What kind of weapons do you want to see in F3?
- Thread starter Finesse
- Start date
Robert Czarwolski
It Wandered In From the Wastes
.45 dual
Unless you have IN10 and AG10 you cannot wield 2 weapons at once... I've tried in real life and it's realy hard...... Recoilless howitzers will resolve the problem with hand wielded wowitzers (but will become a recoilless rifle however......).
Unless you have IN10 and AG10 you cannot wield 2 weapons at once... I've tried in real life and it's realy hard...... Recoilless howitzers will resolve the problem with hand wielded wowitzers (but will become a recoilless rifle however......).
I'd agree that dual weilding should NOT be easy. It is possible to effectively utilize two weapons and there are situations where you'd want to (situations where volume of firepower outweighs the need for accuracy, or where ammunition on demand is needed -witness how dual-weilding was the order of the day in the age of the single-shot pistol -because it was the only way to get two shots off in rapid succession- and steadily declined as the available ammunition in a hand weapon increased.) But ordinarily you do not want to go traipsing about with a gun in each hand.
There should be a large penalty to accuracy, reducable with a perk, and, of course, able to be overcome with sufficient application of skill points -for example today's "trick shooters" who do all kinds of crazy stuff with pistols that's impossible even for skilled marksmen.
Strength should come into play when dual-weilding anything larger than medium-size pistols, and this factor should be doubled for anything fired in automatic mode, and tripled for sawn-off shotguns or similar weapons. (I know a fellow who has a pistol that fires a full-size rifle bullet, very much like the .223 pistol in Fallout -so much so I think it actually IS a .223 pistol- that in theory a very strong man could one-hand.)
The biggest argument in my book in favor of dual weilding, though, is that you can do it in real life. Weather or not you'd WANT to is another matter, but you can do it. I've read about some of the changes from 2nd Ed AD&D to 3rd ed Dungeons and Dragons -one of the things they wanted to address was why it says in the rules that Wizards can't wear armor. Someone asked "what happens if my wizard puts on armor? Does he explode?" So they wrote rules for it instead of disallowing it. The rules basically make it so that wizards don't wear armor still, (-4 to all moving actions since nonproficient, so on and so forth) but since in a tabletop game it's not as easy to say why the player can't do something, especially something as simple as put on armor. Because it's a computer game you can just set a flag that something can't be done, but the computer game should be trying to give the tabletop experience, which is trying to provide a fun simulation of life.
Just like in D&D you can build a character that is essentially a Wizard in armor, I don't see why you shouldn't be able to build a character who can wield two pistols. Make it realistic if that's your problem with it, but it is possible to learn how to use two pistols at once in the real world, so why not in Fallout's world? Do I explode when I pick up a second pistol?
There should be a large penalty to accuracy, reducable with a perk, and, of course, able to be overcome with sufficient application of skill points -for example today's "trick shooters" who do all kinds of crazy stuff with pistols that's impossible even for skilled marksmen.
Strength should come into play when dual-weilding anything larger than medium-size pistols, and this factor should be doubled for anything fired in automatic mode, and tripled for sawn-off shotguns or similar weapons. (I know a fellow who has a pistol that fires a full-size rifle bullet, very much like the .223 pistol in Fallout -so much so I think it actually IS a .223 pistol- that in theory a very strong man could one-hand.)
The biggest argument in my book in favor of dual weilding, though, is that you can do it in real life. Weather or not you'd WANT to is another matter, but you can do it. I've read about some of the changes from 2nd Ed AD&D to 3rd ed Dungeons and Dragons -one of the things they wanted to address was why it says in the rules that Wizards can't wear armor. Someone asked "what happens if my wizard puts on armor? Does he explode?" So they wrote rules for it instead of disallowing it. The rules basically make it so that wizards don't wear armor still, (-4 to all moving actions since nonproficient, so on and so forth) but since in a tabletop game it's not as easy to say why the player can't do something, especially something as simple as put on armor. Because it's a computer game you can just set a flag that something can't be done, but the computer game should be trying to give the tabletop experience, which is trying to provide a fun simulation of life.
Just like in D&D you can build a character that is essentially a Wizard in armor, I don't see why you shouldn't be able to build a character who can wield two pistols. Make it realistic if that's your problem with it, but it is possible to learn how to use two pistols at once in the real world, so why not in Fallout's world? Do I explode when I pick up a second pistol?
