upgradeable item (each upgrade making the lock progressively harder to pick).

• Doors and window fortifications could be inherently stronger than walls (and upgradeable) which would further provide incentive to fortify houses. You could have a standard wooden door/fortification (with a door lockable using a standard lock, that could probably be crafted or scavenged as civilian loot). Because houses come with doors and windows in II rather than just open, you could probably just put locks on the doors and fortify the windows and then it would be considered your house, and then the door(s) and windows could be further upgraded, the walls are indestructible so you wouldn’t have to worry about someone blowing through the wall. Perhaps the storage inside the house could be further fortified and expanded, etc.

I’ve seen suggested many times around the forum a workstation that a base would require instead of a claim flag that would need constant upkeep (which I’m personally against) but if something like that was added, perhaps fortified buildings wouldn’t need them, or come with them pre-installed (as opposed to something that would be hard to craft yourself otherwise).

Perhaps if several houses in the same town were fortified, then a “safezone” could be able to be established there, making other players unable to be killed within the inhabited area. This could maybe encourage player co-operation thus providing incentive to fortify buildings that way. (Just an idea, there are probably a bunch of flaws with it that I haven’t thought of yet ).

[NeonPalm]

@ekhoalfa

I guess your right, my problem lies more with plates than freeform building as a whole. Things like barricades and fortifications should remain and be expanded upon, it’s plates I think should be neutered, I think in 3.0 they’re just overpowered, they’re cheap and can easily be used to circumvent claim flags, and as a result of that things like barbed wire fences and mines are completely useless, 'cus someone can just bridge right over them. I think for walling off buildings a barricade-like buildable would fill the niche that plates do now. A way to make them less OP would be to make it so you can’t place freeform buildables on top of other freeform buildables.

Yeah, you are absolutely correct there, plates should definitely have some sort of nerf because it’s way too easy to bypass any kind of security measure with them, and it sucks. Either making it impossible to stack them on top of each other beyond some reasonable number (5-10, idk), but basically, to turn them from an offensive powerhouse to a small defensive option.