Dear Nelson: My 4.x wishlist

[CrimsoN]

Greetings

I know that it takes a lot of time, resources and effort to make a game and some of these might not even be possible to implement at the present time, but one can still hope for the future.

(READER’S DISCRETION IS ADVISED I know this will be a big topic, so I will try to keep it easily understandable and separate the extra details. Nelson, if you are reading this, I do suggest you read all the details. And keep up the good work, Unturned has come a long way from it’s humble beginning )

Here are the things that I would very much love to see in the upcoming 4.x Unturned, in no order of importance whatsoever (Many of these could be optional / could be toggled on and off):

More Zombie Diversity

I am not talking about the “special infected”.
The regular zombies all look the same in the previous Unturned games and, they all behave the same and are very predictable. This should be changed.

The zombies should be more diverse in terms of skin tone/color, faces (currently there’s only one face for the zombies. 2-3 more wouldn’t hurt), hair and facial hair, gender (now that Nelson is introducing a female player model, this will probably be implemented) as well as decomposition (broken/detached/missing limbs, wounds, bite marks and so on) and behavior (some would grab the players and hold on to them and/or try to bring them down, some would slash/bash them as they currently do, some would have slightly, but noticeably different movement speed. Also, some would move directly towards the players, without regards of obstacles and would mostly get stuck on them (fall down stairs, down holes, stumble over rough terrain), while some would behave like current zombies and try to avoid the obstacles).

But perhaps the most important thing is the animation. The zombies should be less coordinated in their movement. They should be shambling towards the players (the way in which they move towards the player should also be diverse), instead of holding their arms up and beaming towards the player as they currently do. They would sometimes stumble to the side and/or fall down.
Receiving damage would influence this. Suffering leg damage would slow down a zombie and/or make him crawl, arm damage would restrict a zombie from grabbing a player, head trauma would make a zombie slower and more prone to stumbling and so on.

Headtracker support (Freetrack, TrackIR…)

This would be very helpful while driving vehicles and especially aircraft as players will be able to look around while steering.
On foot, this would work like it does in the ArmA series.

For those who don’t know what headtrackers are, they are thingies that you place on your head and they translate your head movement/rotation into the game - you turn your head left, your game character looks left
In ArmA, players could move (translate) their head sideways and their character would lean to that side

More wildlife, urban animals and pets, ride-able horses

Currently there are only fish, deers, pigs, wolves, bears and cows in the game and these can only be found in the wilderness.
We need more animals as well as a way to capture them and keep them as livestock, as well as animals found in the urban areas. Horses for transport.

These would include the likes of rats (rat on a stick, anyone? ), squirrels, pigeons, chickens, sharks, dogs and rabid dogs, snakes, cats, sheep, crows, birds of prey and so on. Most of these would serve as a food source in a dire situation and preparing them would be affected by cooking skills, while some could be livestock. Others could be hazards (Sharks, wolves, rabid dogs). Some would be pets and could even guard your base. Some would be a source for materials (leather and wool), some would be a source of useful weapon modifications (poison being put on arrows and blades).

Horses would be used mainly for transport, but would be targeted by zombies and susceptible to poison arrows as well as any other weapons. Armor, saddle and bags could be craftable and put on the horses.

A fun thing that would be a nice addition to this would be the wildlife interacting with the environment (Wolves pestering livestocks and farms, rabid dogs hunting in packs, cats hunting rats, crows and vultures around corpses, flocks of birds being scared off by loud noises like gunfire and so on)

Aircraft overhaul

The aircraft in 3.x are just awful. I am talking about physics. These need to be vastly improved for 4.x.
The controls are just wonky and bad and the aircraft feel like they are moving on a plane rather than in a 3-dimensional space.

The aircraft need to have better inertia and handling, modular damage (damaging wings, rotors, engines, control surfaces and so on), they need to be able to stall (due to insufficient airspeed) and so on. Now, I’m not saying Unturned should be a flight sim, of course, but air combat and air support is often overlooked in games. Look for Battlefield 4’s helicopters and War Thunder’s Realistic/Simulator battles aircraft handling for reference

More Joystick support for vehicles

Steering wheel for cars and boats, joystick and HOTAS for aircraft.

More map destruction

This would add a lot more depth to the game, especially the tactical aspect of it.

Players should be able to break glass on windows, tear down walls (perhaps giving the sledgehammer an extra purpose), demolish bridges, bring down radio/water towers, street lights and flag poles, knock down fences and grass walls of the base map, not just player-created buildings (Players should also have a way to repair these, especially bridges). Allow shooting through a thin wall with a .50 cal machine gun or timberwolf (and shooting through those bullet holes), destroying a bed, tearing big holes in the walls/floors with a tank shell or C4, but not allowing the player to completely level the terrain. If we take a random house in the city for example, it should be possible to demolish it, but even demolished, it would still retain a certain shape and give some cover/protection. Player-made bases and objects, tho, should be completely destructible.
This isn’t just a cool addition to the game, it brings up a whole new set of opportunities, both for PvP and PvE.
In PvP, players might bring down that crane with the sniper’s nest by demolishing the support and watching it crumble down (tho this would probably attract a horde of nearby zombies) and so on, while in the PvE, they might demolish a bridge to stop a herd of zombies from going down a certain path. This makes the game a lot more dynamic, the possibilities are endless!

More and randomized quests

The current ones are ok, even though they are for the most part fetch quests, but after a quest-giver runs out of scripted quests, they should start giving out randomized ones (tho, they shouldn’t be giving them out 24/7)

For example: clear this area of zombies (without the horde beacon, simply secure an area), scout this camp/area and report back, find 5 melee weapons (of 80% and above durability), protect the convoy, redirect a horde, investigate the smoke pillar/radio transmission/loud sound, find the missing patrol and so on

Singleplayer NPCs and random events/encounters

Now, I know NPCs have been requested a lot, but this is a bit different and more detailed so hear me out:

NPCs in Multiplayer are a big no-no due to many reasons which I will not get into here, but for Singleplayer (and COOP / PvE),
they are a must. The SP gets way too boring after a while, even with the quests. What we need, and this will add more replay value to the game, are NPCs and random events, something to break the monotony of the current survival game, as well as to make a worthwhile “end-game” as players will get a chance to use their high-tier gear against opponents much deadlier than just plain zombies.

NPCs would vary from your standard every-day raiders/bandits to scavengers, survivors in factions and to military/ensign (more on this below, in the next suggestion). They’d be encountered through random events and their responses to the player would vary based on his/hers reputation. They would also interact with other NPCs (faction based).
Now, these random events would be something along the lines of:

• One or more NPCs in a party moving around the wasteland (maybe travelling to a certain location)
• A patrol around a certain area/base
• Scavenger party searching buildings
• Skirmishes between two or more factions
• Supply convoys
• In-distress situations (1 or 2 survivors/faction members being surrounded, wounded and/or trapped. Helping them would raise the player reputation with that faction)
• NPCs camping for the night near the woods
• Ambush
• Travelling merchants and so on
• A random camp/outpost/base

Based on the faction, these would vary in terms of size, equipment, strength and goals. Military factions would be better equipped (having APCs and trucks and firearms) than bandits or survivors (which would have mostly melee weapons and cars/vans)

More factions and a better reputation system

We need more factions with different mind-sets and outlooks on the apocalypse.
The 3.x reputation system is good as it is, but I think it could be expanded.
The current rep system could be used as global reputation, as a good-evil scale, and would determine
how certain factions and NPCs would react to the player.

As we all know, not everyone’s the same. People have various mindsets. Some may be evil and psychotic and would form anarchic/bandit gangs keen on wreaking havoc and violent behavior, while some would try to restart society and build cities and so on.
Each of the factions would interact with the player in a specific way and based on his GR.
Joining some factions (like the Coalition for example) would only be possible if the player has a certain GR.
Aside from his GR, the player would have different FRs (Faction reputations).
These FRs would change the NPC behavior towards the player and allow the player to gain promotions in that faction which themselves would unlock more opportunities for the player (Like calling for reinforcements, bringing companions, better rewards and pay and so on).

If a player gains a very bad reputation for one or more specific factions, these would try to hunt the player down, ambush him/her and sometimes launch an attack on his/hers base (attacks would get harder each time).

Here are some of the factions, their equipment, tactics and how they would behave:

Bandits:
-They are your run-of-the-mill bandits and would mostly shoot on sight, unless the player has a very negative global reputation (GR). In that case they might try to get the player to join them.
-They wear rugged clothes, bandanas and spiky haircuts/mohawks… oh you know, bandits!
-A mix of melee and common firearms and Molotov cocktails for weaponry, motorbikes, vans and pickup trucks for vehicles.
-Lack tactics, prefer to brute force engagements. Some bandits would try to suppress the player while others charge him. Smart enough take cover and shoot from behind it. Not smart enough to frequently relocate during engagements or employ better tactics.
-They attack a player’s base by arriving in vehicles, taking cover behind them and throwing molotovs on the base.
-If the player runs away, they will give chase relentlessly. If with vehicles, they will first try to run the player over
-Retreat to the nearest camp when down to the last 1-2 members.

Secret Service:
-Working for the shadow government and protecting certain things that the government considers valuable (secret facilities like Scorpio-7 and so on). They do not care about the affairs of the wasteland and thus do not care for the survivors. They are closed to applications and would seek to eliminate anything they consider a threat to them, dead or alive (mostly trespassers trying to get near the “valuable” thing). They always shoot on sight (perhaps wearing a full set of their clothes would allow the player to get closer to them, extract information from them and do more things )
-Very secret. Wear all-black spec-ops clothing, night vision and balaclavas/facemasks.
-Professional weapons with suppressors and laser sights, smoke grenades and flashbangs for weaponry, black cars, motorboats and little-bird helicopters for vehicles.
-Very smart and capable in combat, employing snipers in tactical positions, throwing flashbangs at players before advancing. So smart as to spread out, lay suppressing fire and dispatch agents to flank the player or fake a retreat and ambush the player.
-They do not chase after the player or attack his base, but are very keen on calling for reinforcements.
-Never retreat

Coalition:
-Your run-of-the-mill “good” guys. They’re already in the game and are fine as they are. Shelter survivors and hunt down bandits and “evil” factions.
-Same equipment and clothing as in the current game.
-Above average tactics
-Retreat when down to 1/4 of their attack force

Rogue/private Military
-Bandit-like. Look to benefit from the apocalypse. Hostile towards most survivors.
-Wear modified military uniforms without the flags
-Military weapons with various attachments, as well as grenades, flashbangs and smoke grenades.
-Military vehicles (APCs, Tanks, Trucks, Helicopters, Humvees with machine guns)
-Military tactics (flanking, suppressing fire, tactical positioning and repositioning, use smoke to advance/retreat and so on)
-Retreat when down to 1/4th of their attack force
-Attack the player’s base by mechanized squads by day (ranging from a couple of humvees to an attack helicopter), or by sending a spec-ops squad by night that breaches the base with C4s and smoke/flashbangs.

Skin-walkers:
-Basically The Walking Dead’s Whisperers. Tend to live in small camps and use zombies as a weapon and sometimes move within hordes
-Wear special skin suits that hide them from the zombies and allow them to blend in with hordes
-Use sharp melee weapons and poisoned knives, molotovs and flares as well as bows with standard, flame and poison arrows
-Prefer to travel by foot
-Very smart, ambushing the player near their camp and manipulating hordes of zombies
-Attack a player’s base by day using a gradually bigger and bigger horde, as well as (at later levels) throwing molotovs and shooting fire arrows
-Retreat to the closest cluster of zombies, blend in and retreat to the closest camp

Various communities of survivors with various equipment and tactics

GR and FR would be connected to each other to a certain degree. In some cases it would only be possible to join and stay in one faction if your GR is at a certain level. For example, for a GR of -50 or higher, the bandits would shoot on sight, while for a GR of 51-100 they would allow you to talk to them and do faction quests. These quests would give you a certain amount of Bandit FR while also decreasing your GR as you are doing “bandit” things. Once you gain enough Bandit FRs you would be allowed to join them and with that, since you are now a member of a very evil faction, your GR would take a hit and so on. Increasing your GR in this case would decrease your Bandit FR, eventually having you kicked out of the group (in the bandits’ case they’d probably try to kill you instead), tho this wouldn’t increase your GR.

Now, based on the player’s reputation (both GR and FR), each faction and it’s members (especially those in random encounters) will react to the player differently. Let’s take a random survivor as an example,
If you had a very negative GR and/or were a member of the Bandit group, they would try to run away from you, hide and would attack if you were to approach them. Or let’s take the bandits as an example again,
If you were to have a very negative Bandit FR (for example you had killed a whole lot of bandits), regardless of your GR, they would still be hostile towards you (there should be a way to get around this, maybe sparing some bandits, helping them in a random event or something else, i can’t come up with a good idea). More over, since they know you from killing a lot of their members, when they encounter you alone or in a pair, they’d try to run away or hide and would only attack if backed into a corner, as they see you as a threat based on your reputation. They would only think of attacking you with large numbers and would resort to trying to ambush you and attack your base.
If a player has a good reputation the faction members, especially the ones patrolling, would wave him/her a friendly hello, maybe heal the player or give him a snack based on the player’s health/hunger/thirst or say that they heard/saw a thing or two (like they saw a helicopter going down or an airdrop, or heard gunfire nearby) which would be a point of interest for the player as it would represent a random event (and where there’s random event, there’s loot and fun)

Thank you for taking your time to read this, I’d love to hear your guys’ feedback.
That’s all (for now )

Edit 1: Wolves are already in the game, removed them from the animal lists
Edit 2: Expanded on the reputation and NPC reactions
Edit 3: Added the Edits section and expanded on the random encounters
Edit 4: Fixed the text formatting, expanded on the patrols in the reputation section and expanded on destruction
Edit 5: Fixed various typos and formatting errors, worded some things better

[derfreak1002]

First of all I want to say that wolves already exist. But the idea of bringing more animals in the game sounds cool, I’d really support this.
I think it’s a good idea to make more things destructible, but everything? Maybe not so good.
Then my favourite thing about the 4.0 discussions: NPCs. I really want to see them in 4.0. But it would be hard to program many factions since they have different styles, methods and so on. I think two or three factions like Bandits (bad), Coalition or remnants of the former military (good) and maybe normal survivors (something in between) would be enough.

[CrimsoN]

Oh, wolves exist? Wow, I’ve never encountered them…
About the destruction, It could be like in Battlefield 1 where you can destroy most things like walls, ceilings/floors and so on, but you can’t quite level the whole ground. That way you get the best balance between destructibility and map design as for example a windmill would be a lot demolished but would still allow for some elevation and cover. Or Nelson could go all out and turn Unturned into a Michael Bay simulator
As for the NPCs, I was just throwing out ideas. As I’ve said previously, I know developing a game is a hard job and takes a lot of time and effort. 2 factions are good enough for a basis. 3 are more then enough. They could be expanded later on.
Thank you for your feedback

[MoltonMontro]

@CrimsoN

Wow, I’ve never encountered them…

Play on Yukon. Bears exist too.

[derfreak1002]

Wolf

It’s a article about the wolve
Destruction like in Battlefield 1 may be cool, but it might be a bit, just a bit to much. Maybe something between Rainbow 6 Siege and Battlefield 1

[ShadyIndividual]

if there are conflicts between factions in 4.0, i’d like to see balance between the two groups (i.e not having a group of local bandits somehow completely crush an international militaristic group’s presence from a region)

[derfreak1002]

! Its one of my Posts from another topic !

First of all, I want to say that I really like this idea.
My ideas/ questions:

1. It should be possible to disable it in the map settings like in my last post
2. What will happen to the Liberator on Russia when you join the Bandits? I mean it would be hostile then. Would it loose the Safezone around it or will you just be unable to attac it?
3. Opinion of everyone: should the NPC’s have vehicles? For example the coalition having apcs, urals or hueys and bandits having pic-ups and hummingbirds. It should depend on the game difficulty/ on your reputation. E.g. easy/ ±10 reputation: NPCs just walk, very rare they will appear in urals/ picups. Medium/± 50 reputation: NPCs mostly appear in urals and picups, sometimes they have armoured vehicles like apcs. Very rare they get air support by helicopters. Hard/± 100 reputation: mostly they have armoured vehicles and hueys/ hummingbirds. They will appear more frequent and in big groups.
4. Should they have bases? I mean destroyable bases that will appear randomly on the map. NPCs spawn there and you will be able to find some loot there, too. If you destroy a base (maybe destroying 80% of the structures there or destroy a claim flag in the middle of the base), a new base will appear after some time somewhere on the map. Depending on your reputation the bases will get stronger (better materials / more guards).
5. Patrols? I mean hostile/friendly teams walking around you can attack/trade with. Hostile teams will attack you when they spot you, friendly teams will help you or you can trade with them.
   Point 4 and 5 should make everything more offensive. I mean just getting attacked will get boring after a time.
   Point 3-5 should be disable able, even if you have NPCs turned on.

