Lucifer Effect is a big issue: ideas to reduce it in Unturned

Now to actually address what I see.

Nelson would not approve of this, at least in my mind. He wants the game to be just as enjoyable and full of content as it would be for someone in a 30-man zerg or a lonesome freelancer survivor (atleast from what I think). Though I made a post regarding team-based work and the “evolution” and development of civilizations in Unturned II (which nelson liked… so its nice to know he’s probably thinking about it). Though I think it is neat.

I always loved the idea of players not being able to be “super soldiers” and recently I made a post to sort of counter that regarding genetics. I heavily dislike games where everything can be maxed out, especially in Unturned 3.0’s case. I even made a post about how I think ‘maxing out’ things could be avoided by making experience and traits more Exponential instead of in a Linear fashion - which would be a viable alternative to what you’re suggesting (you suggest points and having a cap, while Exponential would not exactly introduce such a cap). But I agree with most points.

I agree that lowering long-range capability would obviously bring players closer, and would give them the chance / opertunity to conversate or reason. But as said in my earlier comment, high looted players are too scared and too looted to bother being friendly (usually). Also I never really use any scopes higher than 4x lol.

You want less ammo types? I think more ammo types would encourage more sharing. Players in groups would find all types of different ammo, and would trade with one another. Though this doesn’t have much at all to do with being friendly - as purely random people definitely won’t be trading anytime soon. I never trade with randoms to begin with.

Huh. Sounds sorta neat, not sure how well that would go, though.

Why would this stop people from ‘spraying’ or hoarding stuff on them? You spray someone, they die, their loot gets damaged. You snipe one-shot head-shot someone, their loot is still damage just as equally as before. That wouldn’t stop spraying. Also, carrying tons of things and having their be degraded on death isn’t an inconvenience for you, it’s an inconvenience for the player that kills you - but you portrayed it as if it’s supposed to be bad for the player hoarding.

I’d rather not have a big floating bubble on my head for players to see while being stealthy. Sometimes I work with nakeds and I can’t talk out loud so I must type.

Although this of course makes sense, global chat is obviously fundamental to how servers work and is necessary. There are already plugins to prevent chat spam (IE, a small timer between posts)

Another side note: A little solution to the problems is to have proper in-game groups. The current system for 3.0 is not worthy and has it’s downsides, such as the owner of the group not also being the owner amongst his 4 other Gold characters, and in-game groups have the major disadvantage of not being able to kick offline members. It also could have a better UI, but thats just my opinion. By making it easier for players to join groups and begin effectively communicating and working together it would allow players to get together and team more fluently.

I like what your saying. I think that if warfare/skirmishes are more methodical I.E you have a base and they have a base with stuff you want you go and raid it and fight for the better supplies. It shouldn’t just be you see a random dude and go after him. What if he can provide you useful information or wants to be your friend. My rule is don’t engage unless engaged. Although that ends up with me dead a lot due to the current PVP system if the pvp and guns change like they’re supposed to I wont be dead before I can react hopefully. Basically what I’m saying is right now players just randomly kill each other regardless of the loot they have.

1 Like

I was just thinking, something games so far haven’t explored is a “collective server effort” for things beneficial for everyone. For example, restoring power to a structure or city. The Turned could periodically sabotage those objectives in planned hordes (like every full moon), requiring players to defend collectively the objective or redo those if successfully destroyed again.

2 Likes

I think that it’s definitely a great idea. This idea is often in PVE games or some PVP games but only rly amongst clans/ IRL friends. I think bringing friendly events to a PVP game not just for small teams would be awesome.

yeah and then them in a disagreement and beating each other like this for a weapon

or even like this

The only issue is that you get a negative rep so easily, it is almost impossible to gat a good rep on a pvp server. Because even defending yourself from a player who shot at you, but hasn’t hit you will get you a bad rep. Hopefully 2 will get an improvement in rep system. Then your idea would work.

