/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.6049458]

I am new to the Fallout series and hear all sorts of things about the first two. I could never get into the third or fourth installment. If I play the older ones, which one do I start with first? 1 or 2?

[Anonymous No.6049504]

>>6049458
well what do you think dumbass?

[Anonymous No.6049505]

Might as well start with the first, given that Fallout 2 directly follows the events of the original Fallout. Game mechanics wise, they are essentially the same game.

[Anonymous No.6049519]

you wont be able to sadly, your attention span is ruined and you wont finish it

[Anonymous No.6049532]

First one is shorter, but second one is zanier. Both play basically the same.

[Anonymous No.6049546]

2 is a real sequel and is more difficult. Play 1 first.

[Anonymous No.6049553]

Your gonna wanna play one before you step up to Frank

[Anonymous No.6049604]

>>6049458
If you asked this in late 90s, the answer would be obvious. But nowdays? Unironically start with the 2nd one. Gives you much bigger feeling of wonder who the fuck was Vault Dweller and what kind of epic shit did he do.
Otherwise you are into a world of disappointment and can possibly burn you out of the series entirely before you even reach 2nd game.

[Anonymous No.6049608]

>>6049532
>It's another episode of "Fallout 2 was one big meme"
You animals never really played any Fallout games, just parrot each other with this shit. FO1 has even more zany stuff into it, but to know about it, you need to be a bit older (or you miss the references) and actually play the game.
The very first thing you gonna read in FO1 is a fucking Pulp Fiction joke. Here goes your claim about "FO2 is zanier"

[Anonymous No.6049657]

>>6049608
>The very first thing you gonna read in FO1 is a fucking Pulp Fiction joke.
And it's subtle enough that you can't be sure it's intentional if you don't read the dev interviews.

[Anonymous No.6049783]

>>6049504
Fuck off

>>6049505
>>6049546
>>6049604
Thanks for the actual answers

[Anonymous No.6050128]

1, 2, 3, and new vegas are all worth playing

[Anonymous No.6050136]

>>6049458
fallout 2 is better.
but if you play it first, you wont be able to enjoy fallout 1

[Anonymous No.6050374]

>>6049458

Play Fallout 1 first, its short enough to not feel like you wasted time if you dont like it. and if you do like it you'll want more in which case you can then play Fallout 2. (which is much longer)
like people said its an actual sequel, and your experience will be better if you played Fallout 1 first.

[Anonymous No.6050441]

Guess some basic tips for FO1

Skills are more important than actual main stats

Cha is useless so you can put it to 1 and nothing will change as long as you keep your speak skills high

Int is the best skill for the skill points with Agi being second (maybe even tied) because it gives you the action points needed in combat. The rest are give and take but try not to lower them too much

There are items to boost I think every stat by one so maxing Int/Agi at the start is kind of wasteful but some players feel the extra skill points and movements at the start is worth it.

Skilled trait is the best one to pick at the start

Small guns and speech tag are good for beginner players

Finally lots of save in case of bad RNG.

[Anonymous No.6050479]

>>6049657
>N-no, it doesn't count
>I-it's a serious game
Like the encounter with aliens abducting Elvis, right? Totally and 200% subtel, one can't tell if it was a joke or just something that happend

[Anonymous No.6050482]

>>6050441
>Skilled trait is the best one to pick at the start
>Skilled
>good
>best
This is bait, right?
It has to be.

[Anonymous No.6050485]

How do I holster my weapon in Junktown?

[Anonymous No.6050490]

>>6050482
Skills are massively more important in FO1 than anything else. So an extra 10% to everything is better than anything else in the game. You lose out on Perks there's not really many must have anyways.
>>6050485
You have 2 weapon slots. Just put the second slot as unarmed and switch to that in town.

[Anonymous No.6050495]

>>6050374
I played them originally in reverse order and I don't feel I got robbed of anything. Quite the contrary - I was able to force myself to finish the first one out of sheer curiosity, because otherwise the early game in it is so god-damn boring it put me away from playing on my first contact. Only after playing sequel I got enough initiative to return to the first. And it was still an inferior experience for me.

>>6050441
>Skilled trait is the best one to pick at the start
Funny way of writing "Gifted". Skilled is worst trait imaginable, especially in the first game, since you have a level cap in it. You are robbing yourself out of 2 traits for literally no gain, since the +10 to skills is meaningless, ESPECIALLY in Fallout 1, where you can just raise a fuckload of skills via books to 99% by just robbing the library and messing around with difficulty settings. And it's not like you need anything but Small Arms, Speech and maybe Lockpicks to be above 70% in the first game.

>>6050485
... remove weapons from your weapon slot?

[Anonymous No.6050501]

>>6050490
Skills can be learned by reading books. And like I've said, there is grand total of 3 skills that are needed for anything above 70%. So you are going to have more skillpoints than ways of spending it by level 12. Meanwhile, having those two aditional perks is a massive change of game dynamics. Takes to be a complete moron to trade perks in a game with level cap of 21 for +10 to skills you either don't need or can raise without any issues by 3rd town.

[Anonymous No.6050505]

>>6050441
The actual best trait is Gifted, closely followed by Small Frame (especially in FO1, where followers have unlimited carry weight and thus your own is a non-factor). Having +1 to all Stats is effectively +5 to skills, while benefitting you all the various secondary stats from having that +1 to all mains. If you tag both Small Guns and Speech, you are set for the rest of the game with sufficient number of skillpoints to do whatever and even ignoring the Hub library exploit, there is never a shortage of skillpoints. Ever. But missing option for, say, Tag! or Sniper is a no-go, when your "gain" is +10 to Throw and Traps

[Anonymous No.6050506]

>>6050505
>>6050501
Alright than I must have played it wrong. Never really saw the benefit of the extra stat bonus.

You are right there are books everywhere so no need to worry that much about it. Guess if I do play it again I'll just pick that.

[Anonymous No.6050512]

>>6050506
Tag! alone is worth it in FO1, since it provides you with bigger bonus than Skilled ever will, not to mention in a skill you actually need (say, tagging Big/Energy by late game and rising it easily to high value).

[Anonymous No.6050539]

>>6050495
>Funny way of writing "Gifted". Skilled is worst trait imaginable, especially in the first game, since you have a level cap in it.
Actually Skilled in FO1 is mildly better than in FO2, but you have to use a small exploit to really abuse that. With Skilled, you must not pick your first perk at level 4, but wait until level 6, which is when you open up a new perk list. Do the same with your level 8 perk (pick it up at 9). Level 3 perks are the least dramatically useful to a character (Awareness is great intel, but it doesn't directly impact your character's performance), so if you do it this way, you're essentially trading one perk for +10% to all skills. There's a Fallout 2 perk at level 3 that gives you +10% to all four "thief" skills, so in a way Skilled is a better version of that perk.

