After New Vegas, do you feel that Melee and Unarmed should b : Fallout: New Vegas

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:24 am

Playing New Vegas, how do you folks feel? Should the Unarmed and Melee Weapons skills be merged into a broad-coverage Melee skill similar to how Big Guns was handled?

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 7:20 pm

The problem with Big Guns is that the heavier weapons are almost all found at the higher end of the game. An entire weapon skill devoted to end game is kind of silly.

Neither unarmed or melee have this issue. They have representative weapons at all tiers.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 7:35 pm

Playing New Vegas, how do you folks feel? Should the Unarmed and Melee Weapons skills be merged into a broad-coverage Melee skill similar to how Big Guns was handled?

Probably can't really speak to this since I don't generally pick unarmed/melee first thing. I've heard some grumbling about things like the slayer perk though (http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Slayer) and how it requires a specific unnarmed skill, even though the perk can be used for melee.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 4:17 am

Playing New Vegas, how do you folks feel? Should the Unarmed and Melee Weapons skills be merged into a broad-coverage Melee skill similar to how Big Guns was handled?

And do away with the bloody annoyance of perks that benefit both, but have a massive prerequisite in only one, (or in both) so the dedicated Melee fighter has to make massive investments in Unarmed to get a perk for the skill he actually uses and vice-versa? (dedicated Unarmed user has to pump Melee for perks)

Oh, hell yes!

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:26 am

It would be kinda nice for convenience but the skills are used differently enough that they should be kept separate.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:25 am

Playing New Vegas, how do you folks feel? Should the Unarmed and Melee Weapons skills be merged into a broad-coverage Melee skill similar to how Big Guns was handled?

No. They do need a lot of improving, but they don't need to be removed. Further removing/merging of skills isn't a good thing at all in my opinion.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:08 pm

No. They do need a lot of improving, but they don't need to be removed. Further removing/merging of skills isn't a good thing at all in my opinion.

But there isnt much denying that right now Unarmed is under the shadow of Melee. Aside from Achievements there isnt really any point of going Unarmed over Melee. Granted this is more of a balance issue than a character development issue. I would like to see the skills merged and have something totally new make an appearance like defense or something.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:39 am

I could care less either way, Unarmed and Melee are two of my dump stats.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:27 am

But there isnt much denying that right now Unarmed is under the shadow of Melee. Aside from Achievements there isnt really any point of going Unarmed over Melee. Granted this is more of a balance issue than a character development issue. I would like to see the skills merged and have something totally new make an appearance like defense or something.

Unarmed is incredible. It has several special moves always available to you once learned. And the Ballistic Fist can simply be absurd sometimes.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:00 pm

Unarmed is incredible. It has several special moves always available to you once learned. And the Ballistic Fist can simply be absurd sometimes.

To be fair, the Ballistic Fist is broken at the moment since it doesn't need to consume ammo.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 5:18 pm

It would be kinda nice for convenience but the skills are used differently enough that they should be kept separate.

"Used differently?" Uh, what? I'm lost here, explain to me the difference between "Get in enemy's face, beat them with stick" and "Get in enemy's face, beat them with fists." That's a bit like claiming shooting an opponent with a Hunting Rifle and shooting them with a Sniper Rifle are very different, isn't it?

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:30 am

No but the perks for the individual skills should not require both.
If I go Unarmed I don't want to waste skill points into Melee just cause I'm forced to do so to get all unarmed perks.
The requirement for the combo perks should be Unarmed OR Melee not Unarmed AND Melee.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 2:46 pm

To be fair, the Ballistic Fist is broken at the moment since it doesn't need to consume ammo.

No indication that this is a bug other than it simply looking weird. And even should it consume ammo it doesn't change it's strength.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 11:12 pm

And do away with the bloody annoyance of perks that benefit both, but have a massive prerequisite in only one, (or in both) so the dedicated Melee fighter has to make massive investments in Unarmed to get a perk for the skill he actually uses and vice-versa? (dedicated Unarmed user has to pump Melee for perks)

Oh, hell yes!