Dual wielding of mêlée weapons is mostly misrepresented. Dual wielding of guns is just retarded.
I say, yes, allow people to wield single-handed weapons if it doesn't cost you too much time and resources to implement. Just be sure to nerf it so hard people realise it's pretty useless in most situations.
Dual wielding mêlée weapons is about using one to block and the other to strike back at the same time (I think this is often referred to as a riposte, though I have never encountered the term outside of fencing and SCA-esque nonsense), so it should be portrayed like that, not like the fancy but idiotic "scissor"/"fly catcher" moves characters in games like Neverwinter Nights tend to perform.
Dual wielding guns makes sense if you only want to lay barrage on a general area without the need to actually injure or kill anyone. Otherwise, you can keep one gun ready while firing the other. Apart from that, it boils down to missing a lot at the cost of precious ammo -- not the best choice in a post-nuclear wasteland.
I say, yes, allow people to wield single-handed weapons if it doesn't cost you too much time and resources to implement. Just be sure to nerf it so hard people realise it's pretty useless in most situations.
Dual wielding mêlée weapons is about using one to block and the other to strike back at the same time (I think this is often referred to as a riposte, though I have never encountered the term outside of fencing and SCA-esque nonsense), so it should be portrayed like that, not like the fancy but idiotic "scissor"/"fly catcher" moves characters in games like Neverwinter Nights tend to perform.
Dual wielding guns makes sense if you only want to lay barrage on a general area without the need to actually injure or kill anyone. Otherwise, you can keep one gun ready while firing the other. Apart from that, it boils down to missing a lot at the cost of precious ammo -- not the best choice in a post-nuclear wasteland.
That is an interesting idea, back in the days of Fallout 2 I was wondering what it would be like to wield two gatling guns. Back then it made perfect sense: use a big ass strap to carry one on each shoulder, each gun would be resting on one hip and you had two free hands to pull both triggers. And accuracy would not be a problem due to the sheer number of bullets, a solid wall of hot lead mowing down everything that stood in your path. Now I know better. 
Moving on to more realistic stuff: how would this be adapted to the game? You have two item slots, one for each hand, but you only use one slot at a time. You'd have two options:
-make weapons that are meant for dual wielding, like a set of berettas or something. This would mean that you would equip two pistols in the same slot so that you could use them both at once. That would be tricky with something bigger, even SMGs...
-the other one would be adding a button (sound simple, eh?
) that would allow the player to toggle between using the weapons in the two slots at the same time and using just one.
But I doubt that using two AK47s, for example,at once would be efficient: in stead of one burst that you could control using both hands you'd have two bursts that are way out of control if the char isn't really strong and proficient with small arms. Come to think of it ... it may be possible to wield two flamers at once, but again the char would have to be very strong and he would chew through the fuel really fast... might just work though...
Moving on to more realistic stuff: how would this be adapted to the game? You have two item slots, one for each hand, but you only use one slot at a time. You'd have two options:
-make weapons that are meant for dual wielding, like a set of berettas or something. This would mean that you would equip two pistols in the same slot so that you could use them both at once. That would be tricky with something bigger, even SMGs...
-the other one would be adding a button (sound simple, eh?
) that would allow the player to toggle between using the weapons in the two slots at the same time and using just one. But I doubt that using two AK47s, for example,at once would be efficient: in stead of one burst that you could control using both hands you'd have two bursts that are way out of control if the char isn't really strong and proficient with small arms. Come to think of it ... it may be possible to wield two flamers at once, but again the char would have to be very strong and he would chew through the fuel really fast... might just work though...
Let's pretend we're not talking about a Fallout game for now
Take a look at the early screenshots of Fallout. The "hands" button was split in half for one-handed weapons and two-handed weapons would use both slots (I think the unarmed button was further split in half for punches and kicks).
Now, using both guns at the same time (i.e. shooting both at once) is probably just ridiculous. Such an option would require more changes to the interface than it could possibly be worth, considering the to-hit penalty, the recoil and everything.
The problem may be that it doesn't cost any action points to switch between hands as-is, so you don't get a penalty for "readying" a weapon or having a second weapon equipped (as you can hold a flamer in one "hand" and a rifle in the other without either interfering with one another).
