Gun draw weight

I can only see this for heavy weapons and items.

It would be cool to put ballast into the butt stock of a long range competition rifle to move the point of balance back and reduce scope sway or add weights to the barrel of quick shooting competition pistol to reduce vertical recoil, but these weights can only be added in specific positions and most attachments only have a minimal impact on the point of balance. I’d say that instead of calculating where attachments would shift the point of balance to and applying buffs and debuffs based on that, we should have those buffs and debuffs be inherent to the attachments. I think that:

  • Most attachments (or atleast heavy ones) should provide a debuff to equip speed regardless of where they’re attached.

    • Some attachments that directly influence the way a weapon is held or carried around (such as stocks, handguards, grips, carry handles, and slings) might provide buffs to equip speed.
  • No attachment should directly have a buff or debuff to movement speed

    • The weight of all the stuff youre carrying should cause movement debuffs regardless of whether any of those items are or aren’t attached to your equipped weapon.
  • Attachments that would move the point of balance toward the muzzle (such as barrel weights, muzzle devices, long barrels, and/or heavy barrels) should generally have buffs to vertical recoil control but debuffs to increase scope sway.

  • Attachments that move the point of balance rearward (like heavier buttstocks and drum magazines) should generally have buffs to scope sway, but debuffs to vertical recoil control.

  • Items with integral attachments should have comparable (though not necessarily identical) stats to other similar items.

    • An AR rifle with a carry handle upper receiver should have similar buffs and debuffs to an AR rifle with a flattop upper receiver and detachable carry handle.

    • A barrel with an integral muzzle device should have comparable buffs and debuffs to other similar length barrels with muzzle devices of that type and to other barrel and muzzle device combinations that offer a similar overall length.

1 Like

Yeah that was i typo i meant to say recoil. Your arguement still doesnt make sense. Should we make pistols be fully automatic long range because someone “got lucky” and found an assault rifle meaning he has better gear than you? And that slight change of recoil wont make such a huge different if you are actually better skilled than your opponent, if you are you can take him out. The “luck” factor doesnt come into play here. Following that logic we should give everyone the same gun so everything can be balanced and nobody can find anything better than what you have.

If i find a backpack on the floor it wont make me slower. Backpacks dont slow you down. Do you know what they are made out of?

Why would you even put metal plates over yourself? If you spawn in and see a person you go away from him or die and respawn… if someone would go and charge him and expect success he would be ignorant. You cant do anything because that player has progressed and has BETTER gear. Should we now also make new players get a loudout copy of the strongest player so its “balanced”?

Unturned isnt a sandbox game. Your luck arguement is flawed. Someone could find an assault rifle, someone could find a pistol and someone could find a golf club. Thats the way it is. You simply cant force all those things so they are all equal and nobody has a “staight up advantige”. You cant. Thats just how survival games go.

1 Like

It is all about ztradeoffs, just like in real life.
I think tht is a good thing to ahve in your game.

You’re implying assault rifles would be objectively better than pistols and pistols would then need a buff. That’s not the case, pistols are far better close range than an assault rifle, particularly if you sneak up on him.

The point isn’t if you can and are better than someone, it’s that they got lucky and got a free advantage. If they decide to not take that grip (because they want to have maximum draw speed, maybe?) then you’ll be at slightly more equal ground, both close and medium range. But they will take the grip, if what you want comes true, because there’s no reason not to. Now he gets a free advantage again.

First, you’re assuming all guns follow a tier system just like the attachments you want and one gun is either better or worse than all others, rather than unique, different to other guns, and fit a specific playstyle, as they should be, and so you find one gun and have to take it because it’s better than the one you have. Hey, lookie there! Less player choice. More linear gameplay. That’s not what people want in an open world game.

Also, no, luck should come to play with the gun you find. Putting too much luck based stuff, IE free advantage attachments is bad. Finding a good gun out of some luck is what makes a survival game fun.

Yeah, school backpacks are made of lightweight cloth and are small. Military backpacks are made of military-grade kevlar (Quite a bit heavier!) and are massive, clunky and cumbersome. Are you saying when you wear a backpack full of stuff in real life, and say run to school, you run the exact same speed with the exact same amount of effort as without one?

Uh, for armor? You understand this is an apocalypse, right? Ever seen Mad Max? People will do some stuff that may be considered weird now to not die.

I assume you’re referencing this:

My point was, with your proposition it’s possible to be the best at everything and be completely unstoppable in any situation. Does that sound balanced, to you? Shouldn’t there be some way to take on a guy like that, like say because of all that armor and storage he’s going to be slow?

Or maybe the game isn’t balanced?

Yeah, and that’s a dumb system. That’s my point. Stop repeating yourself.

Stop putting words in my mouth. I said it should be possible to be at a disadvantage in some particular situation any time. I think people should have advantages and disadvantages to balance the game, you think everyone should just have all the advantages with no disadvantages. If everyone’s super, no-one will be. But that’s a terrible system for a multiplayer videogame, for there to be just worst, bad, better, best stuff. It’s called a meta. Look it up, people tend to not like it when it comes to open world games.

Here’s what i found from a google search.

" A sandbox is a style of game in which minimal character limitations are placed on the gamer, allowing the gamer to roam and change a virtual world at will. In contrast to a progression-style game , a sandbox game emphasizes roaming and allows a gamer to select tasks."

Unturned is the definition of sandbox game.

I’m not forcing them to be equal, i’m giving opportunity to the player. If someone has a gun, smash him over the head with a bat. You want that to not be possible, because you think guns should be the best. I want it to be possible, because having things be the best is bad.

Yeah.

Bad ones.

As Deus said,

I think that sums up the idea pretty well.

Seeing as he has more than leikely never worn a proper kitbag I think he would really think that.

Lmao, this.

2 Likes

Did you seriously say pistols are better than assault rifles in certain combat? Do i even need to adress this? Assault rifles fire bigger bullets and faster, bigger magazine, better grip and accuracy and better range. Pistols dont need a “buff”, pistols are pistols. And literally anything is good if you “sneak up on him”. I can sneak up to someone with an assault rifle and still kill him… or a shotgun, lmg etc.

Same thing. Things you find makes you stronger. The luck arguement doesnt work. Some finds an assault rifle other person finds a baseball bat. Its the way the game works. There is equipment that makes you objectively stronger and thats how this game works. You cant magically make a baseball bat equal to an assault rifle. Assault rifle always wins.

There are better guns and worse guns. How is that hard to understand? There are civilian tier rifles that fire slowly or not even fully automatic, and military rifles that fire fully automatic, bigger bullets, better range etc.
So yes, you will look at that military rifle and think “This gun is probably better then the one i found in some broken trailer park”

But i thought you just said all weapons should be balanced, and no weapon should be better or worse then the other? What does “good gun” then mean? And now you say luck is fun but just before you said about how slightly reducing your recoil is luck based and bad?

When did we ever say its full of stuff? A backpack is a backpack. No reason to slow you down for taking it. They arent clunky. And they arent “massive” they are just a bit bigger.

Why in the world would you ever put metal plates around yourself? Its not only wierd its stupid and impractical. How would surrounding yourself in metal plates ever help you? I hope you realise that you can shoot and kill people, doesnt matter if they wear some idiotic metal plates around themselves.

You cant be unstoppable, and you can only be best at everything if you have the skills to do so. Yes, its balanced, he just spawned in and the other guy is geared up. I think you are joking by this point saying players who just joined should he equal to those who have been gearing up for a long time. You can take on a “guy like that”, but its not likely you will succeed.

You are saying that the game isnt balanced and dumb because you cant kill geared up players, who played for a long time, just as soon as you join?
I really hope you arent serious. Or you dont understand what balance and progress is.

You just said new players arent equal to geared up players and that thats dumb…
People have disadvantiges and advantiges already. Your worse better etc thing is called “progress”.
Look it up, people tend to like it when it comes to open world games.

You are “giving opportunity” by forcing everything to be equal. The player already has an opportunity and he can take it. If someone has a gun good luck “smashing him on the head with a bat” you sure can try. It is possible, thats just a fact. You are just trying to make a baseball bat magically be equal to a firearm. Guns are the best.

I dont think you understand what balancing is. This isnt some MOBA game or PVP game where every character must be powerful on a similar level. This is a survival game.

Im not going to sit here and decrypt what you keep saying…

It is what I have been doing to your posts so I’d think that’d be only fair. But you do you I guess, dropping and homiens and gibberish instead of actual arguments.

2 Likes

You’re just going in circles. You want linear progression with no player choice in a game all about player choice. You keep repeating yourself, and so far the only argument you have is “because that’s how it works”.

I didn’t say they should be equal, i just said they shouldn’t be complete opposite. Same with guns. I never meant all guns should be equal, but you’re saying and have been saying this whole time if i have one gun that’s better than yours, you can never do anything about it and i win in a situation 100% of the guaranteed.

I, an many others too, could say the same to you.

Kinda contradicts each other, don’t they?

I’m actually confused now. Are you agreeing with me now? Also i never called it progress, i called it player choice. You’re putting words in my mouth again.

