Suppression fire

I bring this mostly from Insurgency, although it is applied in many other games, included in a zombie themed one as The Last Stand: Dead Zone.

As it might not be so self-explanatory for some people, suppresion fire is a term used referring to an action on which any of the beligerants is overwhelmed by enemy during a gunfight, forcing them to move away for cover or seeking better strategical position before firing back, and in some cases, limitating their capability to response.

This is a suggestion I wanted to make from so long time. I’ve been busy, so here it is.

How would it work?

It would work just like as it does in Insurgency, causing a blur effect on suppressed player’s screen, which increases depending on suppression level, affecting vision in general.

It would also be more inmersive if it affects aiming and recoil control, which would be counteracted by increasing pertinent skills and of course should take deeper effect on characters that aren’t skilled enough or not very used to gunfights.

About suppression levels

I won’t define these levels, though I want to state which should be the main parameters that would inflict on suppression’s degree increase:

  • Gunfire noises
  • Nearby bullets whistling
  • Frequency of shots
  • Nearby shots’ hit force

Said that… It’s nearly very clear that best weapons to cause heavy suppression on the opposing forces would be the LMG’s and HMG’s (as these are meant to be IRL), as these dealt heavy gunfire force and are very effective applying all these parameters.

Theoretical explanations

Why should it be applied?

Taking the example of SO MANY (the majority of them actually) games on which this feature is totally up to players intuition (which also means, almost NONE): there’s no suppression fire visible effect, making so many people react in ways that IRL would be so counter intuitive.

Counter-intuitive manners
  • Firing back totally exposed: this may only happen if there’s no further choice. The ridiculous part about this is that currently in 3.x it usually works even against well-covered targets… It’s prone to happen a lot if somehow the assaulted one has a better weapon than the attacker.

  • Full capability of response even below rains of gunfire: wether from cover or not, we’ve all made this at least once in our gaming lives: playing being Rambo, firing back even being one against many (and sometimes even winning). IRL this wouldn’t happen unless you have a really good spot, or intentionally want to suicide, no matter how well trained you are.

  • Not fighting tactical nor conservative-wise: and with this I mean about making the opposing force retreat, surrender, or easing escape by suppressing an aggressor group. IRL this is how many combats, battles and wars are won, having as main incentive the self-preservation, and I see so little of it even on hardcore survival games, because of the absence of a true danger feeling, encouraged by some simple reasons:

    • Quick respawns
    • Ease to fight back and regain progress
    • KOS to be a so prone behavior

On Insurgency, only a few bullets can finish you off and respawn takes its time. Also adding the suppression fire effect on the character can make anybody feel true gunfight panic, which improves inmersion in a terrifyingly good manner.

I suggest this mostly as a way to improve inmersion and make gunfights much more tactical-wise, which could translate it into making these last longer, unless it’s about ambushes and and surprise-raids.

Meant characteristics and features

All up to player’s consideration and preference

  • Longer and more tense gunfights (in average situations)
  • Inmersive emulation of gunfight tension and panic
  • Dealing more importance to tactics and planning
  • Far more intense (and somewhat epic) gunplay action
  • Making base sieges harder and way more inmersive (doesn’t apply to offline raiding)
  • Being able to suppress attackers to force a retreat
  • Being able to supress defenders to force surrender
  • Ability to execute either aggressive or defensive tactics without any casualties

0 voters

Applicability for melee

What do I mean with this? That it would be nice if this very same principle could be applied when it comes to ambush someone with a melee weapon. How? By subduing your opponent:


If this feature is added, it means that you would have the possibility to inmobilize or disarm your enemy rather than committing assassination, if you manage to ambush him from the back. However, this would be up to player’s choice, and could also be counteracted if skilled enough:


(I’ll do an in-depth post about how melee can improved in nearly future)

I really hope you’ve liked this post! Please leave your thoughts!

  • All ideas are good and realistic
  • Maybe it could be better if… (Comment)
  • There might be problems because… (Comment)
  • I don’t like these suggestions at all

0 voters


i like this

I like this too. In terms of gunfire, could the suppression mechanic be aural as well as visual?