Agreed. If they're going to keep them as separate skills, the shared perk requirements should be "either" instead of sometimes one, sometimes the other.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 10:11 pm

"Used differently?" Uh, what? I'm lost here, explain to me the difference between "Get in enemy's face, beat them with stick" and "Get in enemy's face, beat them with fists." That's a bit like claiming shooting an opponent with a Hunting Rifle and shooting them with a Sniper Rifle are very different, isn't it?

Hand to hand is more about technique. Using the special moves/perks to knock opponents down and things like that.
While melee is about raw damage and the breaking of limbs.

The play styles aren't drastically different but they're still far enough away to stay separate. Its more like shooting them with a pistol and shooting them with a missile launcher.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 8:13 pm

Hand to hand is more about technique. Using the special moves/perks to knock opponents down and things like that.
While melee is about raw damage and the breaking of limbs.

The play styles aren't drastically different but they're still far enough away to stay separate. Its more like shooting them with a pistol and shooting them with a missile launcher.

Pffft, I stick with my position: The only difference is presence or lack of a weapon in one's hand.

Melee is more about technique, and using the new weapon-specific melee skills to knock opponents down and things like that.

While Unarmed is about raw damage and punching people into submission.

See what I did there?

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 3:53 pm

Absolutely not; its bad enough that they merged the guns, and got rid of the [two] medical skills (which should never of been merged in the first place).
*Soon we will have Fallout 6 with only "Shoot" and "Barter" left.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:52 pm

But there isnt much denying that right now Unarmed is under the shadow of Melee. Aside from Achievements there isnt really any point of going Unarmed over Melee. Granted this is more of a balance issue than a character development issue. I would like to see the skills merged and have something totally new make an appearance like defense or something.

I still don't think a merge is a good idea. Rather just rebalancing both (and on that account, the overall combat aspect of the game altogether), where riskier approach would offer bigger rewards.

*Soon we will have Fallout 6 with only "Shoot" and "Barter" left.

Indeed. Or "FIght" and Barter.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:02 pm

If I go Unarmed I don't want to waste skill points into Melee just cause I'm forced to do so to get all unarmed perks.
The requirement for the combo perks should be Unarmed OR Melee not Unarmed AND Melee.

:thumbsup: Testify! :thumbsup:

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:43 pm

CQC (Close Quarters Combat)

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 2:54 pm

Soon we will have Fallout 6 with only "Shoot" and "Not shoot" left.

Fix'd :laugh:

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 4:35 am

The nasty side effect of skill mergers is that it becomes impossible to specialize. If you merge Melee and Unarmed (for example), it becomes impossible to create a fist fighter that is not also a melee weapons expert ... How many boxers are there that are also expert swordsmen? (and expert with hammers, and with spears, and with.........)

Fix'd :laugh:

"Shoot" and "Not Shoot" (that's for questin')

I can see this actually happen. :nod:

:( The names might be different, but as the skills continually get merged that's what will ultimately be left.

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:51 pm

Double post

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:39 pm

No, but make separate perks for each skill. Like Unarmed Ninja/Melee Ninja. In fact I may do that myself lol

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 3:19 pm

The nasty side effect of skill mergers is that it becomes impossible to specialize. If you merge Melee and Unarmed (for example), it becomes impossible to create a fist fighter that is not also a melee weapons expert ... How many boxers are there that are also expert swordsmen? (and expert with hammers, and with spears, and with.........)

I wouldn't call that a "nasty side effect" so much as an irrelevant side effect. Forcing narrow specializations isn't a solution. Who cares how many expert boxers are expert swordsmen? The player has the option to never use swords if they wish. Same as the rest of us who want to specialize in only knives, pistols, or lasers. My last character specialized in only using rifles. He took Commando and just carried rifles, him being good with pistols was irrelevant.

There are reasons to keep them seperate, but I won't pretend that's one of them.