yah i wouldnt want the combat always just u know a good level so you dont get bored. Plust have some enemys that arnt like fiends that are actually a challenge. Some more super mutants to be in that mix also never see them going out into the wasteland i mis them

thats a good point, there does need to be areas with not much going on, but in a post apocalyptic world there is always gonna be danger i would think, its not easy to balance, FO3 might of had too much, new vegas is kinda barren the majority of the time and you can easily get to new vegas from goodsprings without fighting anything, thats a long way to be able to avoid combat and it can be done, its pretty easy, most of the map is easy to cruise around without any weapons, especially if you have stimpaks etc, i think 50% of the map area needs to have danger attatched to it, as it stand, only about 2% of the map has danger attatched to it, you really can avoid combat in this game to great extent.

i dont see how you would like no fighting in a RPG like fallout. they should have defintaly more super mutants around black mountian that constatly spawn on a regular bases. also some more patrols of both ncr and legion it would be nice to see a squad of NCR and legion battle it out in the wastes

thats what i'm saying, i don't think there is nearly enough good combat, there does need to be enemy patrols of all factions, most of the enemies are static and don't go anywhere, so i agree, there also needs to be more supermutants in various spots, not nearly enough of them, for for people who say, "oh the enclave was wiped out or there's not many supermutants left" or "its civilized in new vegas so there aren't many bad guys" i've heard all those arguments... well that makes for a bad no fun game, enclave and supermutants are the best fallout enemies of all time, people keep saying fallout needs new enemies, well if the new enemies keep getting weaker and weaker thats not a good move, lets take ceasers legion for example they are suppose to be the main enemy in the game, unless you're anti ncr etc but lets compare enclave to ceasers legion..
ceasers legion>
no energy weapons
hard to even find on the map
they don't really patrol anywhere
not much of a threat at all unless you're in the tent with ceaser and not much firepower
the only good battle with them is at the end of the game
they mostly use melee weapons
very poorly armed overall

enclave>>>
energy weapons and generally well armed
they put up a decent fight and had good firepower
they patrolled the map quite a lot so you could potentionally run into them almost anywhere
they had lots of outsposts
they would drop units from verti birds
they were somewhat tactical
several epic battle or fight with enclave, waters of life, who dares wins, take it back etc.

so some peole who keep crying that fallout needs new enemies, i don't think they willk be happy until the only new enemies left are homeless old people armed with dentures and canes. seriously

yah the enclave has supeior armor to the legion they can actually use weapons unlike the legion. you need to have more of the old enemies before you can think about the new ones. The enclave has vertibirds a big tactical choice for a battle to drop soldiers in and fight. enclave also had a good hierarchy(the legion does also dont get me wrong) but if you take out legion centurians like at the battle of the hoover dam the soldiers just fall apart and dont know what to do. Super mutants werent to strong but were a challenge espically in hordes.

The Enclave is a dead horse they need to go away. Hell, they weren't even going to appear in Van Buren.

Look, I'm all for tougher enemies, but I don't want more. I should be able to avoid fighting and be able to have a diplomatic character if I wanted to. Of course, I don't want to, but I like having that choice there.

im pretty sure the enclave can still pull a card out of there sleeve still it makes me angry that the developers are just like yah the enclave is evil kill them all!! well there not you cant even side with them soo how would you know if there evil or not.

But that's it, they've been blown up. Twice. If they appear in F4 any bigger than a few Remnants, I'll kill a cat.

lol good i hate cats. We need to kill them all muahahahahhahahahahah.

All of the above mentioned enemies in FO3 were more challenging than than the ones in New Vegas are. Nightkin and the Cazador's are probably the toughest enemies in New Vegas, and they aren't even that hard.

I couldn't believe the lack of patrols in the new Vegas wasteland the first time I fired it up. I figured, "Oh well, it'll pick up the more I explore." I continued to be disappointed in the lack of meaningful exploration and combat. It just doesn't measure up.

