Ratio of raiders to settlers

Discussion in 'Fallout 4' started by SarcasticGoodGuy, Sep 10, 2016.

  1. Dr Fallout

    Dr Fallout Centurion

    Aug 17, 2015
    1. Don't like batshit insane raiders unless there's a very good reason for that (like drug abuse).
    2. AUSTRALIA WHY!!!?
    3. Mad Max is a boring protagonist and merely an excuse for good guy kicking ass.
    4. Deserts, deserts everywhere...
    5. The entire setting is ridiculous. How can we become so insane after less then 100 years?
     
  2. CT Phipps

    CT Phipps Venerable Relic of the Wastes

    Sep 17, 2016
    Couple of points.

    1. The raiders are batshit insane because they're desperate survivalists who have lost themselves to lawlessness and murder in the wake of no human contact but each other and their victims.
    2. Because if it was in America or the Soviet Union, everyone would be dead. The only people who survive the nuclear war are in the Outback. Also, the production company is Australian.
    3. Mad Max is a fairly nuanced character who isn't actually a good person in the slightest. He only reluctantly rediscovers his humanity over the course of the Road Warrior and that proves to be a mistake because the Riggers are treacherous assholes who leave him to die.
    4. Because it's the Outback.
    5. It's actually about 10-15 years. Max and a good chunk of the Raiders are former cops who have used their capacity for violence to survive.
     
    • [Like] [Like] x 2
  3. Crossfire

    Crossfire Banned

    491
    Jun 14, 2016
    Im only really going to speak to your first point.

    I see the raiders in road warrior as nothing more than a roving gang. A human being can be taken to a really dark place purely through the gang mentality. Just look at any of the street gangs that exist in society right now. And if you want to take a look at real craziness, run a google search for Liberian Warlords and watch the video that comes up. That place and those people are the closest thing to seeing what a postapocalyptic world actually looks like.
     
    • [Like] [Like] x 2
  4. Dr Fallout

    Dr Fallout Centurion

    Aug 17, 2015
    Honestly, I was joking a lot about my points. I don't think it's a bad setting or movie, it's just I don't like it. Too extreme.
     
  5. CT Phipps

    CT Phipps Venerable Relic of the Wastes

    Sep 17, 2016
    Pretty much. I think Raiders are a great addition to Fallout in the Mad Max style. However, I think they only really work in a situation which is truly desperate. The Walking Dead basically replaced "radiation" with "zombies" and the majority of humans they encounter are almost all insanely vicious and dangerous because the circumstances have turned them into predators of their own kind.

    If no one can be trusted but your gang then everyone but your gang is the enemy.

    I think Fallout 1 was better than Fallout 2 in evoking EXTREME but not as good as Fallout 3.
     
  6. Dr Fallout

    Dr Fallout Centurion

    Aug 17, 2015
    Where was this extreme in the first game?
     
  7. CT Phipps

    CT Phipps Venerable Relic of the Wastes

    Sep 17, 2016
    Fallout 2 is a more settled livable California and Nevada. There's farming communities, trading centers, and so on.

    Fallout 1 has a bunch of scattered settlements only now emerging into the radioactive world with an existential threat to their survival hanging in the balance.

    Plus, the original recipe Khans were badass.

     
  8. Dr Fallout

    Dr Fallout Centurion

    Aug 17, 2015
    How is that extreme?
     
  9. CT Phipps

    CT Phipps Venerable Relic of the Wastes

    Sep 17, 2016
    What do you define as extreme as for me it is the world being a deadly horrific place of violent tribes, murderous armies, and life hanging by the barest thread. I like Fallout 1's setting more than Fallout 2 because it's uncivilized, wild, and untamed.

    Even if Fallout 2 is existentially more fun for me.
     
  10. Dr Fallout

    Dr Fallout Centurion

    Aug 17, 2015
    Yeah that's not the setting of Fallout 1. No violent tribes, a murderous army that doesn't want to kill but sterilize and convert, and life going on as normal in most settlements.
     
  11. CT Phipps

    CT Phipps Venerable Relic of the Wastes

    Sep 17, 2016
    Yeah, that's not at all accurate. The Jackals may have been cut out but the Khans are explicitly one of the big adventures. The "sterailize and convert into monsters" thing is worse than killing. As for life going as normal that includes all of the adventures of the game.
     
  12. Dr Fallout

    Dr Fallout Centurion

    Aug 17, 2015
    The Khans aren't a violent tribe, they're thieves and murderers. They're like criminal gangs in our world then violent tribes. There's nothing really tribal about them. Not really, they don't mind leaving people alone as long as they don't contest the Unity and don't breed. They want to end the flawed Humans, but don't want to kill them all. The majority of the people in the settlements aren't going on quests to fight monsters, fight raiders or save people. They're doing their jobs and getting paid.
     
  13. CT Phipps

    CT Phipps Venerable Relic of the Wastes

    Sep 17, 2016
     
  14. Crossfire

    Crossfire Banned

    491
    Jun 14, 2016
    They arent a violent tribe.
    They are thieves and murderers.

    They want to end the flawed humans.
    They dont want to kill them.

    Youre saying a lot of self-contradicting things, mate.
     
    • [Like] [Like] x 1
  15. Dr Fallout

    Dr Fallout Centurion

    Aug 17, 2015
    'a social division in a traditional society consisting of families or communities linked by social, economic, religious, or blood ties, with a common culture and dialect, typically having a recognized leader.' They have no religious connections, they have no blood connections and economic and social connections are limited to banding together to kill and raid. So no, they're not a TRIBE.

    'cause the death of (a person, animal, or other living thing).' They're sterilizing Humans so they cannot breed. They are not killing them.

    Seriously guys, does common English escape you all?
     
  16. Crossfire

    Crossfire Banned

    491
    Jun 14, 2016
    They have economic connections because they rely on each other to ply their trade of raiding. They have social connections simply by virtue of being a group of people and im sure they would have blood connections because they are descended from a group that left vault 15 generations earlier.

    Are you sure youre not just being a contrarian for sake of it?
     
  17. CT Phipps

    CT Phipps Venerable Relic of the Wastes

    Sep 17, 2016
    1. The Khans are a bunch of families from Shady Sands Vault turned feral. They're explictly families which have turned against their home. They also are identified as a tribe in future games.

    2. The Super Mutants created from humans aren't the people they were, who were effectively killed by the transformation.

    I feel weird here not being the argumentative one. :)
     
  18. Crossfire

    Crossfire Banned

    491
    Jun 14, 2016
    I might make a poll thread for whether or not the Great Khans are a tribe and get some other opinions on this. Mr Fallout is being uncharacteristically retarded today.
     
  19. Dr Fallout

    Dr Fallout Centurion

    Aug 17, 2015
    Fine, the Great Khans are a tribe.... so are the Mafia, so are the every family run mafioso and crime gang. It's the same reasoning, cause they've got social, economic AND strong blood ties.

    That's... more of the domain in philosophy. By that logic every change of thought kills the old person, as they do not believe in the same thing. It's like that but more exaggerated.
     
    Last edited: Sep 20, 2016
  20. CT Phipps

    CT Phipps Venerable Relic of the Wastes

    Sep 17, 2016
    I think if the Mafia had no country they belonged to, they would in fact be a tribe.

    Look at the Omerta.

    The Triggermen, if they're descendants of the Vault in Boston's subway system, would be one too.