If the system would penalise a weapon equipped in the off hand, that would allow you to at least wield two weapons at the same time, though not to shoot them akimbo -- you could decide when to fire which gun so the classic left-right alternating shots would be a bit awkward and tedious, a more realistic empty-first-then-switch style would probably be the lazier alternative.
I guess off-hand penalties are rather annoying in the long run and don't add much functionality or value, so they're probably not worth the trouble. Punishing equipping two weapons (or bonus for only equipping one one-handed weapon) should probably not be implemented, as most one-handed weapons don't need more than one hand (except for swords and the like, which can be easier to use two-handed for the untrained, due to the lack of proper training and muscles/stamina).
This would also mean that you can't equip a second weapon if you already have a two-handed one equipped. Kicking would still be an option (or punching, if the two-handed weapon only needs the second hand for attacking), so there'd probably need to be a seperate action for that.
If we DO use off-hand penalties, this'd force the player to decide whether he wants to use his, say, crowbar or his pistol as primary weapon, i.e. which one he wants to stay penalty-free. Maybe let's add a button to swap hands for 1 or 2 AP (make it expensive enough not to be part of the average combat turn but still preferable over going to the inventory for it).
While at it, we could add a whole ready/holster system, so the player wouldn't have to remove his guns from his "hands" in order not to wave them around like pom-pons. As an alternative, the whole "check for equipped weapons" routine could be ditched under the assumption that the player always holsters his weapons at the end, and readies them at the start of combat. Actually requiring the player to do so would probably get old quick.
All in all, I think Fallout used a decent system, even if it didn't portray dual-wielding in any recognisable way. I suppose equipping two one-handed weapons is the closest Fallout can come to dual-wielding without requiring clumsy changes to the system.
Take a look at the early screenshots of Fallout. The "hands" button was split in half for one-handed weapons and two-handed weapons would use both slots (I think the unarmed button was further split in half for punches and kicks).
Now, using both guns at the same time (i.e. shooting both at once) is probably just ridiculous. Such an option would require more changes to the interface than it could possibly be worth, considering the to-hit penalty, the recoil and everything.
The problem may be that it doesn't cost any action points to switch between hands as-is, so you don't get a penalty for "readying" a weapon or having a second weapon equipped (as you can hold a flamer in one "hand" and a rifle in the other without either interfering with one another).
If the system would penalise a weapon equipped in the off hand, that would allow you to at least wield two weapons at the same time, though not to shoot them akimbo -- you could decide when to fire which gun so the classic left-right alternating shots would be a bit awkward and tedious, a more realistic empty-first-then-switch style would probably be the lazier alternative.
I guess off-hand penalties are rather annoying in the long run and don't add much functionality or value, so they're probably not worth the trouble. Punishing equipping two weapons (or bonus for only equipping one one-handed weapon) should probably not be implemented, as most one-handed weapons don't need more than one hand (except for swords and the like, which can be easier to use two-handed for the untrained, due to the lack of proper training and muscles/stamina).
This would also mean that you can't equip a second weapon if you already have a two-handed one equipped. Kicking would still be an option (or punching, if the two-handed weapon only needs the second hand for attacking), so there'd probably need to be a seperate action for that.
If we DO use off-hand penalties, this'd force the player to decide whether he wants to use his, say, crowbar or his pistol as primary weapon, i.e. which one he wants to stay penalty-free. Maybe let's add a button to swap hands for 1 or 2 AP (make it expensive enough not to be part of the average combat turn but still preferable over going to the inventory for it).
While at it, we could add a whole ready/holster system, so the player wouldn't have to remove his guns from his "hands" in order not to wave them around like pom-pons. As an alternative, the whole "check for equipped weapons" routine could be ditched under the assumption that the player always holsters his weapons at the end, and readies them at the start of combat. Actually requiring the player to do so would probably get old quick.
All in all, I think Fallout used a decent system, even if it didn't portray dual-wielding in any recognisable way. I suppose equipping two one-handed weapons is the closest Fallout can come to dual-wielding without requiring clumsy changes to the system.
You're going rely deep into this...
