Minimum Range For Weapons

[phoenixzs]

ı actually kind of wondered how you could aim a sniper rifle correctly with scoop to somebody just standing beside you.

It would be more realistic if big and some energy weapons could not be used or atleast properly used from some minimum range.

Like the sniper rifle requiring minimum range of 4 squares.When you are in 3 squares of an enemy you cannot use it or get a sewere penalty.This way the melle,unarmed,throwing and small gun parts would be more desirable also.

Speaking of throwing.I think the main idea of throwing (besides grenades)should be to cripple your opponent.like throwing a knife in to his hand disarming him or damaging a leg so he cant walk so good.Maybe some kind of smoke and flash grenades could be cool for blinding our opponents.

Unarmed should definiately should be associated with disarming somebody from close or knocking him.Cripling at high levels should definiately come.

Lastly all that I say wont matter if the critical chances are again that high with those perks.Its just pointless to plan to cripplel somebody when the guy just melts down in a goo of plazma in the first shot.

 

[Sander]

Ehm, in case you hadn't noticed, sniper rifles and the like suffer a penalty in Fallout for close ranged shots.

 

[phoenixzs]

No I didnt notice it since my hit chance was nearly always %95 for called shots.

If thats so insignificant it has no point.

I mean "real" caps such as "not using"the gun or hit chances below "%50" and such.

 

[Sander]

No I didnt notice it since my hit chance was nearly always %95 for called shots.

If thats so insignificant it has no point.

Actually, I recall it significantly influencing my to-hit chances. The optimum range was somewhere around 8 hexes or so.
YOur skill was probably much too high for it to make a difference.

I mean "real" caps such as "not using"the gun or hit chances below "%50" and such.

That wouldn't make sense for someone really skilled with the weapon.

 

[Morpoggel]

If someone is standing right next to you (or really close) you can just point the gun at him and pull the trigger... or am I just that inexperienced with fireweapons?

 

[Sander]

If someone is standing right next to you (or really close) you can just point the gun at him and pull the trigger... or am I just that inexperienced with fireweapons?

Sure you could, but it gets a lot harder to aim at targets nearby with a rifle, due to the length of the rifle and how you look down the barrel.

 

[Morpoggel]

Yeah, I reckon...

Unless he's like standing in front of you... then you can just put the barrel against his head and squeeze the trigger...

Then again, if someone managed to get that close, you're aim really sucks...

 

[Sander]

Yeah, I reckon...

Unless he's like standing in front of you... then you can just put the barrel against his head and squeeze the trigger...

It's a firefight. It's not 'stand still, I'll just raise this gun to your head'.

 

[Morpoggel]

Well... I was talking about Fallout... there it's more or less a 'I'm just gonna stand here while some dude in a blue overall kills my buddies and every once in a while I'll try to hit him"...

Ya know what I mean?

 

[Sander]

Well... I was talking about Fallout... there it's more or less a 'I'm just gonna stand here while some dude in a blue overall kills my buddies and every once in a while I'll try to hit him"...

Ya know what I mean?

No, because the turn-based combat system is an abstraction of a firefight. One that actually allows for tactical combat.
Of course, at some point you're so powerful nothing will help the poor sods, but hey.

 

[Sorrow]

I mean "real" caps such as "not using"the gun or hit chances below "%50" and such.

That wouldn't make sense for someone really skilled with the weapon.

I think that someone really skilled with firearms would simply choose a weapon that is fitting to situation.

Well... I was talking about Fallout... there it's more or less a 'I'm just gonna stand here while some dude in a blue overall kills my buddies and every once in a while I'll try to hit him"...

Ya know what I mean?

No, because the turn-based combat system is an abstraction of a firefight. One that actually allows for tactical combat.
Of course, at some point you're so powerful nothing will help the poor sods, but hey.

Actually, the character can dodge better if he/she doesn't focus entirely on firing - i.e. if he she has some APs left - it's reflected by increasing AC for for every AP left.

 

[Sander]

I think that someone really skilled with firearms would simply choose a weapon that is fitting to situation.

We're talking Fallout here. The game can hardly force your character to grab his side-arm.
Besides, you could get into a situation where something like that can't happen.

 

[entropomorphic]

Per's guide implies that only the Scoped Hunting Rifle suffers from the short-ranged inaccuracy:
The Scoped Hunting Rifle is very inaccurate at a range of 7 hexes or less (which is a little odd, I mean, if they're right in front of you, why not just ignore the scope?), but can be a wonderful implement for picking people off from across the whole screen. The Sniper Rifle, on the other hand, works just fine at short range.