This isn't a recommendation to take Skilled, more of a suggestion of what to do to optimize a character around Skilled. Skilled outright loses a perk every 12 levels, which at typical Fallout 1 levels hurts a character the least.

Skilled in Fallout 1 gives you a total of +180% to skill points, which sadly includes duds like First Aid, and due to players tending to stick to one weapon type and due to available restockable books at Mrs. Stapleton in the Hub, this is still a so-so trait at best.

Since we know that Skilled loses a perk every 12 levels and Fallout 2 generally ends past level 24, sticking with Skilled in Fallout 2 will grant you roughly 115-130 skill points (that you can put wherever you want) if you're a completionist, and you lose a total of two perks to pick that up. The level 3 perk is not that important, but past the other 12 you have to somehow fit in your Action Boys, Bonus Rate of Fire / Bonus HtH Attacks, Living Anatomy and perhaps situational perks like HtH Evade or maybe even Life Giver if you're playing without reloading, which makes Skilled hard to justify in Fallout 2.

[Anonymous No.6050543]

>>6049458
Just play 1&2 and New Vegas. NV is the true Fallout 3

[Anonymous No.6050553]

>>6050539
Hypothetical Skilled builds in Fallout 2:
Big Guns:
>Level 4 (6): Bonus Ranged Damage
>Level 8 (9): Better Criticals
>Level 12: Action Boy
>Level 16: Bonus Rate of Fire
>Level 20: Action Boy
>Level 24: Sniper
you're sacrificing Awareness / Quick Pockets / Toughness? and a second level of Bonus Ranged Damage

Unarmed:
>Level 6: Bonus Move
>Level 9: Better Criticals
>Level 12: Action Boy
>Level 16: Bonus HtH Attacks
>Level 20: Action Boy
>Level 24: Slayer
You lose out on typical level 3 perks and Living Anatomy, HtH Evade, or a second level of Bonus Move.

Gauss Sniper:
>Level 6: Anything you like, snipers don't have anything truly defining until level 9; Magnetic Personality, More Criticals (for a smoother early game, maybe?), Bonus Move (for ducking behind corners) come to mind.
>Level 9: Better Criticals
>Level 12: Action Boy
>Level 16: Bonus Rate of Fire
>Level 20: Action Boy
>Level 24: Sniper
No room for Living Anatomy and you lose the level 3 perks.

Skilled is a better trait in "pacifist" / low-combat / high reliance on followers' games as most good perks have combat utility, so sacrificing perks for skills is less of a painful tradeoff. You also level up less in pacifist games because you have to give up some of the combat-reliant quest resolutions, so having more skill points per level can be helpful here.

The tl;dr is overall that Skilled is a subpar trait choice and mostly viable for speedrunning.

[Anonymous No.6050557]

>>6050539
So let me get this straight:
Skilled is better, by continously post-poning your gains from perks AND giving you less perks by the end of it, and this is somehow better option than not taking Skilled, because... no reason at all?
There is no way to optimize Skilled, because that trait is just flat-out bad. You are better off not picking it than bothering to make it worth it. It's not going to be. It gives you illusion of gain, by providing miniscule amount of points to each skill - skills you will never use, never need, never bother with and in some cases have on sufficient level to pass various checks without investing a single point into them.
If you want to argue about skill point gain via traits, then Good Natured is a superior choice. Granted, it nerfs your combat capacity, but provides a large bonus to useful skills (Speech, Doctor and in case of FO1, Barter), in practical terms robbing you of 10% in Small Arms, which is a non-issue whatsoever. 45% for 10%? A bargain.
Skilled giving you 10% to every skill while robbing you out of traits and not providing anything else? Fucking pointless, your tags are going to be more beneficial than this shit-tier trait.

[Anonymous No.6050558]

>>6050557
*out of perks

[Anonymous No.6050561]

>>6050539
>>6050553
Skilled is the trait equivalent of those various +n% to given skill perks. Why would you even want to pick something so bad and inefficient at all? What for?

[Anonymous No.6050573]

>>6050557
>this is somehow better option than not taking Skilled
>This isn't a recommendation to take Skilled, more of a suggestion of what to do to optimize a character around Skilled.
To you and >>6050561:
This is a fun thought experiment at most and a theorycrafting opportunity. Some people might want to play a Skilled character for a challenge or for a roleplaying opportunity.
I am perfectly aware Skilled is not good. In fact, I will say it clearly here that unless you are bored out of your mind yet still playing Fallout, you should absolutely avoid taking Skilled.
>There is no way to optimize Skilled, because that trait is just flat-out bad
"Flat-out bad" is Bruiser or Heavy Handed, because they prevent you from hitting important combat benchmarks (-2 AP or -20% crit damage effect is actively harmful to the most efficient playstyles). Skilled makes you overall weaker, but it's still a tier above these two traits.
>If you want to argue about skill point gain via traits, then Good Natured is a superior choice
Yes, I agree.
>continuously post-poning your perks
If you sacrifice your level 3 perk then you are actually not post-poning any perks until you hit level 16, by which time you might already in Fallout 1's end game, in which case you can look at Skilled as a trade off of +180% skill points for a level 3 perk. Most of those skills aren't good, although with the modifiers on Fallout 1 skills like Barter or Gambling (which grant you a lot of value for relatively little skill investment, until this got tweaked in Fallout 2), it's not the worst, and it makes your early game somewhat smoother.
>Skilled giving you 10% to every skill while robbing you out of traits and not providing anything else?
Reminder that in Fallout 2 Skilled is a different trait altogether, providing you with +5% skill points per level that you can put into whatever you want, instead of the flat +10% to everything.

[Anonymous No.6050575]

>>6050573
But we are talking about Fallout 1.
And no matter how you try to present it, Skilled is just a terrible trait to pick. There is no real gain from it whatsoever. Want points? Take Good Natured. Want strong character overall? Pick Gifted. Want both? Pick both, duh. Skilled meanwhile is entirely avoidable and should be avoided.

[Anonymous No.6050583]

>>6049458
1 and 2 are so deep it's almost unbelievable. But if you're not into that style of RPGs that are trying to imitate tabletop RPGs in every way then it might not be your thing.

[Anonymous No.6050590]

>>6050575
>Skilled meanwhile is entirely avoidable and should be avoided.
Sure. But it doesn't hurt to have such a discussion at all, does it? Especially since we are being civil about it.
At most, I can say that Skilled has at least "some" use with some very specific circumstances or playstyles (like a pacifist game), but not that it's ever optimal or close to optimal. That's more than I can say about it than I can say about the "Max Stone" traits, and that's about all from me on the subject.

