Weapon Ideas

Rosh · Post by **Rosh** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 7:13 pm

Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.

Are those with learning difficulties still having problems figuring that out?

avenger69ie · Post by **avenger69ie** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 9:17 pm

Pyro wrote:Yes, a slingshot

I've always called them catapults. Perhaps it's because they come in a plastic packet that says AMAZING CATAPULT!

Same basic idea, and one is a small scale version of the other.
Slingshots/catapults are commonly known in Dublin as Gatts lol
and are actually illegal unless you are using them for casting bait for fishing...or something stupid like that.

VasikkA · Post by **VasikkA** » Wed Oct 30, 2002 10:15 pm

Rosh wrote:Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.
Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.Fallout is not Counter-Strike.

Are those with learning difficulties still having problems figuring that out?

Or..
Fallout is not Fallout: Tactics. Fallout is not Fallout: Tactics. Fallout is not Fallout: Tactics. Fallout is not Fallout: Tactics. Fallout is not Fallout: Tactics... :roll:

Strap · Post by **Strap** » Thu Oct 31, 2002 5:20 am

lol. i want my 10mm and some other waky ammo. like 16.2mm assault rifle, boy would that be loud... :twisted:

Sirgalahadwizard · Post by **Sirgalahadwizard** » Thu Oct 31, 2002 6:18 am

Rosh

Not in response to me I hope :twisted:.

I had a very valid point. I agree that Abrams' post could be considered counter-strikish.

I mean, why the hell have a zillion types of weapons that use the same ammo when all of them should do the same amount of damage. Only other reason I can see is range and speed improvements (as well as burst options).

But you can work some magic with weapons when you play around with their damage too. It's just that the modifications should be logical... if it does more damage than a former version, it sohuld have a longer barrel or something, and it should be found later in the game.

20mm grenades

Not quite. An underslung M203 Grenade Launcher uses 40mm Grenades. Not a bad idea having a 20mm grenade launcher though... because then you could make it clip-fed and that'd simply be dangerous now wouldn't it?

A .50cal barrett would be too slow for the fallout atmosphere. It simply doesn't have much of an application, I mean, there aren't many places where you'd even need much in the way of long range attacks. Also, because of energy weapons, you dont need it for the damage either (since energy weapons such as a plasma rifle, or even a laser rifle do much more damage anyway).

Elephant Shotgun

Nope. But I do want some kind of hand-cannon. Maybe some kind of huge heavyweight thing that's slow as hell but fires 30mm shells. Weigh about 50lb, have a Min. St. of 9, do something like 80-160 damage with a -40% DR mod.
Yeah baby.
I dont want to hunt elephants, I want to hunt down fuckers in power armor. Need something a wee bit more powerful for that.

British Army LSW

Umm, Why?
It sucks.
The M-249 is much better (and it fires 5.56mm by the way, they screwed up in FoT).
And im pretty sure that an M-60 is even better than that, and I dont want an M-60 either... they should have some kind of gun in Fo3 better than that as well.

M4 Carbine, w/m203

Nope. The M4 is relativly antiquated by now. It's replacement is the OICW (weighing in at about 10lb and serving exactly the same function, with much better scope and fire support system IMO). And anyway, I dont exactly want to be using ANY weapon throughout the last half of the game that uses 5.56mm bullets unless it's some kind of minigun (the CZ53 or Avenger would do nicely... so long as they fix the damage on it).

And...
What the hell do people want with a slingshot anyway?
BB Gun is much better

Rosh · Post by **Rosh** » Thu Oct 31, 2002 8:18 am

And a lot of these wepons ideas do not fit into the setting of Fallout, either. I think this has been brought up at least 10 pages ago, perhaps more.

It's something the morons at BIS started the screwing around with, in taking the generic cobbled together weapons and the occasional named one of note, and then put in a few dozen. FOT made it even worse.

I'm sure you kiddies like stroking off barrels, but it's really not the point of the setting. At such a time in the setting, the gun has changed hands so many times that it would hardly be known what it was other than it's a certain kind of gun or what kind of ammo that it uses. There would be a barely possible event where you could find a gun in a safe or other place stored away, but unless it was a model that was crafted for purpose of the war and was a prototype, you're not going to see an informational pamphlet there detailing it's name.

VasikkA · Post by **VasikkA** » Fri Nov 01, 2002 12:02 am

May I emphasize the importance of slightly more original and falloutish weapons. Old pistols and rifles, sawed-off shotguns, knives, cattle prods, sledgehammers, grenades, brass knuckles, fists, feet, laser/plasma weapons, miniguns, flamers, hand-made or modified weapons, that's what I'd like to see in Fallout 3 arsenal. I want rusty, dirty and impractical weapons that often get jammed instead of the newest version of M-16.