In reality, scopes would be more inaccurate than iron sights at short ranges when shooting at moving targets, since the target will bounce out of the scope's FOV. Since FO doesn't consider the target's motion, I guess they compromised and made it less accurate for any target.

Fallout's weapon ranges are highly compressed anyways; even the longest possible range for a sniper rifle in-game (roughly 50 yards at 1:1 hexes to yards) would be a routine shot in real-life target practice.

 

[Sander]

Per's guide implies that only the Scoped Hunting Rifle suffers from the short-ranged inaccuracy:
The Scoped Hunting Rifle is very inaccurate at a range of 7 hexes or less (which is a little odd, I mean, if they're right in front of you, why not just ignore the scope?), but can be a wonderful implement for picking people off from across the whole screen. The Sniper Rifle, on the other hand, works just fine at short range.

...
That's odd. I recall the sniper rifle behaving the same way.
Ah well.

 

[Gimpster]

No I didnt notice it since my hit chance was nearly always %95 for called shots.

If thats so insignificant it has no point.

I mean "real" caps such as "not using"the gun or hit chances below "%50" and such.

Scope is useless up close, true.

But just about anyone can hit some man sized target that is right next to them, you dont even need to aim (so no ironsights needed), you can just point your rifle at it and fire.

Damn hard to miss.

 

[Sander]

Scope is useless up close, true.

But just about anyone can hit some man sized target that is right next to them, you dont even need to aim (so no ironsights needed), you can just point your rifle at it and fire.

Damn hard to miss.

*sigh*
If someone is that close it needs to be a hip shot, which is a lot harder to aim, and besides that it's always a moving target. Remember that Fallout's combat system is an abstraction.

 

[Gimpster]

Why does it have to be a hip shot? Just because I cant use the iron sights or scope, dosent mean I have to shoot from the hip, not that it makes much of a difference at those ranges.

Ill put a round right through the centermass of any man sized target at that range, be it a moving, skipping, break dancing or pole vaulting one, and Im not a great shot.

 

[SuAside]

A little late to post this, but I'd like to dispel some misconceptions here:

Ehm, in case you hadn't noticed, sniper rifles and the like suffer a penalty in Fallout for close ranged shots.

A scoped hunting rifle had severe penalties on close range shooting, but the FO1 sniper rifle didn't. (as quoted above)

Sure you could, but it gets a lot harder to aim at targets nearby with a rifle, due to the length of the rifle and how you look down the barrel.

There is a trick to that Sander. It is quite simple, you don't look down the barrel at all.

You point with your index finger along the front handguard, parallel to the barrel. You point at your target & you squeeze the trigger. Kablam!
This can be used from the hip or from the shoulder, it really doesn't matter. With training, the need to actually point fades of course, but to start off it is easier and more natural.

Kinda playing like harry potter or something, but it most definately works. It is tought in basic training for US soldiers as well as in NTGS (nieuwe techniek gevechtsschieten) for the belgian army (and probably in countless other nations).

I think that someone really skilled with firearms would simply choose a weapon that is fitting to situation.

The only time you'd go from a full length rifle to a pistol, would be CQB with an overly long full length rifle. In all other situations, it is accepted that: "a pistol serves to fight your way back to a rifle". Ballistics simply don't compare.

In reality, scopes would be more inaccurate than iron sights at short ranges when shooting at moving targets, since the target will bounce out of the scope's FOV.

In reality a scope is utterly useless at close range, unless it is a 1x or 1.5x scope (like Aimpoints, EOtechs, Kobras, etc).

As for iron sights mentioned before, very few rifles have back up iron sights that can still be used when a scope is installed. Some Steyr AUG's, some AK's, etc.

The point and click technique is probably the most common way to handle close range fire where actual aiming is impossible or contraproductive.

 

[GatewaysToAnnihilation]

I vote for a penalty for snipers, and a perk, something like, finger-sniper or what... What SuAside said.

 

[phoenixzs]

Still only snipers wouldnt cut it in my opinion.

There are heavy weapons in the means of "weight" in the game.Imagine holding a minigun it would take you a while to carry and turn the thing to your next target if he is in an angle of 90 degrees.So its hard to aim if you are in close combat with him.Same goes for big guns expect flamethrower.I dont quite remember how much weight a plasma was but believe me its damm hard to track somebody in a fight with such a weight if the target is moving constanty.
Sure ıf you have a SMG its much easier.So the fact is that big guns are made for wreaking havoc from a "distance" that can stand small angle changes while usingso defieniately there should be a good penaty while attacking some target that is in 3 squares range.Sure you could try to hit somebody without aiming but would be that accurate?
Thats what I meant its not just the scope we are talking about its handling and weight also.