I think the game Crossout does a decent job when it comes to the sounds of gunfire and explosions, and how that affects your ability to hear things. (heavy gunfire or explosions can actually cause a deafening effect, drowning out sounds)

1 Like

If overall sound effects will be improved, then yes :+1:

1 Like

For the “subduing” maybe if you have atleast one empty hand you could initiate a grappling animation. If you grapple with someone from behind their back, you have a higher (maybe even 100%) chance to subdue them. If you attack from the front, if grappling face to face, either player could be subdued. The odds of winning could be affected by the characters’ skills, weapons, and equipment. While a bayonet may make a decent melee weapon, it would offer little to no advantage when grappling. While a knife might not be the most effective melee weapon, it is one of the best weapons to have when grappling with an enemy. Maybe being subdued could cause some sort of DBNO state. (I know that DBNO and unconsciousness have been discussed, and that people have very strong opinions about them, but I hope I can mention down but not out without this post becoming another discussion about unconsciousness [which not every down but not out state has to be])


I love you dude, and your topic, no homo though.

LMAO (10 chars).

I need remenber to all guys in here insurgency is a game if you shoot first you kill the other. Is like a combat in real world converted in a game you not view the enemy first?! sorry more you DIE! Really i like this system but in a quest of “open world” game never is correct the place and from where you will take the damage.

I dont is counter this propose, but just counter your efficience counter other players with more itens. I just dont tink that’s just a guy “farming 10 minutes kill easily a guy farming in 1hour” because shoot his first.

In resume, i am in favor but this dont go work with efficience to all weapons vs all eqquipements. for example:

  • A colt never kill a guy with militar vest shooting in your vest!

And about time duration on pvp and estrategy to this you need nerf things like precision of weapon and increase the loot of ammo.

To add “Fear” in a cross-fire you need increase the damage of all weapons and place “debuffs” (unvantages) wen you receive a shoot. and decrease the loot spawn.

One dont have connection with the other. go remember all in here need help to transform this game in a game of survival need a remake? Yes! but with carefull, not to make quick and uneficient decisions.

In insurgency the weaker smg take around 10 body shots to kill a heavy armor guy.
The weaker pistol is quite useless against a heavy armor dude (head shot still capable of killing it very easy).

"M60 flashbacks"

Honestly ? Nothing to say, thread is formulated nicely, grammar is on-point and the poles have all the stuff you’d want and need. +1 from me!

1 Like

Well this is true, although there can be situations on which you can turn the tables in your favor. I got this… The rest I didn’t understand lol.

So it doesn’t in Insurgency. Although, the way a player with low-tier equip can defeat a high-tier equipped one relies almost totally in the strategies and methods. However, this is barely seen in Unturned and many other games, on which basically you find a Grizzly and instantly you’re the king of the hill.

That’s actually not true. Just by taking intuitive and wise enough decisions during combat, you can make it last even longer than a duel with swords. As it is so forementioned as one of the biggest references to 4.x development, Escape From Tarkov proves my point there:

  • Ammo isn’t that common
  • Guns efficiency is totally up to maintenance
  • Facts that affect efficiency are skills and overall character status instead

Actually that’s exactly the point. It has been mentioned plenty of times that firearms in general will be made rarer and that injuries would be much severe.

All decisions are up to Sexton, I just propose basic ideas and fundaments. Besides, referring again to Escape From Tarkov… It basically has everything I just mentioned and “connects” everything fairly balanced enough. I didn’t get exactly the rest of what you’ve said though…

A +1 from you or anyone it’s also a +1 to you (or anyone) <3

so you don’t like the punch sound effect for melee?
but yeah, I bet sound effects will be different and better than unturned 3.x whole sound system

At its time, it was fairly goofy and funny enough. But it got old and definitely doesn’t leave space for true inmersion.

Acutally… You’ve reminded me of another post I was going to do :+1:

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 28 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.