Scientists and warriors

Briosafreak

Lived Through the Heat Death
More ideas taken from the the BIS feedback forum, now J.E. Sawyer speaks about the interaction between resources and the characters archetypes:
<blockquote>Let's say you have N resources in a game. That's it. N. You will never naturally find more than N, and that N is divided up between a number of set locations. For most characters, N is all they will ever be able to find of that resource. One suit of power armor, two rocket launchers, five hundred .223 shells, 350 small energy cells.
For science-oriented characters, they can get more than N. How? By finding ingredients for N and building more. There's no reason why a building system needs to be exceptionally complicated. Find/get this list of ingredients, have X and Y in these two skills, pop up a building interface, select what you want to make, and spend the resources to make it.
What's the point of putting traps in the game? To reward a particular build of character. What's the point of putting broken limbs in the game and allowing certain characters to fix them? To reward a particular build of character. Combat boys destroy, diplomacy boys talk, stealth boys sneak, disarm and steal, and science boys build and fix. Each type of character has things built especially for them that other character types won't be able to deal with. This is no different.[...]
Let's say you can find two miniguns and 5,000 rounds of minigun ammo in the game through the natural course of exploration. You can use the miniguns pretty regularly, but not all the time, and the ammo is spread out a lot. Also, you have a third teammate who could really use a minigun. Finding the proper resources, you build a third minigun and create 3,000 more rounds of minigun ammo.

You had enough, now you have more than enough. The difference? You're probably not as skilled with weapons as the guy who doesn't bother with item creation and just dumps his points into combat skills. This is the trade off. What the combat boy can do with 10 bullets, the science boy does with 30. But 20 of those, he made.
BTW, these ideas are not particular to reloading. They include the ability to create armor, drugs, weapons ammunition, implants -- basically anything you might want to have more of in the game. The characters have to go out of their way to find the necessary parts, but they are rewarded with extra goodies that other characters can't have.
The idea is to give the science skills something above and beyond what they have had in the Fallout games (which was often not much). No character should feel obligated to make builder characters, but those that do should be rewarded in an appropriate way.
Want to build power armor? Get items A, B, C, and D. Go to a lab, open interface, select power armor recipe, make stuff, profit. Want to build a gauss rifle? Get items A, B, C, and D. Go to a lab, open interface, select gauss rifle recipe, make stuff profit.
Want to make super stims? Get items A, B, C, and D. Go to a lab, open interface, select super stim recipe, make stuff, profit. </blockquote>
Link: Thread on the BIS feedback forum
 
Agreed. What would be really cool though, is if REALLY high level Science Boys could not only make a weapon, but improve upon it. Also maybe while making a weapon you have a roll; on a critical miss the weapon and all the compoents are destroyed, on a miss your weapon has less-then average stats, on a pass your weapon is just a basic weapon, and on a critical success your weapon has better then average stats...
 
Reading between the lines I jump to conclusion that resources and weapons will be very scarce in Fallout 3. I like that. I like the idea of having to save every bullet and fighting with your teeth once you run out of ammo. It should really create a feeling of post-apocalyptic wasteland, where every resource is precious and could mean difference between life and death.
 
Still there are some resources that can be infinitive. Some healing herbs components or even gun powder components (if people could make gun powder in the middle ages why couldn't they do it now ?)

It should be up to technical skills how good and advanced bullets pc can make. Or up to science skill how complicated chemicals pc can make.

IMO Arcanum's system worked well and I would like to see something similar in FO3.
 
Arcanum?

Arcanum's NOTHING worked well.

Any game that gives you the ability to be maxed out in near EVERY combat and related ability by the end of the second town, has some severe balancing issues.
 
I think Frog was referring to Arcanum's whole schematics dealie where you could make your own weapons.

From reading the original post, it sounds like this system is going to be alot like Arcanum's buiding system.
 
As long as it isn't overdone. While you can make weapons or armors, etc they will never be quite as good as something expertly manufactured or created by a true craftsman.
 
JJ86 said:
As long as it isn't overdone. While you can make weapons or armors, etc they will never be quite as good as something expertly manufactured or created by a true craftsman.

Agreed, I more along the lines of not being able to build weapons (ie submachine gun), but rather bombs and such. Augmentations to existing guns, more along the lines of JA..

Oh, what about the state of a gun? should it wear down as you use it? I think it should be implemented, then it would make perfect sense to have some repair capabilities or a techie/mechanic in your squad..
 
Personally, I've never really liked having to maintain items in computer games. Same thing in the military actually, it was fun to fire my assault rifle (not to mention my 120 mm mortar), a bitch to clean it afterwards.
 
I am opposed to having to repair your equipment. I think it's annoying as hell. I'd hate if my Bozar malfunctioned right in the middle of an enemy facility, with no town portal to bring me back to nearest friendly town. :)
 
Hehe, well that's one of the downsides to this feature. Of course you would have to repair/maintain your equipment, but then again it adds more reality to it.. I like it, sure it can be annoying, but I think it's a great feature..
 
I don't know if realism is something to be strived for in future Fallout games. I guess it's a matter of personal taste though, I absolutely loathed having to go back to town in Diablo just to repair my King's Sword of the Bear after whacking an arbitrary number of beasts in the head, but maybe some people thought that was a nice touch. If item damage is implented, it should only happen due to extraordinary circumstances (critical failures, etc.) rather than mundane use, after all, most assault rifles can be safely fired a thousand times without maintenance (that is, if realism is something to strive for).
 
I agree with Azael. In most games, playability generally wins the realism vs. playability struggle on the subject of weapon maintenance. Realism, fine, but not at the sacrifice of good old fun. It may make the game more challenging, but more so...it'll make the game more annoying
 
JE Sawyer said:
Want to build power armor? Get items A, B, C, and D. Go to a lab, open interface, select power armor recipe, make stuff, profit. Want to build a gauss rifle? Get items A, B, C, and D. Go to a lab, open interface, select gauss rifle recipe, make stuff profit.
Want to make super stims? Get items A, B, C, and D. Go to a lab, open interface, select super stim recipe, make stuff, profit.
Does he mean monetarily or is he using it more as another word for benefit? If he means money, then he's got some serious issues if he wants things to be rare. Being able to make money off of making Power Armour would indicate that you have an ability to make several suits. Otherwise, you'd just wear it because it's so rare.

I'd personally like to see the return of one suit of Power Armour. Fallout 1 was good. If you didn't join the Brotherhood, you didn't get the Power Armour (think you even needed a high repair skill to repair it too, didn't you?). Fallout 3, making the Power Armour only available for a science character would be interesting.
 
Azael said:
I don't know if realism is something to be strived for in future Fallout games.

Well it would suit the Fallout setting, since the world is in decay and most of these guns are old, which would mean they would have to be maintained. But I do agree that it can be a pain in the ass, depends on how you add this feature to the game. Ie will you have to maintain the gun all the time (regular use), or will it only go down in damage if you have a critical failure (actually quite a good idea).

But to get back on track, I really don't see the need to be able to make guns. but rather small items, ie molotov cocktails and such, augmentations for guns/armour etc.. But the ability to make guns and armour ? there would have to be alot of ingrediences to those kind of items, and those ingrediences would be rare..
 
Well, yeah, making whole weapons or armors is very complicated so it should go as bonus for super-tech-skilled character.

BUT

I would like to see option to upgrade things. Something like extended capacidy of ammo or sniper scope in guns.

Also it would be nice to have more than one upgrade option for a certain item. Ie in gun it could be faster shooting rate or improvement of acuracy as a mutual exlusive options. Player could at the same time attach bigger ammo magaine and some thorns ( ... ? .... whatever ) to improve melee damage of weapon. And all upgrades on one item. And of course such gun would be heavier and more valuable for possible marchants .... hmmm .... and maybe had some chances of critical failoure.

This way player would have chance to customize equipment according to his/her playstyle.
 
We Be Jammin'......

We Be Jammin'......

How is the group memory on "Wasteland's" weapons skill versus jamming during a fire fight? Did having points in the weapons skill AND repair ratchet up the excitement, or force a Save Reload? Am I having mixed remembering?

Being turn based "Wasteland" gave one the reaction time to respond.
Remember how long disk access and reloading was for the C64, so the learnin' curve must not have been a game killer.

Real$Time may necessitate preventative maintenance rituals.

Real$Time learnin' might be attention paid to motor reflexes, touch finding the 'repair' key.

Or.

Consider a chant of weapons care in a sing song like the one attributed to Central America, by the CBC, during the Contra San-del-ista, Cold War, Era. A rhyming memory device. I guess the CIA's version of the anarchists' cookbook, was in comic book format for that 'target'
demographic.

4too
 
Back
Top