I’ve argued with you enough, and we’re (read: you’re) getting nowhere, i’m done.

Yeah. Did you seriously just say they aren’t? Why do you think the military uses pistols then?

For protection. Seriously?

You may not know, but it’s hard to stab someone through metal.

I never meant just protection from guns, from melee too. You keep forgetting melee. Also, there’s plenty of types of metal capable of stopping low caliber bullets.

1 Like

You use your pistol to fight to a rifle. You don’t use your pistol when you have a rifle. A pistol is not the better close quarters weapon when you have a rifle.

I don’t have an issue with different weapons having longer or shorter draw speeds, especially pistols having a quick draw speed and sniper rifles having a longer draw speed.

2 Likes

Try to explain that to him, he doesnt understand

82 posts were split to a new topic: Gun draw weight - [Side Discussion]

Once more, i never meant using a pistol against a rifle would be equal, nor do i want that. But you continually implied you wanted a rifle to be better, meaning it is higher tier and better in every way, and that there is a 100% guarantee that you would win if you used a rifle and i used a pistol, and i had a 0% chance of survival. I’m merely saying that doesn’t make sense. You keep using the “x is better” argument when that’s exactly what i’m trying to say is bad.

I said “why do you think the military uses pistols” because again, you continually imply there is no way to win a pistolxrifle fight, meaning why even carry one? Why not carry two rifles?

TL;DR: I think there should always be some disadvantage people can exploit if they have the skill to do so. Obviously, a full mili geared guy should be extremely difficult for a freshspawn to kill. But it should be possible. There should be some way to do it. IE, all the armor is slowing him down. Rifles shouldn’t be the best, it’s a problem with U3. There should be some disadvantage that, say, pistols have over them. It should be difficult to win a pistolxrifle fight, but not impossible as you want. That expands over to attachments, grips shouldn’t just give static advantages, they should introduce a new advantage in one situation (lower recoil in a medium range fight) and a new disadvantage in another (slower draw speed in a sudden ambush/sneak attack).

No, that’s what you’re saying. Read the reply next time.

The one where I said “You cant do anything…” was because freshly joined people can try to attack a geared up player, but a lot of time they will fail if not all, so its still possible, but very hard.

Its always possible to go against anyone.

In Unturned II you can switch around attachments on the Eaglefire to basically create an AR-15 pistol build, but we can all agree that an item more specialized in being used as a sidearm (like the cobra) should be balanced to be a better fit for the role of a sidearm (Maybe it can fit in a smaller holster, maybe it can be equipped faster than reloading a primary weapon). Similarly, dual wielding cobras, or building them into an SBR shouldn’t be as good at filling the role of a long range weapon as an Eaglefire with a scope and long, heavy profile barrel. Why is this argument still a thing?

2 Likes

Yeah, I agree. But detaching the eaglefire just makes you more of a worse rifle then a pistol. I mean in that scenario it should still act as a rifle meaning it cant be placed into pistol holsters

1 Like

Yes, that’s what i’ve meant this whole time.

I just don’t like seeing someone being given an advantage for no reason. If you get lucky and find a grip, i don’t want it to just make you have less recoil. It’s a free advantage, that’s dumb. It should introduce a new advantage and disadvantage. Less recoil, less draw speed! So now you get a free advantage at medium-range firefights, and a free disadvantage at close-range sudden combat. Or, just don’t take the grip and have neither. Giving free advantages means you have to take that, it makes you better. Again, it’s called a meta. Nobody likes metas, ask around.

I totally understand your point of view, it always sucks to find something cool but then to see it does something bad too. But from a game development standpoint, it’s just not balanced. There needs to be some reason to not take that grip, right? You have to understand that, right? Again, less player choice. More metas.

All in all, your entire argument is just

I mean that’s literally it. Don’t give people a bunch of power, give them power at some price. Free power isn’t good!

It made no sense because your accusation that pistols are never ever used in any way as long as they have a rifle makes no sense either, i wasn’t serious in the slightest.

I don’t know anymore.

Fair enough, though I’d like to imagine that wearing a bigger holster (like that of the vz. 61) would allow bigger weapons to be used as sidearms. (Although obviously there would be no clothing item in vanilla that would allow an m60 to be equipped as a secondary.)

1 Like

I like the concept of draw weight as a balancing method to slightly nerf heavier guns when you holster/unholster (and impacts if you can fast-draw something, for example), and maybe impact how fast the gun comes back to you when you need to move it away when too close to a wall for example.

How front heavy a gun is doesn’t actually impact how long it takes to draw out, that’s more in the receiver weight and length department.

4 Likes