[Anonymous No.6050595]

>>6050590
>But it doesn't hurt to have such a discussion at all, does it?
... for what point, exactly? It's a pointless solipsism, chasing own tail for the sake of it. I mean, we are posting on 4chan, but doing your thing is still a few levels deeper of wasting time and energy on pointless shit.

[Anonymous No.6050625]

I'm sorry I put Skill trait as recommended. I was wrong can we move on now please.

[Anonymous No.6050681]

>>6049458
>I could never get into the third or fourth installment
Understandable. If you want something like those, but actually good, it's New Vegas you're looking for.

>>6050128
I don't actually hate 3, but New Vegas does everything it does so much better in every way it's hard to not look at it as obsolete.
I'll admit I was pretty impressed with 3 when it launched, but in hindsight, it has aged horrendously, a lot of the design decisions are obnoxiously bad.

[Anonymous No.6050705]

>>6050479
That's a rare encounter, not something you see as soon as you start the game.
>>6050490
The only important skill is Speech (you can learn Small Guns from books). Perks are far more important, so Skilled is the worst trait in the game.

[Anonymous No.6051043]

>>6049783
It was an actual answer, and a good one at that.

Fallout 1 is a 'pure' experience, it's self contained and to the point.
Fallout 2 has a lot more irony, references, satyre..
Some people will snob it for that, but they're wrong. It still works, it's a very good game.
It's more of a picaresque, lots of colourful people and places.
It's also mechanically better.
But you still lose a little something in the trade.

Also you need min 9 Agi, and 7 Int. Unless you want to make the game difficult. Gifted is god tier too.

>>6049608
Fallout 1 dev had a rule: you can put a reference if it's ambiguous and someone who doesn't know it doesn't feel like he missed something.
Fallout 2 kind of jettisoned this one.
I didn't know doctor who or H2G2 at the time and it felt out of place.

https://www.invidio.us/watch?v=T2OxO-4YLRk
If you have time to waste, this is about the creation of the game. Very interesting take about the vg industry and fallout itself.

>>6050495
>boring
it's about the mood

[Anonymous No.6051079]

>>6050681
not him but i could never get into new vegas even though mechanically it's a better game.

the mojave just feels really boring compared to the capital wasteland & commonwealth and a rebuilt wasteland isn't as exciting to explore as an untamed wasteland.

[Anonymous No.6051102]

>>6051079
Fair enough. Personally I just really took to all the cowboy stuff, and as a gun guy the much better and nicer weapons charmed me (FO3s guns are mostly very floaty and awkward), it was fun to handload ammo, combat felt better, it felt like it had much more character, and much more variation in equipment and items. It also felt like most of the expansions were fairly substantial additions.

Capitol Wasteland is vaster, true, and it has much more urban ruin crawl and underground tunnels, which I missed in Nevada, but at the same time, there's a lack of particularly interesting things to do. I'll say that Nevada is almost like one big U-shaped corridor for a pretty good part of the game, which doesn't offer up as much variety as it could.
That is, unless you're willing to gather up some necessary supplies to fight your way through the Cazadors north of Goodsprings, and then carefully sneaking past the Deathclaws near the quarry (because you have the chance to fight off Cazadors at reasonably low levels, but you're just not putting a dent on a Deathclaw with anything available that early on, certainly not fast enough to take two, or even three.
Nevada is a bit of a railroad, I guess is what I'm saying.

[Anonymous No.6051152]

>>6051102
>Nevada is a bit of a railroad, I guess is what I'm saying.
and that's honestly what i didn't really like about it the most.

the DLCs fixed that problem for me for the most part but everything after honest hearts was kinda disappointing.

[Anonymous No.6051327]

>>6051152
The only thing I liked about Honest Hearts was the gear you could get, as well as the roaming. The characters and questlines were boring as fuck, Joshua is cool at first, but you just don't do anything interesting at all through the entire DLC, aside from just going exploring and looting.

[Anonymous No.6051383]

>>6050625
No. Internet never forgets

[Anonymous No.6051387]

>>6051043
>Being this wrong
>Being this contrarian

[Anonymous No.6051539]

>>6050705
>That's a rare encounter, not something you see as soon as you start the game.
Right, because the game opens with Pulp Fiction joke.
As compared with Fallout 2, which doesn't bring any references all the way until Den. You know, the zany game full of memes, the Memout 2.
Like the original anon said, you animals never played either of those and just keep sniffing farts about "unbearable memes in FO2" and "pure and true FO1".

[Anonymous No.6051635]

>>6049608

I played Fallout 1 and 2 late, but it was still like 15 years ago, before I ever read any criticism of the second one. And I thought the second game kinda sucked because of the excessive amount of zany "humor" in it. If they put a lot of their Important Funny References into the first one too, then they did it much better. It doesn't matter if it's just because I missed the references - what matters is that, whatever the difference was, it WORKED. That is, it protected me from having that kind of bad experience in the first game. You are wrong and the second game is tainted.

[Anonymous No.6051638]

>>6051539

Fallout 2 had an entire section in which insufferable neckbeards lectured me about Scientology while clearly thinking they were being hilarious. Fallout 1 had a little tiny Elvis joke. It's a different flavor of "humor". In neither case is it funny, but one is much more harmful than the other is.

[Anonymous No.6051650]

How come neither the sequels nor games heavily inspired by them (ATOM RPG) managed to capture the atmosphere of the first two Fallouts?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SefxmOv-88M

[Anonymous No.6051665]

>>6049458
Start with the first one. The second game's opening level puts people off due to the design, you almost need to know what game mechanics are before you play the game. But the second one is better.

[Anonymous No.6051681]

What do you guys do in the post-game? I stop playing after I get to the ending.

[Anonymous No.6051841]

>>6051638
Fallout 1 had an entire section in which game turns into word-by-word quote from Island of Doctor Moreau (two pages of it), while you are talking with a guy named Richard Moreau about his vision for human race.
But since you are illiterate faggot, you didn't even notice or in your ape brain assumed this is some subtle joke or something. But most likely didn't even notice.
God, you are all pathetic faggots with the never ending "muh super-speshul Fallout 1, so pure and untained with outside influence".
Go watch first two Mad Max movies at least. Then tell me with a straight face how "pure" Fallout 1 is. Or just go for Wasteland. Nah, too much effort, right? And it doesn't count, if you are illiterate, ignorant fucking zoomer with no idea what the fuck he's talking about, because you never experienced any of the COUNTLESS media Fallout 1 includes in itself.

tl;dr go fuck a goat.

[Anonymous No.6051849]

>>6051635
>I didn't get the reference, so it wasn't a reference
Flawless """""logic""""", Private

[Anonymous No.6051996]

Fallout 2 is really bad in pretty much every aspect.

[Anonymous No.6052946]

https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Fallout_cultural_references

vs

https://fallout.fandom.com/wiki/Fallout_2_cultural_references

Fallout 2 is shit
Fallout 1 despite being smaller has a better story, more meaningful choices and better writing

[Anonymous No.6053650]

>>6052946
>This shitty list once again
One day I'm going to actually fucking sit and write down all the crap that's in the game, because you niggers won't know any better, unless someone literally points a fucking finger and tell you "Hey, it's a shout-out and this is taken from other media"
This fucking list doesn't even include Boneyard references.

[Anonymous No.6053656]

>>6052946
Also
>Has reference to Arnie himself
>Doesn't pick up the fact the exact same character refers to Predator movie
Not sure what's worse. Faggots fellating over how "pure" FO1 is, or the blind cunt who composed that fucking list. It's like an insult to man's intelligence.

[Anonymous No.6053663]

>>6052946
I mean Fallout 2 is longer so it has more reference. And the whole idea of Wasteland and Fallout is because of a love of Boy and his Dog and Mad Max. Every game does references and other things. You can say 2 goes a bit overboard but trying to claim that 1 is a masterpiece that hid their reference well is a fucking lie.

[Anonymous No.6054004]

>>6052946
From the top of my head:
Obligatory Brian Fargo reference, which will also count as Wasteland reference, not included
Guy named Loxley, speaking in English accent and making references to Errol Flynn is running a group of thieves... not on the list. And they literally made him a talking head to milk that joke.
Elvis, aliens, Area 51 aren't even on this list
Neither is Godzilla's footprint.
BoS being a militarised monk of St. Leibowitz, from "Canticle for Leibowitz", not on the list, despite being very blatant case.
.223 pistol is a Blade Runner reference, not included
Red Ryder BB gun, which is both A Christmas Story and Wasteland reference, not included
Lieutenant is dropping ReBoot references by a dozen thanks to his voice actor (now THAT is aged like hell, you probably don't even know what ReBoot even was)

So just with short glance on the list it's more about "many things aren't listed here" than "things aren't in the game".

[Anonymous No.6054008]

>>6054004
*monk order

[Anonymous No.6054017]

>>6049458
Start with 1. 2 was rushed, is genuinely "more humorous" than the first and begins a lot of the tropes that would plague the Fallout series for decades to come (the "Vaults are experiments" crap, the "Brotherhood of Steel are so cool! OMG!" garbage, the "it's a wasteland but it's a civilized wasteland" paradox, etc. so forth).

In short, 1 then 2.

[Anonymous No.6054031]

>>6054017
>"Brotherhood of Steel are so cool! OMG!" garbage
Which Fallout 2 DOESN"T HAVE, instead presenting them as washed-out has-beens. It's Fallout 1 that's non-stop wanking over how cool they are. Seriously, for all faults of FO2, you've listed a thing it doesn't do and is virulently against.
Also, when FO2 came out, the "Vaults were a social experiment" was a big fucking plot-twist. But like all plot-twist like that, it became overused, overblown and generally became a common knowledge. Kind of how people know Bruce Willis is a ghost in 6th sense even if they never saw it, bexause that's a very famous twist.

[Anonymous No.6054054]

>>6054004
This guy gets it

>>6054017
>t. never actually played 2
It's so blatantly obvious you never went through the game with your accusations against things that either aren't there or aren't a problem for the game itself, it's just amazing you have the sheer gale to make your claim anyway. All you had to do was say "play them in chronological order", but no, you just had to expose yourself as incompetent, parroting faggot who never touched the game himself.

[Anonymous No.6054506]

I hate when some things are repeated ad nauseam like some sort of meme just to shit in good games, same with "Torment has such an awful insufferable combat" and stuff like that.
Fallout 1 is extremely short. It's simple. It barely uses the mechanics it presents. Just New Reno is more complex than the entirety of Fallout 1.
And Fallout is about action/consequence, complex and ramificated quests, roleplaying really different characters, who the fuck cares that much about some references?

[Anonymous No.6054510]

>>6050505
quality post

[Anonymous No.6054524]

>>6054506
>not showing the character's charisma
you never really realize how short F1 is until you list the locations in sequence.
>shady sands/vault 13/khans
>junktown
>necropolis
>hub
>BoS
>glow
>mariposa
>boneyard
>cathedral

[Anonymous No.6054568]

>>6053650
>>6053656
>>6054004
>>6054054
obvious samefag

[Anonymous No.6054758]

>>6054524
>you never really realize how short F1 is until you list the locations in sequence.
I realized it when I had a day I had nothing else to do but replay Fallout 1 and noticed that an "all quests" playthrough can be done in like 10 hours of casual play.

[Anonymous No.6054856]

>>6054568
>Post is a continuation to previous one
>S-samefag!
Of course I'm a "samefag", you dumb motherfucker, because I'm concluding my thought

[Anonymous No.6054861]

>>6054568
Oh look, I'm samefagging again, because I add something to insulting you now:
More insults!
Because you appear to be under the delusion that when fingers are pointed at FO1 with legit concern, the best way to go with it is to try dismiss game content. Content that's there for over 20 years and you never even notice, being either a fucking zoomer or never really playing the game. Most likely both.
So go fuck yourself.

[Anonymous No.6054948]

>>6054856
>>6054861

[Anonymous No.6055178]

>>6049608
>The very first thing you gonna read in FO1 is a fucking Pulp Fiction joke. Here goes your claim about "FO2 is zanier"
F1 mostly kept the jokes in check. F2 puts a (rather shitty) reference to Pinky&Brain in one of the major quests (i know it is optional, but judging by the way you choose to take, it's the part of a main story). And a ghoul religious cult based around this reference.

[Anonymous No.6055181]

>>6050441
>Skilled trait is the best one to pick at the start
You sure you aren't talking about Gifted, which is 7 SPECIAL points for free basically?

[Anonymous No.6055186]

>>6055181
This. Gifted is god-tier, Fast Shot is high-tier (god-tier in 1, since it works on melee/unarmed too), Finesse and Jinxed are mid-tier, everything else is shit-tier.

[Anonymous No.6055293]

>>6055186
Small Frame is excellent (carry weight is negligible).

[Anonymous No.6055315]

>>6054948
>not using fallout reaction image to be thematic

[Anonymous No.6055321]

>>6055293
Yeah, the carry weight penalty isn't a big deal with the car and based sulik, but I think 1 AP off every ranged attack is worth much more than +1 flex point with SPECIAL since we want to start with 10AG regardless of build.

[Anonymous No.6055336]

I have only ever played New Vegas and Fallout 4. I have watched countless videos about Fallout 1, 2 and 3, like Let's Plays, lore videos etc.
Is it worth it to play them myself when I already know what happens in the games?

