Seeing How there will be less firearm ammo how about

[set]

More basic weapons like
Bows And Crossbows
Staff Weapons other than Spears
Axes
hatchets

something like the M1911 (I just like that gun)

 

[Gunslinger]

More basic weapons like...something like the M1911 (I just like that gun)

A M1911 isn't a basic weapon. A gun is a gun is a gun.

Anyway, I don't think that a even a nuclear holocaust or a developer's decision for less ammo can reduce the population to Medieval weaponry. Bows and crossbows aren't the first thing that come to mind when you read "Fallout 3: A Post-Nuclear Adventure".

Rather, I think there'd be more emphasis on melee and unarmed combat than in the other Fallouts. If you wanted to be a close-up fighter in Fallout One, it was up to personal preference since you start off with a gun and ammo isn't hard to find once you get to Junktown. In Fallout Two, the game kinda forced you into a close-up fighter but only for the Temple of Trials. Later, at Klamath, you can pick up a Pipe Rifle and, later, a 10mm pistol.

So, yeah, since close-up fighting seems to escalate per title, I think Fallout Three will favor the pugilists and knifers. And I'm sure there'll be more makeshift weapons (perhaps broken beer bottles or a farmer's scythe).

 

[Ripper]

but with so many fighting moves mention, i wonder can FO3 stay true to its roots, having the 50s feel.

i mean, back in the 50s, there are no gravity defying roundhose kicks or uber combos.

 

[Dan]

i mean, back in the 50s, there are no gravity defying roundhose kicks or uber combos.

You are right. But Fallout 3 is quickly losing it's 50's setting in favor of a 21st century marketting system.

 

[Ripper]

i mean, back in the 50s, there are no gravity defying roundhose kicks or uber combos.

You are right. But Fallout 3 is quickly losing it's 50's setting in favor of a 21st century marketting system.

yes then we will all soon see FO3 favouring Matrix style kungfu fight scenes.

 

[Old School Role-Player]

Ever read about JE Sawyer's ideas? It's almost a given at this point that his "combo moves" are going to turn Fallout 3 into a Mortal Kombat Adventure game..

 

[Azael]

but with so many fighting moves mention, i wonder can FO3 stay true to its roots, having the 50s feel.

i mean, back in the 50s, there are no gravity defying roundhose kicks or uber combos.

While some of the combos suggested by Señor Sawyer seems like something taken straight from a Tekken game, I wouldn't say kicks and such are totally out of order, as long as they aren't very stylished kung fu monkey style, or shit like that.

Unarmed looks like it will be a force to be reckoned with though, which isn't all bad.

 

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

one question comes to mind, would a character know all the combos or would he learn them from others going through the game ?

The idea is the character "learns" combos simply by increasing his or her unarmed skill.

However, you can learn "stances" from different people (I made up some names previously like NCR Ranger Stance and Blackfoot Tribal Stance) that act as modifiers to your unarmed attack, like different ammo types. As a combat action you could "go into" or "go out of" that stance.

I'd actually like to see these combos that JE is proposing before making up my mind, just don't go all Mortal Kombat on us JE..

Really, all you have to do is imagine a bunch of the ordinary moves stringed together against multiple targets -- llike an oddly-shaped burst. For example, Jab-Backhand-Elbow. Your character does a jab at the guy in front of him, immediately followed by a backhand to the guy next him, and an elbow smash at the dude right behind him.

The same thing applies to kicks. There are no jumping kicks in my unarmed attack list -- just regular snap kicks, side kicks, roundhouses, hook kicks -- bread and butter stuff. Kick combos just work the same way as punch combos.

Really, Old Skool? That thing I just quoted doesn't sound so bad to me...

 

[Odin]

I have to agree with Sarjahurmaaja on this one, the way JE explained it this time it didn't sound that bad. But there's also the fear that they might go overboard on this combo thing, simply because they think some combos are k3wl.