This is a post I wrote under a post about NPCs. It features some things about factions and systems for NPCs

[CrimsoN]

Yes, these would be the random skirmishes I mentioned. They would be asymmetrically balanced. Since different factions have different equipment, one side having half melee weapons and worn out civilian guns facing another side with bulletproof vests and spec-ops gear with no balance would have a pretty clear outcome, don’t you think.
The weaker side should have some sort of an advantage to equalize their lack of gear and tactics.
For example if the bandits were to face the coalition, the bandits would have slightly more men or a pickup truck with a machine-gun on it, or would be fortified inside a structure and so on.

The skirmishes would need to be balanced as they need to play out long enough for the player to take action and step in, but also to make it reasonable as to why either side won it (if the player ignores it).
For example: Yeah, the average bandit is weaker than an average coalition soldier, but it was 7 bandits vs 2 coalition soldiers and they overwhelmed them. Or yeah, the bandits had the numbers but the coalition soldiers used their superior tactics, they threw a smoke grenade and flanked the bandits.

A good example of this would be Far Cry 4’s random skirmishes

[CrimsoN]

I am sorry but I couldn’t simply scan the whole forum for every topic on a certain… topic

1. Disable what exactly? Anyways, as I’ve said, some of these options should be a toggle (on/off) in the difficulty/server settings.
2. As for the Liberator, I’ve expanded on the reputation topic, give it a read. It would make the Coalition view you as a threat and attack you. Maybe we could even expand on that and make it a “boss battle” as the player would have to pick off the sentries from a distance first to be able to get near the Liberator and board it, or use a helicopter/airplane to sink it completely. Tho, I don’t think this would be a good idea, I think it would be better if it was inaccessible to the player (if a player was to get near it he would receive gunfire (or rockets if in a vehicle) from it. That way, if a player somehow repairs his reputation, he can still join the Coalition.
3. Yes, some factions should have access to specific vehicles, some factions might not want vehicles (skin-walkers for example), while some might prefer horses. It wouldn’t make sense for a reputation to influence vehicles tho - at least not in that way. Vehicles would be used for specific purposes (some for travel/transport, other for support/raids). Random events follow that logic and they are just that: random events. They didn’t happen with the NPCs having a goal for the player to appear there. Tho, for base raids (when a faction attacks your base or prepares an ambush), the vehicles would vary based on what kind of threat that faction sees you as (Low threat, just a couple of guys dispatched to get rid of you. High threat, an organized mechanized assault)
4. Yes, they should have a signature base on a map, but random outposts/bases would appear from time to time, just like you explained. I like this point
5. Patrols as in, a pair of soldiers patrolling a certain base or area and looking out for trespassers, zombies or faction enemies and interacting with the player based on his/hers reputation. I am not quite sure about trading, it would be quite the best idea, unless it was severely limited. If a player has a good reputation the soldiers would wave him/her a friendly hello, maybe heal the player or give him a snack based on the player’s health/hunger/thirst or say that they heard/saw a thing or two (like they saw a helicopter going down or an airdrop, or heard gunfire nearby) which would be a point of interest for the player as it would represent a random event (and where there’s random event, there’s loot)

As for your destruction feedback, yeah between R6S and BF1 would perhaps be the best as it would allow for a lot of things and add variety to the gameplay. Like shooting through a thin wall with a .50 cal or timberwolf, destroying a bed, knocking down street lights, tearing big holes in the walls with a tank shell or C4, but not allowing the player to level the terrain. If we take a random house in the city for example, it should be possible to demolish it, but even demolished, it would still retain a certain shape and give some cover/protection.

Thank you for your feedback

[Sgt.Bacon]

the destructive map idea sounds cool, and it would work in unreal (unity couldn’t support, so it’s a good idea to add in 4.0)

[Nerobrine_LP]

Waht xou mean with destructive? Destroy buildings?