[Anonymous No.6055345]

>>6055336
If you're old enough to appreciate cRPGs, 1 and 2 are some of the best out there. If you aren't, you probably won't have a great time. If you want to try a more modernized Fallout with many classic elements, try Wasteland 2.

[Anonymous No.6055360]

>>6055336
I mean late 90's isometric turn base RPG plays very little like 3D action RPG. They are fun if you can enjoy lots of reading and resetting when a fight goes poorly.

[Anonymous No.6055430]

>>6055360
>isometric
reeeeee it's cavalier oblique

[Anonymous No.6055454]

>>6055321
>we want to start with 10AG regardless of build.
I use a lot of drugs so I actually don't run 10 AG, although that usually relies on either playing a meme run (something without Gifted, or a high CH female to do sex favors) and free SPECIAL is free SPECIAL. I rate SF over Finesse simply because on the off-chance I don't crit (like really early on) then the damage penalty is annoying and later on with Sniper my crit chance is consistent either way. And ofc Fast Shot is less hot if you're going for aimed shot builds until level 27 (when you can Mutate into it).

[Anonymous No.6055519]

>>6055360
>resetting when a fight goes poorly.
The biggest flaw in classic Fallout is the swingy combat making ironman runs play weird. I've ironmaned both 1 and 2, but you have to be ultra-paranoid, because one bad enemy crit will end your run. It would be better if crits weren't so random.

[Anonymous No.6055529]

>>6055519
>swingy combat
?

[Anonymous No.6055560]

>>6049458
Start with the First Fallout. It's amazing.

Read up on how to make a character before starting 2. It's a good game, but you can't just make what ever character you want.

[Anonymous No.6055595]

>>6055529
I can try answering that:
in Fallout, enemy damage ranges from "tickles" (non-threatening normal hits that you usually can instantly heal because Stimpaking is infinite) to "mortal blows" (getting knocked down and stunlocked over and over as you're getting pelted down for all your HP in a turn OR even getting hit for your entire HP total). Lifegiver or high EN helps somewhat (although high EN comes at a hefty SPECIAL cost and it scales like shit) but hit points are just a tertiary cushion and you can't rely on them; an Enclave turret is still liable to one-shot you, although I've had Ironman characters survive on just barely enough HP to reposition and heal.
It's swingy because it's 50/50, if you get hit you die or you don't and it's often hard to control, so your best resolve is to minimize getting hit.

[Anonymous No.6055616]

>>6055595
That's what makes it so great. No matter how decked out you are, crits are always potentially lethal.

[Anonymous No.6055798]

>>6055336
You might get confused by different design philosophy, but you should be fine.

>>6055345
>Wasteland 2
>Enter building
>Different map
What is wrong with those people?

[Anonymous No.6055814]

>>6055798
Engine limitations :^)

[Anonymous No.6055821]

>>6055814
>Pick engine that can't do something that could be done in the previous century
My question still stands. This was actually major dealbreaker to me, I saw it and thought "fuck it". This and I don't really like controlling entire squad.

[Anonymous No.6055838]

>>6055821
Were the load times particularly bad on your system or something?

[Anonymous No.6055852]

>>6055838
No, it's just dumb as fuck to not have continuity in a fucking tactical game.

[Anonymous No.6055981]

>>6055814
>>6055821
It's less about technical limitations and more about lazy coding - because inside and outside are separate locations, you have far easier time coding AI behaviour and don't need to get worried NCPs are going to go hostile or paranoid due to being dragged in combat.
In other words - it's another case of Fargo cutting corners and being smug about it. It's been so many years and I still feel bitter about the final product that was W2: DC with full patching. I let a lot of thing slip during development, I was really lenient when pre-DC game was released, I endured the lengthy patching process and I endured equally bumpy DC development. But there is just no way I can stomach the fact the game reached its final iteration and still is so god-damn lacking in capturing the spirit of the original or in being good tactical shooter. For fuck's sake, 20yo JA2 is superior game to the clusterfuck that W2 ended up being.

[Anonymous No.6055983]

>>6055178
>F1 mostly kept the jokes in check
So far this thread proved exact contrary of that, with fucking examples. But hey, it's not on the list, so it doesn't count, right?

[Anonymous No.6055991]

>>6055321
That 1 AP prevents you from aiming your attacks, thou, which is the real power of the combat, at least before obtaining Sniper perk. And it's especially important in FO1, where weapon progression is barely there and there aren't really that many good guns for mid game.

[Anonymous No.6055994]

>>6055519
>I am paranoid fuck and thus behave like one
ftfy

Also, fuck people playing games for retarded, self-imposed challenges.

[Anonymous No.6056006]

>>6055991
The irony with aimed shots to the eyes (outside of melee) is that they're most useful early game except your chance to land them early through mid-game is laughably low. The weapon progression in 1 isn't too bad, we can pick up a 10mm SMG straight out of the gate in Vault 15 and keep a Hunting Rifle on our switch for extra long range shit. Upgrade the 10mm SMG to the .223 Pistol, and the Hunting Rifle to the Sniper Rifle while putting extra points in Energy Weapons to tide us over until we can switch to the Turbo Plasma Rifle and shoot five times per round which will delete anything and everything, no aiming required.

The one really rough part is dealing with the Deathclaws in the Boneyard with the .223 pistol, but it's doable.

[Anonymous No.6056010]

>>6056006
If you sink a couple of levels into guns you'll start getting decent chances, no? Been a while since I actually played the game so I don't really remember how it went.

[Anonymous No.6056117]

>>6056010
The formula is BTH = (Skill - 30) + ((PE - 2) * 16) - (HEX * 4) - (AC of Target) [- 10% at night if HEX >= 5] for all rifles rifles from FO1 with a range >25

So with 150% Small Guns, a 10mm Pistol, and 6 PE against a guy wearing a leather armor 15 hexes away, we have a 184 - 75% chance to hit, or 109%. An Aimed Shot to the Eyes has a -60% accuracy penalty, so now we only have a 49% chance to hit. Not great, you would need 196% gun skill for 95% accuracy eye shots without a bonus from the weapon type, and that's so fucking expensive you might as well just put those points into energy weapons instead.

Melee is way more forgiving when it comes to accuracy and aimed shots.

[Anonymous No.6056758]

>>6056006
My point of lack of progression boils to following:
You can obtain in early game half-decent "late early game" guns... and there is no real replacement for them until you are in end game. Aside that, the game itself is written in a way to get Turbo Plasma Rifle as your ultimate weapon, or get fucked.

>The one really rough part is dealing with the Deathclaws in the Boneyard with the .223 pistol
Shoot the legs. That's why aiming is so important.

>>6056117
There is a VERY important modifier from weapons themselves you didn't include into the equation (since it's not part of it). In other words, the equation is true for a 10 mm pistol, but not .223 one.

[Anonymous No.6056770]

>>6056758
And by modifier I don't mean item perk (in case of .223 it's Weapon Penetrate), but pretty much each gun has different "effective range", after which distance penalty starts to be applied (or additional bonus up-close is added). Unfortunately, this statistic is one of the most obtuse and hidden of them all and isn't even displayed in any way in-game, aside giving you the final range of the weapon.

[Anonymous No.6056797]

>>6055983
Here let me help you out...
>get power armor and equip it
>go to New Reno and start talking to all the NPCs
>realize the game is shit and uninstall

[Anonymous No.6056872]

>>6049519
I played it for the first time a few months ago and finished it, if you have add, doesn't mean others do as well.

[Anonymous No.6057021]

>>6056797
Must be tough being autistic

[Anonymous No.6057031]

>>6049458
NV is also fun, but it crashes all the fucking time (play on PC to reduce that and reduce the inevitable reloading of the game and room loading).
F1/2 are bretty gud for birds eye view(is that the view?) Fallout, but I'm younger so I grew up with the later first person point of view games. I liked what I played in F1/2, but that turn mechanic was a little bit annoying. You also can't sneak like you can in the newer games. In a survival game that's the key.

[Anonymous No.6057037]

>>6050128
NV makes me dream of another obsidian fallout, only with less crashes.
The story was fucking amazing compared to 3. 3's setting made no sense at all, which is ok in small doses in a fallout game, but not when you put a town right next to an unexploded and irradiated nuke, that makes no sense and isn't even funny.

[Anonymous No.6057092]

>>6057021
Must be tough being retarded

[Anonymous No.6057312]

>>6056758
I'm willing to compromise and have one really hard fight while annihilating everything else fast and efficiently versus making that one fight easier and suffering for the other 99% of the game. Same goes for Fallout 2, where aimed shots on a ranged character are most useful when you're forced to melee when boxing in new reno or kickboxing the dragon.

It would be a more compelling choice if aimed shots didn't require an extra AP, on top of yet another AP because you can't take fast shot.

[Anonymous No.6057321]

>>6050128
4 is also worth playing but less so.

[Anonymous No.6057653]

>>6057321
3 is trash, 4 is trash, NV is pretty bad but playable.

[Anonymous No.6058191]

Are there any good mods for Fallout 1 or Fallout 2?

I love the mechanics and art style in those games, but would really like a new scenario for it. I played through the Restoration Project mods for both games, anything else?

[Anonymous No.6058209]

>>6058191
>new scenario
Fallout 1.5: Resurrection and Fallout: Nevada are entirely new campaigns in the engine. They're quite decent as far as fanworks go, and recently received English translations (from Czech and Russian, respectively).
Otherwise anything else is just QoL stuff like SFall.

[Anonymous No.6058245]

>>6058209
Oh, thank you. I've seen screenshots of mods with russian-looking lettering ages ago and figured there weren't translations available.

[Anonymous No.6058461]

>>6051681
I like to talk to every mayor NPC to congratulate me for defeating the Enclave. Then I try to wipe out Navarro without my companions getting killed.
Then i kill every single NPC until I get bored

[Anonymous No.6058473]

Finally beated Fallout 2 on retard mode and even tho it was something different to what I usually run with, it was hell not getting as much XP as I did in other runs. I had to start using Mentats to get a few quests and by the end of the game my retarded character was suffering from crippling Jet addiction while taking down Horrigan

[Anonymous No.6059213]

>>6058473
Serious question: why go for retard run, if you use Mentats anyway? What's the fucking point?
>B-but I can't do quests
... so? It's like you don't understand the concept of role-playing and instead do fucking completionist checklist.

[Anonymous No.6059354]

>>6059213
Not him but he did say it was hard getting less XP (I think he meant fewer skill points on level up).

[Anonymous No.6059512]

>>6059354
Tbh, as a dumb character, you can skip Gifted (not many useful stats either way) if you really care about skill gain... but you also don't need that many skill points since most of them don't work when you're an idiot.

If you need to level up without Speech XP, just explore the world map and kill shit. You also get a shitload of loot (especially in raider cave encounters with the chest at the end), so it's easy to feed a Big Gun habit. Or exterminate cities you exhausted of quests.

[Anonymous No.6059536]

>do I start with part one or part two
The absolute state of 2019

[Anonymous No.6059665]

Sniper/Speech build best build

[Anonymous No.6061337]

>>6059665
2x p90 > snipefaggotry

[Anonymous No.6061351]

>>6059665
>>6061337
>Being this boring
If you aren't doing a tribal run, you are doing it wrong.

[Anonymous No.6061364]

>>6061351
Nothing more boring than melee.

[Anonymous No.6061370]

>>6050441
>Cha is useless
no

[Anonymous No.6061480]

>>6061364
>Spearing motherfuckers dead
>Going fist-to-fist with a deathclaw
>Bashing skulls with a baseball bat and watch them fly
>Boring

>>6061370
He considers Skilled a good trait, give the poor sod a break.

[Anonymous No.6061680]

>>6059512
Going for a Killing everything is a bit tricky when absolutely everything can kill You instantly with a critical near the endgame.

[Anonymous No.6061725]

>>6049458
what a retarded question, are you a faggot who can´t decide by himself a simple thing like which one play first?? what the fuck.

[Anonymous No.6061980]

>>6061370
Cha in Fallout 1 really is useless. It doesn't affect companion limit in that game, and every important interaction is gated by Speech, which in turn is gated by Intelligence. Off the top of my head, there are like three CH rolls in Fallout 1 and they can be achieved through other means. Dump Cha and don't look back. Fallout 2 bolsters the stat a bit.
>>6061680
Nah, you can loot Highwaymen and Press Gangs for couple thousand bucks every so often and those aren't highly armored nor *that* dangerous. Exterminating cities that you've exhausted is usually safe and grants you a couple hundred XP.

Also, to be technical, enemies in Fallout 2 don't have instant death criticals, they just punch superhard through HP. Sometimes you get lucky (I try to make my own luck in Ironman by going Lifegiver, but sometimes it's admittedly not enough), but often you don't. Still, this is mostly a concern with the Enclave, and the encounters I recommended doing are random caves with loot chests at the end, which are less dangerous.

Still, though, no-reloading a game that finishes with the extermination of Navarro and the oil rig is quite glorious.

[Anonymous No.6061987]

>>6061480
>go fist to fist with a deathclaw
>don't disable or kill them in the first round
>immediately knocked down and whacked until dead
I prefer shooting them in the face.

[Anonymous No.6062468]

I'm a couple hours into Fallout 1.5: Resurrection right now. Good stuff. I'm going in blind, as is proper.

[Anonymous No.6062582]

>>6061725
Zoomers don't like thinking for themselves and always consult the tribe before making any decisions. Won't even do their own research.

[Anonymous No.6062997]

>>6061987
>Not punching deathclaws brains out
>Or punching it so hard, it's knocked out cold
>Or breaking its arms, so it can't attack you at fucking all and just walks around, confused
Sounds to me you never really played melee, especially with bare fists. Pro-tip: knocking enemies cold is super common and it's not considered critical by the game. On top of that, there is a critical version of knocking targets out. So all in all, you can put bunch of targets unconscious in a single turn with proper build in regards of AP.

[Anonymous No.6063002]

>>6062997
I've done one melee playthrough, and several unarmed (superior to melee in every way) playthroughs. Ranged is just better in every way until way, way late-game where it catches up.

[Anonymous No.6063003]

>>6062997
>>6063002
When I was playing FO2 for the first time, I decided to really go for a tribal, since, you know, that's the premise. Tagged Melee and Unarmed (and Speech, because it's Fallout after all) and had fun with it - temple was super-easy, Klamath was fun, Toxic Caves were a blitz. Friend of mine played along, with "standard" build, with Small Guns tagged. He had nothing but complains how the early game plays, since he had hard time hitting anyone with aimed shots, ammo was super-scarce and getting a 10mm pistol was a problem by itself.
Then we both reached Den and ultimately picked on Metzger and his guild. I dropped most of targets unconscious and generally just punched anyone trying to enter the room flat, powering through the slavers like through wet toilet paper. Friend run out of ammo mid-fight and barely survived the whole encounter.
Granted, he eventually did catch up in terms of combat proficiency, but that was by "canonical" reach of New Reno. By that time I was Mirek the Destroyer, with literally nothing matching to my punching skills and Mrs. Wright graciously gave me one of the best weapons in the game just because I asked.
So I guess to everyone according to their needs and tastes. I dread the concept of playing melee in FO1, but in 2 it's fucking fantastic.

[Anonymous No.6063015]

>>6063003
>aimed shots in the early game
>running out of ammo constantly even though Flick and Tubby has a whole arsenal
>trouble with beating up rats leading to 10mm Pistol when even a dedicated gunslinger gets a ton of free Unarmed training from Arroyo and Klamath
I think your friend just played really poorly

[Anonymous No.6063026]

>>6063015
I think his friend just didn't like buying things. Considering your budget (especially on first playthrough) in F2, it's understandable. When I was charged for the plow in Vault City, I just dropped the quest first time around, as that was almost all of my money.

[Anonymous No.6063108]

>>6063015
>>trouble with beating up rats leading to 10mm Pistol when even a dedicated gunslinger gets a ton of free Unarmed training from Arroyo and Klamath
That's just 65%, anon. You get trained up to 55% in Arroyo and the guy in bar in Klamath is +10%. Meanwhile, you need 85% for reliable hits on torso. Not saying that the game doesn't throw enough free training on you to reach it (it's perfectly possible to have 100% Unarmed without spending a point on it), but if you play in sequence, then tough luck, because Klamath will end at 65% and you won't get free increase until New Reno.

[Anonymous No.6064060]

>>6063108
Yeah but rats aren't harmful, you can kite them or tank them and it's all the same, you can simply kill them anyway.

[Anonymous No.6064081]

>>6063015
This for sure. There's a ton of shit to steal in klamath, there's no reason you shouldn't be able to kill every single rat/gecko/radscorp and leave with a bunch of 10mm to feed the 10mm smg you can buy in the den.

[Anonymous No.6064297]

>>6057653
okay grognard.

[Anonymous No.6064318]

>>6064081
>Buying SMG
>Not buying Magnum
What are you? A fag?

[Anonymous No.6064324]

>>6064318
SMG has more ubiquitous ammo, burst is useful in a pinch early on (and since there aren't many useful level 6 perks, Bonus Ranged Damage bolsters the burst fire quite a bit without committing much) and it's better for Fast Shot builds.

[Anonymous ~ No.6064350]

>>6049458
Fallout Tactics.

[Anonymous No.6064352]

>>6064324
>Having two aimed shots
vs.
>Having one aimed shot or one burst
Thanks, I will pick two attacks over one, especially since it deals more damage and uses second most popular ammo type anyway.
>Bonus Ranged Damage
Oh, so you really are a fag. It's either Magnetic Personality (if you aren't junky faggot) or Bonus Move (if you are melee) or Quick Pockets (if it's Ironman) or just withholding a perk till level 9 for either Sharpshooter or Dodger (with Better Crits as regular pick)

[Anonymous No.6064364]

>>6064324
And if we are going for fast shot:
>Having three shots per turn
vs.
>Having two shots per turn
I'll pick three. Magnum is just fucking broken. I wish there was a mid-game weapon like it, so I could have a good gun progression for mid-game, rather than being either stuck with eventually too weak magnum before getting my hands on P-chan

[Anonymous No.6064382]

>>6064352
>Having two aimed shots
>vs.
>Having one aimed shot or one burst
If you're doing a burst build, you take Fast Shot, so it's two shitty inaccurate aimed shots versus two bursts which each have a good chance of instantly killing your target.

[Anonymous No.6064393]

>>6064382
>it's two shitty inaccurate aimed shots
It's three shots.
Unless your burst crits for some serious damage (which is unlikely in Den, since you aren't going to be level 9), three regular shots from Magnum > two bursts from SMG.
That gun takes -1 less AP to perform all actions, And is perfectly viable for Fast Shot builds, since you can empty the entire fucking drum once you've got 12 AP and the perk for less AP on guns.

[Anonymous No.6064405]

>>6064393
Two bursts @ 5-12x10 (100-240) vs three shots @ 12-18 (36-54). I really like the magnum, but using corners and dumping on people point blank with the 10mm smg is glorious.

[Anonymous No.6064420]

>>6064405
>Implying more than 5 will hit
Come on, anon. I love the animation of cuting motherfucker in half with burst mode, but let's be realistic. This is paper damage. As in - exists only on paper. What's the negative modifier from firing burst? -20? -30?
There is just no way to make SMG shine at even half its potential early on. And once you have skills and perks for that, there are better options already.

[Anonymous No.6064442]

>>6064420
>What's the negative modifier from firing burst? -20? -30?
Aimed Eye shot is -60.
>There is just no way to make SMG shine at even half its potential early on
Pump points in guns right from the start and shoot point blank, you'll be fine.