I completely agree. I was expecting something similar to Fallout 3 and it felt a lot like Fallout lite.. I enjoyed the dialogue and quests, but the combat and exploration were far and away my favorite parts of Fallout 3 and NV. Why have such good weapons and few places to use them? I actually enjoyed Dead Money more than most of NV (except for the vault ending).

I wish I could say that. pc got no Microshaft loving.

*Raises difficulty* Oh, hey there. I just found this really cool option! Let's see.. I can change my difficulty.. Wow! Thanks Obsidian! To think I was just going to rant on Bethesda's forums! Silly me..

In all seriousness though let's address a few points here..

FO3 vs NV: Fallout 3 had plenty of enemies to kill, maybe to much for some but it was just right for me. I found them challenging as well so I'd check to see if your playing on "very easy". NV lacks enemies but there are some that are difficult, just not enough.

Map Sizes: FO3 obviously had a larger map and more content in it's areas. Add that with the large amounts of enemies equals plenty of combat. NV on the other hand is smaller, and lacks enemies. This isn't my opinion, play the games.

How to solve this? Don't look at me, look at Obsidian. My advice though is play your games before releasing them.

???? I used to love getting different groups to fight each other like this.



That's the crux of it, isn't it? They please someone, someone else gets p'd off. If they tried to please the loudest voices on these forums, we'd have less combat, more combat, stronger weapons, weaker weapons, more dungeons, less dungeons, more factions, less factions... you get the picture.

This has been suggested before, but I am going to bring it up again: An option/way to make more/better combat happen so that both sides of the argument (those who are fine with things as they are, and those who are not) can have it their way so to say. Everybody wins in this case, and no one can say "Great the game go crapped up" or "Ugh it is still boring". There is only pluses to options in this situation, so why not go in this direction?

First how about the ways the options can be implemented? Here are the ways that come to mind:

• An actual option (example hardcoe Mode)
  
• Perks and Traits
  
• Quests and Items

All of these (and maybe more if I missed any) could be used somehow to make the combat in Vegas be more/harder/better/advanced (or hey, for those who are leaning more toward non-combat, less and/or easier!).

Second, is how to implement these, or rather, how to make them available to the players of all the platforms? Update, DLC, or part of a DLC?

Everybody can benefit from this if all of the possibilities are considered, and agreements are met. Of course the "hows" and "whats" of how these options are done (such as what to add/take away in combat as far as enemies and equipment, plus where to add/take them) will still need to be discussed by both players and devs alike. Though these discussions would take some time to form the agreements, I am confident it can happen (even if it looks a bit iffy on here :wink_smile: ).

i just want the AI to use some smart tactics and be better equipped.
and to have alot more patrols in the wasteland

yes exactly thats what i want. Like have a enemy armed like the enclave they had some tatics and were really good equipped but werent to tough. have more legion and ncr patrols for people that like to kill either one

Firstly - I like the raising of the level cap. It gives em a goal, something to look forawrd to. However, I do think the enmies should level up too. The tactics (or lack of) in Fallout enemies is very out-dated really and could be much better and also like I've said on here before, don't make the enemies bullet sponges, just make the weapons they hold kill you with one or two clean shots and make larger groups. You'll have to have your wits about you then.
I'd liek to see more enemies, more variations and more encounters too like Fallout 3, as much as they annoyed me at times I would cneak almost everywhere looking around me to see if I was being followed. I don't get that feeling at all on New Vegas and New Vegas is definitly easier than fallout 3. I played Fallout 3 on easy then ramped it up to hard when i was top level, on New Vegas I play the whole game on the hardest setting (not hardcoe though) and although it made it nearly impossible to get through certain pathways (which I loved) the Cazador swarms and Radscorpion packs, once I got some decent guns and levelled up I found taking out enemies easier than ever. I think the Deathclaws have been ramped up and the cazadors are a fairly touch enemy but I rarely fire my guns anymore, there is next to no fighting.
I'm more of a story player but, I still feel there should be more combat, whether the NCR are there or not, bad guys will always be around and they are stretched anyway with higher priorities so there would still be bad guys everywhere.

