Weapon Operating Speed

[TigerSurvivor]

Weapon Operating Speed

Something that, in my opinion, Unturned 2.0 and 3.0 failed was in the weapons part. Not that they are poorly made or poorly worked, but, if I may say so, poorly balanced.

Some weapons, such as pistols, are only for when the player has just spawned and need something to kill the flaming zombies, so far their usefulness is noticeable, but once the player finds an assault rifle, they become completely useless, mainly for PvP, with few players still using them.

This happens because assault rifles have more cadence, more accuracy, more ammunition capacity and etc; so there’s no reason to keep using a pistol, right?
I know that real-life assault rifles are very good and amazing weapons, so in the game they must be as good as it seems to be almost impossible to balance them.

However, there is YES how to balance them, and this without ruining the weapon.

— But then, how ?!

It’s simple: Weapon operation speed.

Note

By “weapon operation speed” I mean: The player’s speed to wield it, reload and even walk with it.

How it would work:

It’s quite simple: Larger, heavier weapons have a slower operating speed than lighter, more compact weapons.

In practice, a player will move faster while holding a pistol than another holding a sniper rifle;and reload speeds are also different, a pistol should reload much faster than an assault rifle.

Almost as a rule (later on there will be an exception), it will look like this:

Detailed explanation

[Z> Y> X> … n].

Z is faster than Y; Y is faster than X…

Unarmed player / melee weapons> Pistols> Submachine guns> Carbines> Shotguns> Assault rifles> Sniper rifles> Light machine guns

(Pardon if I forgot something )

Would that be good for the game?

Yes, as players would be motivated to use pistols in places that require faster movement, such as a CQB, while in larger places, such as city streets, they would use more accurate, higher-cadence weapons, for example. assault rifles; in the open country, perfect for campers (I don’t like these guys very much), they would use sniper rifles or even light machine guns, as these would have the slowest operating speed for closer combat.
Not to mention that each player would have more options to develop his or her favorite gameplay, without almost necessarily having an assault rifle (as in unturned 3.0).

Addicional point: Weight of weapons

Another point I would like to emphasize is the weight of weapons; an MP-7 (a submachine gun) has an operating speed greater than, for example, an S&W model 500 (a pistol [revolver I know: /]); Because of the weight of the MP-7 which is less than the model 500.
Cases like this one in the example would only be exceptions to the rule that submachine guns are heavier, so slower, than pistols. But this one is a separate suggestion, and it is not fully integrated with the suggestion of the operating speed of weapons.

Voting

Do you agree with the idea of ​​weapons with different operating speeds?

• Yes.
• Sort of, because …
• No (if you wish, explain).
• Null vote.

---

If you agree with the above idea, do you think it should be based on weapon type or weight?

• Weapon Type
• Weight.
• I voted No / Null in the previous one.
• Null vote.

---

Very well, that is my suggestion.
If there is any grotesque typo, it was Google Translate
Thanks for reading!

[GreatHeroJ]

While it’s great you took a step back to reflect on such a factor at a mechanical, overarching level, I think it would simply be best to balance such factors as ergonomical handling, reload/cycle speeds, ADS speeds, etc. on a per-weapon basis rather than anything more systemic. Otherwise you run the risk of an imbalance based on a technicality (case in point: lumping the Matamorez in U3 with all of the high-cal snipers in U3 despite it being a fundamentally different weapon with a unique niche, resulting in one of the most awkward balance situations the game has ever seen).

That being said, pistols in general certainly need to be more useful, but I feel like that utility is something that will inherently be gained as various mechanics become more fleshed out (e.g. dual wielding, barrel length affecting surface interaction, etc). There’s no single solution.

[kvc.6]

I like this thread a lot, though I believe that a lot of what you mentioned is already being considered/implemented.

As for weapon weight, I would love to see a system in which more attachments means a weapon will be heavier, thus a longer reloads and equip/holster, and a weapon with fewer attachments will be lighter, meaning shorter reloads and the like. In 3.x reload speeds are handled by animations, most assault rifles reuse the same animations, though some are slightly tweaked. Each gun has will usually have 10 animations, Aim start and stop, Attach Start and stop, Equip, Hammer, Inspect, Reload and Sprint start and stop, however, some guns don’t have hammer animations, while others don’t have sprinting animations. In 4.x I’d love to see guns with animations that change based on proficiency, however, this is a lot of work for a relatively small pay off.

WOS should depend on both Weapon type and weight, though more so on weight imo. Certain skills could help to alleviate high WOS but would negatively impact weapons with low WOS, forcing players to stick with either high WOS or low WOS depending on their playstyles. There could also be a penalty for quickly switching from high weigh to low weight and vice versa.

[TigerSurvivor]

@GreatHeroJ

lumping the Matamorez in U3

In the case of matamorez, she could be an exception, since she is part of a single nincho; neither need be as systematic and generic as that,

@TigerSurvivor

Unarmed player / melee weapons> Pistols> Submachine guns> Carbines> Shotguns> Assault rifles> Sniper rifles> Light machine guns

It’s just an example of a rule that will work on most (but not all) occasions.

@GreatHeroJ

There’s no single solution.

This is not the ultimate solution, but it is just a “push” to make players more motivated to use them.
But I can understand what you are talking about.

@kvc.6

attachments means a weapon will be heavier

I also like the idea of attachments doing this, but we have to make it very complex because each attachment would have a different weight, so if there are 10 different attachments we will have 10 different weights and with that thousands of different WOS ( this in a weapon that supports 4 attachments).
Unless each attachment type has an exact weight.