[Anonymous No.6064456]

>>6064442
At that point I migh just punch motherfuckers dead, while using them as body shields against their buddies with 80% in Small Guns trying to hit me.
Different playstyle, different goals, I guess.

[Anonymous No.6064458]

>>6064442
Different anon, but there is no modifier for firing magnum unaimed. That's still 36 damage in worst case scenario, but if you pumped skill, that's three crits, despite not aiming them.

[Anonymous No.6064463]

>>6064458
>but if you pumped skill, that's three crits, despite not aiming them
Skill doesn't give you crits, anon.

[Anonymous No.6064472]

>>6064463
Then I guess I'm a really, really, really lucky for those past 20 years, dumping LK each and every time and yet reliably landing crits once skill is at 120+ %. Sans Better Criticals, I never take any perks affecting crits, not to mention Crit Chance.
Any explaination? And I'm asking sincerely.

[Anonymous No.6064482]

>>6064472
With 6 luck on a 95% chance to hit attack and no other crit boosting effects, you've got a ~10% chance to crit, so seeing regular crits isn't unusual.

[Anonymous No.6064486]

>>6064352
>Sharpshooter
What for? Not only is it not good (+32% weapon skill, in effect, IF IT WORKED?), it's bugged and only gives +1 PE instead of th advertised +2 PE.
>Dodger
+5% avoidance? On Rough difficulty, that's nothing.
>Magnetic Personality
no need
>Bonus Move
I'm obviously not melee if we're talking gun buiolds
>Quick Pockets
Either taken at level 3 or skipped
>(if it's Ironman)
Quick Pockets doesn't do anything specifically amazing on Ironman.
Also burst weapons are capable of AoEing enemies down.
>you are a faggot because you picked a perk
no comment, especially considering your poor choices and illogical justification
>>6064472
>dumping LK each and every time and yet reliably landing crits once skill is at 120+ %
aimed shots increase crit chance by as much as the to-hit penalty you're imposing to hit with them
if you're hitting crits reliably with Fast Shot and LK2 then it's pure confirmation bias
also locking yourself out of Better Criticals, the best combat perk in the game, is dubious
not to mention there really is nothing good to pump points into when dumping LK because it really is one of the better stats in the game and it can't be raised by drugs on top of that

[Anonymous No.6064490]

>>6064352
>>6064486
Oh and BTW withholding perks in Fallout 2 doesn't work because if you advance to the next level-eligible perk you lose your original perk choice. Doing what you advise loses you a perk, outright. Holding out for perk choices only works with Skilled, or in Fallout: Tactics. Otherwise everyone would be banking the relatively lukewarm level 3/6 choices and slam them into Action Boy or Life Giver instantly at level 12.

[Anonymous No.6064493]

>>6064486
Different anon, but I can clearly see his justification
>Sharpshooter
He listed it as a "spare" perk and it's always a smaller penalty
>Dodger
Very good for melee, as a spare perk
>Magnetic Personality
He explicitly mentioned no-drugs approach
>Bonus Move
Even outside melee, still handy
>Quick Pockets in iron-man
Ability to enter your inventory and mess around gear is great, especially when you can't reload. Healing is particularly far more efficient when done with Quick Pockets from inventory level rather than taking slot with a stimpak.

As for LK or no LK - that confirmation bias carried me so reliably for two decades, I never saw a reason to go "Max LK possible", as people usually make their characters. Guess I really am lucky

[Anonymous No.6064513]

>>6064493
>As for LK or no LK - that confirmation bias carried me so reliably for two decades, I never saw a reason to go "Max LK possible"
Other anon here. I'm sure you did fine with a low crit percent, since the game is flexible enough that even going out of your way to do really bad meme builds won't stop you from beating everything, but if your argument is "fuck the math, i have 20 years of feels", you're being silly.

[Anonymous No.6064517]

>>6064493
>He listed it as a "spare" perk and it's always a smaller penalty
Which he doesn't have because he advocates "saving" your level 6 perk until you hit level 9, in which case he simply loses his level 6 perk (as explained here >>6064490).
Bonus Ranged Damage, at best, for a sniper, gives you a boost to an alt. fire mode, which is somewhat useful in the early game (+2 to every bullet) and at worst it gives you +2 damage to your single shots, modified by crit, so that +2 damage could become +4 or even +6 with Better Criticals (Living Anatomy, in comparison, isn't modified by crit, and simply added to the damage calculation at the end).
Also Sharpshooter is bugged and in effect a skill perk. Skill perks are generally bad except for Tag, situationally.
>Very good for melee, as a spare perk
It isn't. Avoidance-based defenses aren't particularly reliable and ultimately, Dodger is just a flat +5% avoidance. If you're relying on it to save you, your tactics need revision. On Rough difficulty enemies have much better to-hit, so AC doesn't matter unless you go all-in, and there's only one way to do so - HtH Evade, which is much better for Unarmed characters.
>He explicitly mentioned no-drugs approach
And? Companions aren't specifically better in no-drug games. They're not even particularly good for many playstyles. Non-drug characters can wear shades and get a Charisma chip, too.
>Even outside melee, still handy
Somewhat, but his justification was "if you're melee", which I'm obviously not if we're specifically talking gun builds. Point of the matter is, Bonus Ranged Damage helps gun builds and deflecting that with "Bonus Move helps if you're melee" makes no sense.
>Healing is particularly far more efficient when done with Quick Pockets from inventory level rather than taking slot with a stimpak.
True, and so is everything else (weapon reloading is important), but if you're Ironman, you can pick Quick Pockets at level 3 as well. QP is a burst user perk primarily.

[Anonymous No.6064524]

>>6064517
>QP is a burst user perk
To elaborate: if you're wielding two ammo-hog weapons at the same time, particularly if they're duplicates (H&K P90C in the niche Small Guns Burst build is notorious for this), the optimal way to go is to pick QP and fight by unloading two entire clips, accessing inventory and reloading them both (while healing as needed).

In Ironman I find that if I have to spend the round healing, I probably am using the rest of my turn to reposition rather than keep firing. It's a good perk still, but not essential and not much in it specifically screams "Ironman".

[Anonymous No.6064534]

>>6064524
>>6064524
I usually end up taking quick pockets over bonus ranged damage, even for burst builds. 2 AP to reload everything and heal up is just way too good to pass up.

[Anonymous No.6064542]

>>6064534
My point is you can take both because QP is level 3 and BRD is level 6.

[Anonymous No.6064545]

>>6064542
I always pick up awareness at 3. My favorite perk outside of sniper/slayer.

[Anonymous No.6064548]

>>6064545
That's fair, yeah. I don't pick it myself. Playstyle reasons, mostly. Nothing wrong with it, though.

[Anonymous No.6064593]

>>6064517
I'd rather pick a perk rather than have more than 4 CH