This is just my opinion though, and just because I like the level cap being raised doesn't men it should be because alot of people are against it. They really need to set up a customising option either in the options menu or at the very start of the game with a quiz or something so everyone ca get the best experience they possibley can and get the Fallout they really want.
It would not be hard to do, they could even patch that easy enough so I think they should. They would get a better reception for it on this tough to please forum that's for sure!
I think they can't please everyone all of the time but, thwne they can easily do something to please fans with different tastes then, they should.

I hope they listen to this but, I doubt it...

The most action i see is in Freeside :hehe: And the only challenging fight was the Legion's Assassin ambush (because they spawned out of thin air behind my back :rolleyes:). Oh, and the Radscorpion Queen in Camp Searchlight required me to actually use chems to kill it before it killed Logan oo: And i still can't believe they managed both to misname and mismodel the Legendary Bloatfly in Dead Wind Cavern

In non- passive aggressive tone: combat, it's amount and it's difficulty has left me extremely unimpressed :meh: But i predicted the game would have it's disappointing aspects which is why i got the PC version.

Constructively, i think this game should have not been a sandbox game, it would've benefited from being similar to the classic Fallouts in structure. This person thinks along the same lines: http://kotaku.com/5738527/are-games-giving-us-too-much-freedom

I've posted this before. Without deeper levels of dungeons to trawl through as you get stronger, the other options are an extremely linear game, or scaling monsters a la Oblivion, which, quite frankly, I would sooner nail my wobbly bits to an angry bears forehead than see again.

Level scaling is good when done right. Oblivion did it wrong, so very wrong :shakehead: The (more or less) static enemies of New Vegas are the opposite extreme of Oblivion's level scaling though. Combined with too few enemies in too few places, the lack of level scaled enemies makes every playtrough very homogeneous experience, and ultimately the problem this thread is about.

Why not make an honestly linear game instead?

Level Scaling has been a useful solution for many RPG games. It makes it so players are still challenged and receive better loot as they go up in level. Borderlands had something such as this going on (now before anyone flies off the handle about this, I am only mentioning it as an example. Nothing more; nothing less) as enemies and loot, though usually the same/similar in appearance/name/function, always appeared in level with the player, thus giving both a challenge and incentive to proceed through the game. Perhaps Vegas could go along a similar (not the same) route. For example:

Creature example:

Levels | Creature Name

1-6 Baby Deathclaw
7-12 Young Deathclaw
13-18 Blind Deathclaw
19-24 Deathclaw
25-30 Mother Deathclaw (with Babies or Young Deathclaws)

Hostile NPC example:

Levels | NPC Name | Loot

1-10 Buzzed Fiend (9mm Gun/.357Revolver/Varmint Rifle)/Raider Armor/couple chems
11-20 Addicted Fiend (10mm Gun/Laser Rifle/Laser RCW)/Reinforced Raider Armor/few chems
21-30 Overdosed Fiend (12.7mm Gun/Hunting Revolver/Tri-Beam Laser Rifle)/(Metal Armor/Tribal Power Armor)/good amount of chems

These are just examples to use a reference for the idea. Something like this could have kept combat fun while traveling around the Mojave in search of whatever.

Why would anyone fly off the handle? Borderlands did this extremely well, though they had scaled weapons too. The only time it didn't do it well was after you finished playthrough 2, when you tended to get absolutely smacked a lot.

I'm not sure I want to see it in FO though. Borderlands is NOT an RPG by any stretch of the imagination.

In other forums I have been in people get mad when another game is mentioned that relates to the topic game in question. I guess I am still used to it, so I acted accordingly is all :cryvaultboy:

More like a multiplayer co-op action adventure racing game with some RPG elements.
But that would be too much to put on the box so it's shortened down to action RPG. :banghead: