Playing on Very Hard: It Means One Thing Only...

qi

First time out of the vault
EDIT: I initially titled this thread, "Playing on Hard..." I had actually picked Very Hard, not Hard. Goofed when I typed the post.

(hi you goofy hipsters you) :(

...and that is, ammo shortage. As far as I can tell, the Hard setting doesn't increase enemy AI or awareness, enemy equipment or even enemy numbers (though granted these observations are based entirely on enemy encounters seeming much sparser than they could have been and foes being uniformly ill-equipped.)

You see, I suspect that the difficulty slider either raises the level of your enemies by a factor of 5 or so, or, more likely, simply raises their HP/damage-resistance and lowers your own. This leads to absurdities such as shooting a bare-faced Raider four or five times point-blank in the face with a 10mm before they die, which is so "gamey" as to obliterate the meagre "immersion" that had previously been achieved.

So I find myself in mindless clickfests wherever I go, because combat is reduced to putting more bullets into the enemy faster than they can put them into my own poorly-animated form. The enemies are still stupid, so I still win, but it merely takes more shots to do it; ergo, the main effect of a higher difficulty is simply to drain my inventory of ammo, which is not a challenge but a huge frustration, as there are only so many ammo stores in the game and my firearms-focused character, even without wasting more than a few shots each combat, simply cannot find more in any area remotely survivable for him.

Strangely, it would make the game very fun if there simply weren't many bullets in the world (a la Mad Max) and I had to cope - that would be logical and, as a result, stimulating. But even though the end result is largely the same (with ammo shortage caused by absurdly impervious enemies) I'm so dismayed by the unreason of it all that I wonder whether the (unmodded) game can hold any interest for me at all. It's not a matter of "making each shot count," but instead just of burning through ammo and then being stuck with nothing but a baseball bat...and a 3 STR character.

I think the most sensible way to affect difficulty would've been one of the simplest for Bethesda: just raise the arms skills of enemies so that they're more likely to hit you and, as a consequence, you need to manoeuvre more skillfully during combat. Provided, of course, that Bethesda would've had no interest in improving the AI...

Oh, but what would a Bethesda release be without a world of frustrations at braindead design decisions, you know? Lordy lordy I do declare, they're like little boys with toys, and aggression disorders.

Anyway, if you can imagine some means by which I can mitigate the frustration (without doing something Beth-fany like "play normel but onley take halfe teh bullits" or whatever) do offer your suggestion, I'd appreciate it, you lemon-faced sponge-bathers, you. :spamfromabove:



edit: of course i can just wait for the shops to restock, i'm very aware of that, thank you. but that fact detracts in no way from the essential idea of my post, as i'm sure you can see easily. ta
 
A tad off topic but still relevent to your post:

I really enjoyed this aspect in Vanilla STALKER. Going out into the wastes with my favorite gun(s) only to run out of ammo, have to ditch it for whatever is lying around and make do.
 
I guess you have to make a choice what you find is most annoying, you taking too little damage on normal or you having to use too many bullets on hard and set it at the level which is least annoying.

It does seem like playing on normal would be the best course of action from reading your post since you find the ammo consumption problem so large as to make you "wonder whether the (unmodded) game can hold any interest for me at all".
 
The survival guide states this:
Level Oponent Damage% Your Damage%
VE 50 200
E 75 150
N 100 100
H 150 75
VH 200 50

It also quite confusingly seems to state more XP at higher level difficulty.
 
Hey there!

Please don't take this post as trolling, because it isn't. I hold Fallout 1 and 2 sacred (along with Jagged Alliance 2) and I have been lurking the forums for ages (hello everyone!) before joining.

However...

I distinctly remember that, in both original Fallouts, most high level enemies could take more than one, more than two and often more than three shots in the face from the 10mm pistol providing none were critical hits.

Of course, this shines as more absurd in a 3D world where you can actually see the shot hitting the dude square in his bare face and you can't just assume a grazing shot (as I did in the originals).

Still, as numerous as Fallout 3's shortcomings may be (I honestly don't know, I haven't tried it yet) I do remember most bad guys in Fallout 1 and 2 were bullet sinks unless you scored a critical, generally an eye shot which dealt extra damage (critical head shots, for some reason, would often knock out but not kill).

Am I the only one who remembers this being so?

Thanks, and please forgive me if I'm wrong
 
Texas Renegade said:
The survival guide states this:
Level Oponent Damage% Your Damage%
VE 50 200
E 75 150
N 100 100
H 150 75
VH 200 50

It also quite confusingly seems to state more XP at higher level difficulty.
An easy way to calculate XP would be to make %XP = %dmg that enemies do so on VE you get 50% experience while on VH you get 200% experience. Guessing aside, I think it's pretty clear what getting more XP on harder difficulties is, though I agree that they should have been clear about how much more.
 
Freudian said:
It does seem like playing on normal would be the best course of action from reading your post since you find the ammo consumption problem so large...".

It's amusing how some players are decrying the scarcity of ammo, and some how overly plentiful it is.

For simplicity I'll stereotype them into the FPS ("Need more ammo") and the RPG ("scrounge in an already heavily scavenged world") factions.

Adjusting the effective stopping power of each round (as difficulty currently does) currently only effects the FPS ammo availability viewpoint. Clearly if it takes 2 rounds instead of 20, ammo will "seem" more plentiful.

To adjust for both viewpoints Bethesda could make ammo availability, both found, and purchasable to be dependent upon the difficulty level.

Just a thought.
 
almost.dust said:
For simplicity I'll stereotype them into the FPS ("Need more ammo") and the RPG ("scrounge in an already heavily scavenged world") factions.

Lol. I like it. :clap: :lol:
 
Ya, I am playing on hard too, and as a do gooder, so I don't let myself steal ammo. It'll make the game last longer and second time around I'll play on normal and steal stuff, will be fun.
 
Difficulty in Bethesda's RPGs since Morrowind are, as Texas Renegade clarified, simply based on changes to the "die rolls". Also increased XP at higher difficulties kind of makes sense to me, otherwise you'd ALWAYS be the underdog.
 
Less ammo. Well. As a primarily H2H player this sounds gosh-darn rediculous. Do they think they can limit the amount of 'knuckle' on my fists, or the 'sledge' on my hammer?

I would facepalm but I just watched Gremlins 2.. and am all facepalm'd out.
 
Reading comments about the absence of difficulty before I started the game, I went straight to Very Hard setting, yet I could still kill everyone in the vault with my baseball bat and Oblivion-like combat (right click to block, left click to hit when the ennemy is staggered after he hits you while you block...). It takes a few hits, but since my health is so high and stimpacks so generously given, it's really not hard at all.

I forgot to mention ... I was a science nerd specced in Energy Weapons, Repair and Speech, with STR4...

First steps outside, I encounter a weapons dealer that offers me a Laser Pistol for ... 27 caps ( my pistol is worth 60... ) ! And apparently he had a stock of them, so I buy a couple and repair one to 80% condition. Great, I now own an energy weapon, 30 minutes after the start of the game.

In FO1&2, energy weapons were sort of high-end equipment, so tagging the skill associated instead of Unarmed or Small Guns was a risky take. Not so much here, this merchant also sells ammo for 3 caps/energy cell, and he has hundreds. Since I got more than 500 caps selling everything I found in the vault, well let's just say corpses are no longer lingering my path, but a vaccum cleaner might be required to clean all that shiny dust.
 
Bowyerte said:
Reading comments about the absence of difficulty before I started the game, I went straight to Very Hard setting, yet I could still kill everyone in the vault with my baseball bat and Oblivion-like combat (right click to block, left click to hit when the ennemy is staggered after he hits you while you block...). It takes a few hits, but since my health is so high and stimpacks so generously given, it's really not hard at all.

I forgot to mention ... I was a science nerd specced in Energy Weapons, Repair and Speech, with STR4...

First steps outside, I encounter a weapons dealer that offers me a Laser Pistol for ... 27 caps ( my pistol is worth 60... ) ! And apparently he had a stock of them, so I buy a couple and repair one to 80% condition. Great, I now own an energy weapon, 30 minutes after the start of the game.

In FO1&2, energy weapons were sort of high-end equipment, so tagging the skill associated instead of Unarmed or Small Guns was a risky take. Not so much here, this merchant also sells ammo for 3 caps/energy cell, and he has hundreds. Since I got more than 500 caps selling everything I found in the vault, well let's just say corpses are no longer lingering my path, but a vaccum cleaner might be required to clean all that shiny dust.

I found it odd that I was able to take on 3 guards and the overseer (and lay waste to them) with my bat as well.

I liked in FO2 that at lv 1 or 2, if you got jumped by 2 gecko's there was a good chance you were going to die.

Alas, in todays gaming scene, nobody really wants a challenge.
 
@bowyerte and rcorporon ...

That is just another pair of brilliant examples as to why this game will become a major disappointment for any Fallout fan.

Hell - a disappointment to anyone mildly interested in gaming - this is so lame I am at a lack of words.
 
rcorporon said:
Alas, in todays gaming scene, nobody really wants a challenge.

I'm not so sure about that. Challenge plays a big part in the feeling of accomplishment, and beeing too dumbed down can make a game completely worthless.

Furthermore, beeing a god among men doesn't help the feeling of survival this game is supposed to be about.

Then again, I remember a friend telling me he tried FO1 and stopped playing because he got killed by the vault entrance rats. I asked him why he would attack a nest of mutated rats in the dark with a lowly pistol he never fired ? He looked at me with big eyes ... Yet he would play Gears of Wars on the highest difficulty, beeing killed by the smallest rock thrown at him, and call it a blast. I guess some people are missing the point entirely.
 
Short supply of ammo = GREAT!

So I don't understand the first complaint.
But I really do understand the fact simple humans can stand several shots in the head. So stupid...
 
Its a basic gameplay mechanism. you can shoot guys in the face in most any game that isn't a pure FPS and they will survive multiple shots.

Heck, you could shoot guys in both original fallouts in the eyes and unless very powerful weapon rarely equaled instant death outside of a crit.
 
But the crit chance for eyes was also pretty high. Shots that hit the eyes also dealed a bunch more damage, and were likely to blind the target for good. Also, High critical chance perks and using certain tpes of weapons made eye critcs all the more likely. And, allright, how many human opponents are there in the original FO that can take over 10 hits on the head? In FO3 an average caravan driver takes 30+ to die...
 
I'd also like to point out that aiming for the eyes in FO1/2 was different than shooting at the eyes in FO3. In the former, your character was trying to hit the eyes or face of their target, and may have missed, or the target may have dodged, or the weapon may have jammed, etc.... Graphically it just looked like there was a hit and the target did that "Ooof, I'm hit!" animation. The text usually told you what happened.

In Fallout 3, there is no text, no explanation as to why the target's just standing there (or at the most, being pushed back by the gunshots) after being shot DIRECTLY in the head. It's much less believable.
 
Well- you do get double damage for shooting them in the head in FO3.

In the originals with the regular pistol it was quite normal at low levels to shoot someone in the eye "causing extreme pain and blindness" only to have them stand there and shoot you back.
 
Back
Top