Ok, why should there be a penalty for switching between one handed weapons? Say two pistols... The question would be where does the char 'hold' the weapons? Does he/she hold them (pistols) in the inventory (that lovely bag that can hold up to the char's weight or even more) or does he have them in some holsters, close at hand. I'm talking here about the weapon (pistol) in the other slot. In other words what is covered by the AP you need to fire a weapon: just the aiming and shooting or the aiming, shooting and taking it out of the inventory?
In Fo when you change the gun in slot 1 for the gun in slot 2 what really happens? Do you holster one and grab the other with you other hand or do you holster the one you're holding and then grab the other one with the same arm? I'm talking about right handed - left handed... do any extra penalties/bonuses exist for using the weapon in your left/right hand?
What I was suggesting was either creating sets of two weapons (small of course and of the same type, firearms or melee)or letting the player bind them in some way. And this set of weapons could be used as one. Like taking two 14mm pistols, merging them into a set and allowing the player to equip this item in one slot. and then the char would be shown holding two guns in stead of one. The math and dice rolls behind that would be a lot more complex that it seems but it may be something worthwhile....
Ok, why should there be a penalty for switching between one handed weapons? Say two pistols... The question would be where does the char 'hold' the weapons? Does he/she hold them (pistols) in the inventory (that lovely bag that can hold up to the char's weight or even more) or does he have them in some holsters, close at hand. I'm talking here about the weapon (pistol) in the other slot. In other words what is covered by the AP you need to fire a weapon: just the aiming and shooting or the aiming, shooting and taking it out of the inventory?
In Fo when you change the gun in slot 1 for the gun in slot 2 what really happens? Do you holster one and grab the other with you other hand or do you holster the one you're holding and then grab the other one with the same arm? I'm talking about right handed - left handed... do any extra penalties/bonuses exist for using the weapon in your left/right hand?
What I was suggesting was either creating sets of two weapons (small of course and of the same type, firearms or melee)or letting the player bind them in some way. And this set of weapons could be used as one. Like taking two 14mm pistols, merging them into a set and allowing the player to equip this item in one slot. and then the char would be shown holding two guns in stead of one. The math and dice rolls behind that would be a lot more complex that it seems but it may be something worthwhile....
Robert Czarwolski
It Wandered In From the Wastes
Dual guns
The best option for dual wield would be 1 one hand gun in right hand and other in left hand and, with a button press you use the 2 hands at the same time (but it's ridiculous, unless you have a zip gun).... For melee would be cool (speart+knife!!!).
The best option for dual wield would be 1 one hand gun in right hand and other in left hand and, with a button press you use the 2 hands at the same time (but it's ridiculous, unless you have a zip gun).... For melee would be cool (speart+knife!!!).
fallout ranger
Vault Dweller
A common method in swordfighting was to have your normal sword in one hand and a knife in the other to parry blows.
Although I think that's a *little* out of place in fallout.
Although I think that's a *little* out of place in fallout.
Robert Czarwolski
It Wandered In From the Wastes
Tatical Nukes
Well i don't want to see a thing called Fatman there... Enought tatical nukes!
Well i don't want to see a thing called Fatman there... Enought tatical nukes!
fallout ranger
Vault Dweller
I want to be able to put aimpoints and Eotechs on my guns in F3, stuff like that.
Robert Czarwolski
It Wandered In From the Wastes
[sarcasm]I want AKs!!! I want M16s!!! I want M8s!!!! I want XM29s!!! I want FN-SCARs!!!! I want H&K auto shotguns!!!! I want AT4s!!! I want M95s, M99s, and M107s!!! After all, FO is a bloody, post-nuclear FPS with BFGs AND little, REAL little dialog.
FO3 will be soooooooo great![/sarcasm]
FO3 will be soooooooo great![/sarcasm]
Sorrow
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
I want the original Fallout 1 guns and some new that would fit the F1 ones.
The Guardian
It Wandered In From the Wastes
Sorrow said:
I agree.
Also some of the upgraded stuff should be a welcomed addition to the armory (sharpened spear, Magneto-Laser Pistol, Avenger minigun, etc.)
Also, the Pulse rifle and pistol were interesting and fit the universe, as was already mentioned on this thread.
Of course, with what we've seen of Fallout 3, this will not be the case.
Full_Metal_Wolf
First time out of the vault
The Holy Hand Grenade would be nice, as would a rock. Yes, a rock. I happen to like rocks.