I don't see why modern assault rifles should be added to the Fallout series, which made me very impressed with it's original weapon arsenal.

Rosh · Post by **Rosh** » Fri Nov 01, 2002 7:22 am

VassikA, I think that you've got a good idea about the Fallout world in that aspect, even more than the two bit chimps at Interplay who did what was passed off as a sequel to Fallout and the sleazy hacks at MicroFortÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â© that did Fallout Tactics.

To further expand upon this:

It's why the cities were named the way they were. It was the traits of the city that gave it the name. It was Junktown, the Hub, the Glow, the Boneyard, Necropolis, and other descriptive names that gave no real solid "this used to be L.A.", you had to find that out for yourself. Finding that you were standing on the ruined bones of a prior great city was potentially a wonder for both character and player alike, and a touch of archeology adds more to the atmosphere in finding out what places were originally what..

Klamath, Arroyo, New Reno, etc. just hardly do that at all. FOT's naming system was even worse.

axelgreese · Post by **axelgreese** » Fri Nov 01, 2002 9:52 am

In some aspects I would like to see some weapons that are crudely crafted rather than rusty cobbled together antiques.

You know to show the how they were like building stuff and not so much feeding on the carcus of the old world...

Rosh · Post by **Rosh** » Fri Nov 01, 2002 10:57 am

I've always been a fan of cobbled weapons in Fallout, or those modified to work. After all, that IS the setting, not some caseless ammo G11 irrelevency.

The pipe rifle was good, a prime example of what would be made in the setting. With a Repair skill or even Science, you may be able to somewhat craft up your own weapons sort of like Arcanum. Pick apart a couple of broken guns in order to make one that works. That would also give more use to those often untagged skills and give birth to a new character archetype, the Scav Mechanic.

Meths · Post by **Meths** » Fri Nov 01, 2002 7:48 pm

Hey, how about minimal ranges for all long weapons?

That would make hth and melee skills more useful..

What do you say???

Spazmo · Post by **Spazmo** » Fri Nov 01, 2002 10:25 pm

Does that really make sense? I don't think a real hunting rifle would have any minimum range, so it's not logical to have it in Fallout.

VasikkA · Post by **VasikkA** » Sat Nov 02, 2002 12:10 am

Well, the problem with pipe rifles or other cobbled together weapons in Fallout 2 was that they were severely underpowered compared to weapons like Assault rifles or Bozars. Both of these are fine weapons but they make other weapons completely useless, including the classical wastelandish ones. I wouldn't mind removing these weapons from Fallout 3, giving more importance modified/self-built pistols, rifles, shotguns and melee weapons. They could be included in the game, but hopefully not available in the beginning.
Weapon quality should get better as you advance in the game, and the most kick-ass weapons such as miniguns and plasma rifles would be available towards the end. Because there's no minimum requirements for using weapons, the most powerful weapons should be made tougher to get. In Fallout 2, you could get an APA from Navarro straight after Klamath or steal a Bozar from NCR guards with ease. A classical example of how over-powered armor/weapons can make a game boring and way too easy to finish. Removing these loopholes would be important in Fallout 3.

Meths · Post by **Meths** » Sat Nov 02, 2002 1:39 am

Spazmo wrote:I don't think a real hunting rifle would have any minimum range, so it's not logical to have it in Fallout.

And I don't think you'd be able to hunt anything with it if the distance between you and the target was 20 cm, and the target is big, nasty, smelly with NO hairs

.

Think about rocket launchers and most of the HMGs. That WOULD make sense since it would force big gun characters to improve their unarmed skill as well. Think about how useful the super sledge would become.

Doyle · Post by **Doyle** » Sat Nov 02, 2002 3:43 am

Doesn't a hex represent a meter, though? If that's the case, even most rifles would be useable against an opponent in an adjacent hex.

Meths · Post by **Meths** » Sat Nov 02, 2002 3:51 am

By saying min range i meant distance = 1 mostly

If the distance = 0 then i consider it as about 20 cm.

Doyle · Post by **Doyle** » Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:42 am

What? I'm sorry that just doesn't make any sense.

Meths · Post by **Meths** » Sat Nov 02, 2002 10:47 pm

Doyle wrote:What? I'm sorry that just doesn't make any sense.

Sure it didn't, now it does

Doyle · Post by **Doyle** » Sun Nov 03, 2002 3:47 am

I still don't really understand what you're trying to say.

Spazmo · Post by **Spazmo** » Sun Nov 03, 2002 5:40 am

I think I understand. You meant that you wouldn't be allowed to shoot somebody who's in melee with you, right?