But one thing I would like to see in Fallout 3 is less ammo laying around, the idea that ammo would be in aboundance after about 100 years after the bombs fell (without that many that know how to make ammo or have the equipment) seems wrong to me. It would also make you use more close-combat fights.

Also more abandened places..I want that good old Indiana Jones feeling where I go around and dunno quite what I'm doing, but managed to find some goodies in some strange place.

 

[Azael]

One thing about having less ammo is that this will automatically mean that you'll also have less enemies who shoot at you, not necessarily a good thing if you ask me.

 

[Odin]

Good point, but somehow alot ammo doesn't strike me as a thing that sounds right in a post-apocalyptic world. Of course some cities/bases could have more ammo, but they would then in turn demand more caps/items for it.. Ammo should be expensive in a world like this..

 

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

I have to agree with Sarjahurmaaja on this one, the way JE explained it this time it didn't sound that bad. But there's also the fear that they might go overboard on this combo thing, simply because they think some combos are k3wl.

But one thing I would like to see in Fallout 3 is less ammo laying around, the idea that ammo would be in aboundance after about 100 years after the bombs fell (without that many that know how to make ammo or have the equipment) seems wrong to me. It would also make you use more close-combat fights.

Also more abandened places..I want that good old Indiana Jones feeling where I go around and dunno quite what I'm doing, but managed to find some goodies in some strange place.

Actually, the more I read it, the more I wonder this:
"How is this different from attacking those three guys normally?"

Big mystary, no?

 

[Odin]

huh?

 

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

huh?

I have a knack at being unclear, I guess.

For example, Jab-Backhand-Elbow. Your character does a jab at the guy in front of him, immediately followed by a backhand to the guy next him, and an elbow smash at the dude right behind him.

So, how is that different from this:

Action 1, uses X AP: Attack Opponent A, jab
Action 2, uses X AP: Attack Opponent B, backhand
Action 3, uses X AP: Attack Opponent C, elbow

?

Hm...

Maybe it's like this:

Action 1, uses >X, but <3*X AP

?

 

[Briosafreak]

Yeah i got it now (can i call you Sar from now on?) , when he explained it on the SA forums i got OSRP idea, but now i`m asking the same, is it so different from what it was? And if it can make unnarmed more interesting, why not?

And less armed attackers each time may not be such a bad idea Azael, as long as it doesn`t happen all over the game, i want to use my generic name ray gun Flash Gordon style too

 

[Odin]

The difference is that you do it kinda like a burst mode, it's done in one move and uses more action points i guess.

 

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

Yeah i got it now (can i call you Sar from now on?) , when he explained it on the SA forums i got OSRP idea, but now i`m asking the same, is it so different from what it was? And if it can make unnarmed more interesting, why not?

And less armed attackers each time may not be such a bad idea Azael, as long as it doesn`t happen all over the game, i want to use my generic name ray gun Flash Gordon style too

Sure, you can call me Sar.

Hm, someday I gotta explain the clumsy joke of my nick...


I wonder what the penalties for the combo are. Maybe if you miss the first, you miss all?

 

[Briosafreak]

I wonder what the penalties for the combo are. Maybe if you miss the first, you miss all?

Hope not, they are making crits beeing less frequent, if they penalise the unarmed character so much it doesn`t seem consistent...

 

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

I wonder what the penalties for the combo are. Maybe if you miss the first, you miss all?

Hope not, they are making crits beeing less frequent, if they penalise the unarmed character so much it doesn`t seem consistent...

I thought they were just making those "pierces armor totally and does 2.5 billion times normal damage/instakill" crits less frequent?

Anyway, I don't think the miss all is much of a penalty, if you get to do 3 attacks for maybe 5 AP or so.

 

[Briosafreak]

Anyway, I don't think the miss all is much of a penalty, if you get to do 3 attacks for maybe 5 AP or so.

Hmmm we should ask about that to put on the FAQ, i don`t know if it will cost that or something else.