I’d prefer not having anti air or any weapon used flying vehicles in general. Most aircraft already leave pilots and passengers vulnerable (sandpiper, Huey, etc), especially when landing. And these are meant to be rarer vehicles for quicker transportation.
By leaving out anti-air and weaponized aircraft out of the game this encourages more PVE uses of aircraft (transportation) versus using jets to kill players or raid bases. And like I said earlier, most aircraft leave players quite exposed anyway, so specific anti-air weapons wouldn’t be necessary.
Since the design of everything in 4.x is changing, I can assure you so will the design of vehicles such as the ones you listed. Honestly, at the moment for things such as this, we are left speculating. Who knows, maybe I’m wrong and you’re just as exposed in those vehicles as in 3.x.
It all really also depends on the play if you think about it. If vehicles such as helicopters are much rarer compared to 3.x, will the shooter want to shoot down that helicopter? Or instead, track it down until it is required to land, take out the pilot & passengers (or get them hostage) and capture the helicopter for himself.
With all the work required to get a vehicle into working condition, and the rarity of air vehicles making it difficult to get parts, I don’t think it’s a good idea to make helis even easier to destroy. And a lot of the reason behind KoS and destroying any vehicles they can find is the “If I can’t have it, no one will” mentality.
I’m not really thinking of efficiency, just the more general and realistic balance. If it was about having anti-air that’s most efficient, then you might as well have state of the art anti-air weapons.
Send me an example of what you’re saying in picture/s. Just to get a better idea.
A btr would be enough to take on a helicopters giving both parties a chance but it would be useless against a jet or a fast plane. (same goes for any non dedicated AA vehicles)
It is quite hard to balance something meant to specifically take out air… a zsu would be able to rip a heli in a couple of bursts while the btr fires much slower and gives the pilot a chance to evade… however a btr or a 50cal or anything not specifically meant for AA can’t shoot down a jet moving way to fast, thus you would need an AAA or a lock on missle… the AAA would be way to overpowered for helicopters but just enough for a jet… the lock on launcher would give both jet and helis a chance to evade with helis.
or
I think nelson should add all of this but have some settings for servers to disable specific vehicle/weapon spawns… so you could have a balanced survival experience or something more like a realistic war survival experience as I think the experience of ones game should come down to server owners.
Personally I’d want maximum realism and immersion. With all theese military vehicles Anti tank weapons would need to be added to balance out stuff like tanks and btrs. I really do hope vehicle combat will be in unturned 4.
This is why humanity is doomed. Unturned is a post-cataclysm simulator. Zombies are a great catch-all for that kind of event (see CDC Zombie Prep 101). If all the community interested in this can think of is Call of Duty and ‘The Saviors’ then, truly, humanity is doomed and well we should be. Unturned 4.x should be about finding a way to thrive in a new reality, not finding a way to hold non-stop-KOS-conventional warfare on land sea and air.
The most intelligent species of the planet has forgotten the simple need for survival and has no instinct for its own preservation. Why else does every game like this degenerate into an action FPS!? Why else would Trump be the VP of the USA!?
Yeah, nah. This is too much for a zombie survival game. Arma 3, GTA V, Battlefield. Sure. A game such as Unturned, I really don’t think it’s a good idea.
Trump is not, nor ever has been Vice-president of the United States of America. Pence is VP. (How could you confuse the two?)
That aside, the reason that players treat Unturned 3.X like a PvP game with a small survival element, isn’t because there are realistic weapons and vehicles, but because the survival elements are very limited, and players can die repeatedly with little consequence and things like vehicle mounted autocannons are acquired and maintained with very little effort, and can’t be used for anything else. (Atleast handheld weapons can be scrapped.)
What does POTUS stand for? President of the United States? Cause Putin ain’t the prez (unless your memeing? Or talking about how Russia interfered with the election?)
Not meaning to derail the thread. Just making the point that adding something like anti-air, or unltr-modern tanks, jets, guided missiles is about as appropriate in an Unturned 4.x as debating Trumpian politics. IMO - Unturned 4.x should be about survival, which is why every other sentence of that reply (yes, it was only one short sentence about Trump) was an illustration of just that, and a lament to the sad state of the modern human condition to conflate FPS with a survival sandbox.
Misinformed…yes, I do believe you are. About politics, yes, but more importantly about what Unturned is all about. Want ultr-realistic and in-depth modern warfare? Tank warfare? Infantry warfare? Submarine warfare? There are TONS of games for that!!! This is a game based on a simple premise, survival after the zombie apocalypse. Civilization is on its last legs and the infratructure to provide clean water and electricity (forget about military equipment!!!) is gone. There are no SAM’s, tanks are meaningless as are jets and aircraft carriers and even cars since they require a massive infratructure to refine and provide fuel.
Consider this simple fact. Let your car sit on a full tank of gasoline for 3 weeks and chances are it will not start. Fuel is not commonly refined to a stable enough grade to last that long…it degrades over time…and rapidly!!! This is a fact. Bullets and guns? They’ll be spent before the gas goes bland if the Unturned community is any realistic sampling of the population. The billion dollar industry to continue to supply them has ended in this scenario. Even sophisticated bows and crossbows will require serious maintenance in a year or so with very few people around who’ll know how to maintain them…letalone have the wherewithall to squirrel away the tools needed.
Preppers? Ppphhhshhh!!! A virus will not preferentially leave those people alone. Those who survive will likely be a random selection…preppers are no huge segment of society.
So lets talk about a world without flushing toilets, or machine shops, or a gun industry, or oil mega corporations detroying the planet to provide fuel for all the cars that will be so much paper weights littering and polluting the world for ages to come as the scenario grinds on.
Except that most of the population has died, including the military, who were previously sitting on between 4 and 12 billion rounds of small scale arms ammunition. Civilians alone sit on more than 300 million firearms. Making vehicle off limits for the character because they are too stupid to pour fuel stabilizer in or replace the spark plugs seems counter-productive. Scavenging parts for a vehicle so you can finally get to that city before you run out off food and starve is a big part of some games. Collecting enough scrap and parts to get a helicopter running is rewarding and adds a lot of time to the game’s progression. Considering the amount of work and time required to get a vehicle, it’s a bad idea to let the KoS kids destroy it in seconds. It could work if there’s one or two areas clearly marked as dangerous to aircraft and someone decides to take their chances.
