Weapon Suggestions

Unturned II U4 Discussion
1

The LMGs in 4.X should act like actual LMGs. They should do little to no damage against buildables. They should have high ROF, lots of recoil and ability to deploy a bipod to reduce the recoil by a lot.

Unturned needs real bipod deployment like arma. Bipods would work like you expect, it would be great for snipers and LMGs.
Since nelson added more advanced attachments and ability to change barrels, I think you should only be able to put bipods on LMG/Marksman barrels, that way you could turn an AK47 to an RPK or an an ar15 to a marksman rifle.
You should also br able to change recievers to go from a 5.56mm to 7.62mm round etc.

Melee weapons in unturned should have more depth, I think you should be able to have a blunt and stab attack. Stab would cause your opponent to bleed and blunt would do more damage and stun zombies. I also think you should be able to add certain things to a melee weapon, like a barbedwire around a baseball bat, jagged edges on knives etc.

Snipers in unturned should be a one shot kill to the head no matter the helmet.
Snipers should have very high recoil, very high damage, limted clip size and clunky to move around with, making it hard to do cqb with a sniper.

SMGs should have high ROF low damage and easy to move around with, making it excellent for cqb.

Pistols should have medium damage, very very easy to move around with and have a fast draw time.

Assault rifles should have medium damage, medium to high ROF and be the middleground of weapons.

Now for weapon degradation… I think in unturned 3.0 its supid,unrealistic and just annoying, in 4.x it should take much longer to degrade a weapon and you would need certain tools to maintain it, gun cleaning kits etc. Also the degradation should not affect damage, only accuracy and looks. A barrel may break and you are forced to find a new one to replace it.

1 Like
2

  1. LMG’s I agree mostly, what I really want in 4.x is more penetrable objects. That’s where LMG’s would be awesome. They wouldn’t go through everything, but the things you’d expect an LMG to go through (of course, the more difficult it is to penetrate, the less damage the shot will do when it goes through)

  2. I love the idea of converting weapons into other weapons with the system Nelson is adding to gun customization.

  3. Don’t agree with the sniper suggestion. Snipers are very versatile. Some can have a lot of power with high recoil, some can do less damage, minimal recoil as well as have greater accuracy.
    Let’s take the VSS Vintorez and AS50. Both are semi-automatic, except 1 rifle fires a Sub-sonic round (slower than the speed of sound) and the other fires a .50 cal sniper. The VSS has very weak penetration meaning a shot to a helmet (depending on the angle) would cause damage, but most likely not be lethal. Whilst the AS50 is an anti-material rifle, crazy accurate, powerful. So powerful shooting through a helmet would be a walk in the park.

So as you can see, both are sniper rifles. Both are far from different compared to each other. Which doesn’t mean that all snipers shouldn’t be able to 1 shot headshot kill. But a few could be able to.

  1. Again, SMG’s are the same thing as I listed with sniper rifles. There can be fast shooting accurate SMG’s, and noticeably slower shooting smg’s.

  2. Pistols, yes. I agree. But to clarify more, they shouldn’t be as useless just like in 3.x. You should still be able to kill with a pistol.

  3. Yeah, they should take longer to degrade. Would especially be amazing if weapons were rare instead of you being able to find a quick and easy replacement. Extra equipment needed to repair the weapon would be a nice addition instead of just metal and blowtorch :3.

3

Unturned 3 doesn’t really have any penetrable objects besides when there’s literally no hitbox/collision/clipping to begin with (ie: barbed wire fences).

In 4, penetrating surfaces has been in for several weeks now, and using different bullets (alongside shooting at different surfaces) will affect the bullet penetration.

At the moment receivers are the thing that make a gun the actual gun, and most people don’t want multiple receivers for the same gun. (At that point you should just use a different gun, 'fam. You’re going to have to replace most of the attachments/components anyways at that point.) I believe Nelson has also implied that if there were different receivers it’d be more likely to just affect stuff like the firing mode anyways (ie: a Semi-automatic Eaglefire variant). :man_shrugging:

4

In my opinion, no firearm with regular buller should do any damage to a buildable. Explosives&exp. bullets only.

5

Yeah, I guess you are right about the weapons. I think the new attachment system would do all this. Ability to change an smg to a more assaultrifle like weapon would be nice.

6

I still think some weapons should have recievers. Like the DEAGLE ( .44 and 50 AE)

7

Yeah (or .357 magnum)

That would be really nice, being able to switch between these or find unique variants

8

You keep saying this, but I don’t know where you get your data. Most people would be over 3 billion, and I doubt you’re sample size was anywhere close to that number.

9

I’ll reword to implicate less (and help emphasize its importance, or lack thereof), and add more meat to the post (especially regarding the other side) then.

Most people on the SDG forums appear to not want multiple receivers for the same gun, based on posts they have made across one or several topics (particularly in Devlog-related posts).

However, keep in mind that the SDG forums only contains a small fraction of the 40k+++ Unturned playerbase and this is only when comparing people who are vocal (as in, most people who have vocalized their stance do not want multiple receivers), as people who do not take a stance cannot be accounted for. Additionally it is important to know that people are more vocal about what they disagree with (not what they do) so the information can, as with anything regarding sample size and polling, be skewed.

Due to vagueness and different conceptualizations and interpretations regarding what a different receiver would do (ie: change caliber, change firing modes, change all stats, just be aesthetically different in color and such), this comment can be taken with a grain of salt.

So the far less necessary comment directly above aside, Nelson has implied different receivers may likely at least affect firing mode (ie: a civilian-grade semi-automatic Eaglefire variant). This is particularly interesting to think about, at least briefly, because of complaints that some people have had with Unturned 3 (mostly regarding the Eaglefire). We could end up where “military-grade guns” is really just about how many military-grade components/attachments/whatever you have. The lowest tier and highest tier still being the same gun by name, but different in their degree of usefulness.

Personally, I prefer something like that when it comes to “receiver variants.” I feel like making tons of receivers that change calibers for guns just because we can doesn’t help the game, balance, or progression. Why should one gun be able to do the same thing as any other gun? At what point is it fine, and at what point is it not? Does, at some point, being able to switch between some of the most major calibers become actually balanced because of rarity? Should some realistically feasible things be disregarded for gameplay/game mechanic reasons (even if it could be balanced)?

But that gets into a longer post regarding calibers and ammunition types as a whole.

I don’t think restricting them only to specific weapon types (LMGs and longer-range rifles I assume) is needed. I’m curious as to whether or not Nelson will implement the “add an animation to deploying a bipod” thing a few people have suggested.

10

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