[DeusExMachina]

Proper ballistics and weapon handling wpuld fix pretty much all of that, ye

[JoaquinJAR]

I agree 100% with this, but if its added it should be per weight, as not all guns weight the same you can have different types of weapon having similar weights but not the same, so you have the best from having W.O.S based on individual weapons and W.O.S based on the type of weapon. (W.o.s is clearly Weapon Operating Speed, just in case)

[kvc.6]

@TigerSurvivor

so if there are 10 different attachments we will have 10 different weights and with that thousands of different WOS ( this in a weapon that supports 4 attachments).

If WOS is based purely on weight and animations, adding more weight will up the WOS by a percent; would just slow down a animation. 3.x already speeds up reload animations with skills, so this shouldn’t be too hard to pull off.

[TigerSurvivor]

Ahhh I misinterpreted your previous comment.
If so by percentage, it is interesting and quite functional.
For example with each attachment the weapon is 2% slower depending on the type of attachment.

[JoaquinJAR]

maybe the attachment would only slowdown a single thing like reload speed, because with bigger mags a optic sight will not be in the way, but a big bipod or a grip may be in the way and for low skill people it may be harder to reload? Not a good example but i guess you understand

[Aden]

Here’s what I understand from your comment:

@JoaquinJAR

attachment would only slowdown a single thing like reload speed

Adding more attachments causes reload, hammering, recoil control etc. to be harder/slower?
It sounds perfectly plausible, but keep in mind that that could be a bit far. Weight should work fine, but an advanced attachment system would just be… tedious.

@JoaquinJAR

because with bigger mags a optic sight will not be in the way

On the vast majority of unturned’s weapons that allow a sight hook attachment, the sights are on the top and the magazine on the bottom. (Excluding the ekho) So yes, that is true. Keep in mind that larger mags would most likely decrease loading speed.

@JoaquinJAR

but a big bipod or a grip may be in the way

Not necessarily, most grip attachments are in front of the clip. I see what you’re going for though, but these usually don’t interfere much with the clip and the loading mechanism.

@JoaquinJAR

low skill people it may be harder to reload

Makes perfect sense, I think you’re referring to in-game skills like hammering and reloading, which increases your reload time. The issue with this is, using a gun with lots of attachments and large magazines would cause the reload time to be painfully slow without this skill. I feel that attachments should only decrease the reload speed by a minuscule percentage rather than a large amount like 5%. (Doesn’t sound like much, but it stacks quickly)

[kvc.6]

@Aden

attachments should only decrease the reload speed by a minuscule percentage rather than a large amount like 5%.

A soft/hard cap could always be implemented. A hard cap is simple; After a certain value has been reached it cannot increase any further. Some good example of this would be; Being unable to do above a set amount of damage to an enemy, health you can heal in a certain amount of time and amount of enemies that can spawn even with player manipulation. A soft cap is like this; After a certain value is reached every increase will continue to add to the value, but only after being reduced by a percentage. Life Regeneration being less effective after a certain threshold is met, damage falloff and (Some) detection ranges.

[Aden]

You found the words I was looking for. If attachment slowing down reloading, hammering, etc. would be implemented then there has to be a cap for slowness compared the skills that decrease your reload time. Most likely it would be a hard cap so it would be more balanced with lots of attachments.

On a second thought, most attachments (other than long-range zoom rifle scopes) don’t add much weight compared to magazines like drums or extensions. Sights like the Kobra or Holo-Point change the weight minimally, and generally doesn’t matter.

Idea dump:

• While prone, if a bipod is attached, reload speed is significantly increased due to the firearm resting on the ground.
• Only magazines and larger scopes affect weight and reload speed
• Make an option that allows pressing [R] to reload the mag with the least ammunition instead of the most

I’ll update more later since I’m in school

EDIT: I’m gonna spend a long time trying to update this properly and the semester finals are going to smack me in the face like a bulldozer travelling at mach speed.
Anyways, here we go.

ATTACHMENTS

Attachments for a gun would sometimes conflict with reload speed, handing, equipping and unequipping. We can safely assume that sights like the Kobra or, even possibly the Chevron do not affect weight to the point where there is a noticeable change in handling, so I’ll cover those at the end. Heavier ones like scopes and magazines would make a large change that is most definitely noticeable and will be very easily spotted.

Example: If you were to put a rail-mounted scope on, say, a snayperskya, then it would

1. Take longer (for balance and complexity, etc.)
2. Make the gun heavier and consequently decrease handling speed (slower)

Magazines are just about the same, considering that large magazines like 100-round drums (mili drum, U3) have a much larger capacity and is thus heavier. In simple terms, the larger the magazine, the longer it would take to reload. This could affect equipping speed in a way, as well.

GUN PARTS (?)

I saw a forum post by Molt with a long (albeit detailed) explanation on the gun attachment system. The eaglefire was used as an example. He included things like stocks, barrel attachments, functionalities of barrel attachments, etc. etc. I like the idea of these because it allows for more unique combinations and can have great varieties.
What intrigued me the most was the PDW stock, which is, after a bit of research and conflicting articles I found that the majority of PDW stocks are shock-absorbing. A little off track, but I thought it could be used for greatly reducing recoil but also making the same noise as the PDW when you equip it. The noise is actually the stock extending, not the PDW reloading. This will also decrease how much space your gun takes up in the inventory as it is retractable.

More stuff:

• Heavier stocks increase reload time, yaddayaddayadda
• The more solid the stock the less horizontal recoil (makes sense according to physics, shhhhhh…)
• PDW stock decreases overall recoil instead of purely vertical or horizontal
• Barrels (the actual barrels not attachments) would increase or decrease range and damage accordingly, heavy and lightweight also change speeds

@kvc.6

A soft/hard cap could always be implemented.

yes

That concludes my big boy text about weight and stuff.

EDIT: Oh yeah I should be studying for finals but eh

TL;DR Attachments, stocks and firearm parts will increase or decrease stats like reload speed.
Also Nelson is cool.