1 Like

I actually don’t think that there ever will be a properly working rep system, as it’s completely arbitrary and no algorithm can judge a good or bad action.

So far in Unturned the reputation system has been just a gimmick for a concept that just doesn’t work and has never been reworked or used for anything. Rather, people are more than happy to get a “bandit” emblem that shows their pvp skills.

3 Likes

Do you mind if i make a post about this one, compiling the ideas of everyone in a post so people can read it, i have a draft made.

If you think about it this raises pvp skill ceiling.
Hitting consistent headshots would reward you with better loot drops,
Precise hits to weakpoints would be rewarded

Do you consider killing sentient being regularly?
Real humans have morals/feelings/brainchemicals

sounds like the same thing that everyone else has been saying for months.

Thats not true

3.17.1.0 Update Notes

Improvements:

-Improved missing a shot/swing that travelled within 4 meters of a player to mark you as an aggressor if not under attack.
-Improved using lockpick/detonator/grenade to mark you as an aggressor if not under attack.

The reputation system makes no sense in the first place. It’s a number and title that is exclusively cosmetic and the factors that modify it can’t discern when it’s a positive or negative thing. People that care about it just want to flash a bandit badge in the player list to look seasoned and strong.

1 Like

yeah it does. you kill somebody and gain reputation. whats not to understand from that?

Yes, it can discern when its a positive action. Somebody shoots at you, you take damage, and gain positive rep when you kill him. Unless you die to him and well you don’t gain any from it. This also helps with Quests because in order to receive better quests, you need good rep which you get from low tier quests.

Kill somebody out of the blue, earn bad rep, have a title and have better players come after you. its simple. and sure as you said before,

yes, because you are feared in the server. you dont want anybody coming after you, or raiding, you, or trying to negotiate a deal or peace shit. They know that if they come towards you, they will be shot and killed on sight.

Overall, rep. system is anything but accurate, except for negative reputation which is way easier to attain and apparently rated aboved anything else because of the things you’ve mentioned.

Having all that in mind and looking the kind of mindset that a solid part of the playerbase has, is there any need to keep arguing about why is KoS a problem?

The player base of Unturned and Unturned II overlap, but are not the same.

That’s right now, since not everybody has access to the most recent testing version and many of the posters here are current 3.0 players, some of them like OP (hence why I stated what you’ve quoted). In the future, plenty of Unturned players will migrate into Unturned II; if playerbase will mutate and turn into something different (and hopefully better) from what the 3.0’s playerbase is, it’s a different matter and time will decide it.

@Pesticide defending such an ineffective and trivial system is quite playing the devil’s advocate.

No algorithm can decide if what you are doing overall is good or bad. Getting shot doesn’t make you a good karma player. Neither is killing an aggressive player. Or doing quests. They are all things in common among all players regardless of their behavior, which can’t be given an abstract number.

Online games that use a reputstion system for intersction with NPCs don’t use a unique “player is good/bad” (which is stupid as hell). Instead, there are set criterias for each npc or npc group, like aggression towards that npc faction, choices within quests, and so on, and affect only that specific reputation. Usually there are multiple npc factions that are allied or in war with each other, thus connecting the reputation for each of those groups (an easy example is Warframe). And the reputation affects the friendliness of an npc and the interactions.

The current system in Unturned is just bad.

1 Like

capo, my good ol’ fuckin buddy. If somebody believes they can take you out and successfully do it, they earn negative rep. IF you kill the player who shot at you, you gain positive rep. the system is very easy to understand.


image

Exactly, like most quests on board the liberator, you need a certain amount of rep for people to trust you and give you the quest. I haven’t played unturned single player or multiplayer in awhile but i’m pretty sure in order to get MKll you need a certain amount of rep.

yeah, like Greece. Two factions, and in order to get into them you need to wear there clothes. Once again, im pretty sure you can only do quests for that specific faction. correct me if im wrong

2 Likes