I'm just curious if people would like something like vakyrie chronicles battke system in whatever fallout as it ads something more similiar to fo1 n fo2 whie still having a similiar perspective to fo3 n fonv .Just whenever you go in battle something like this triggers where as it is normal outsideof combat similiar to fo1.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-0RY4TTNwE&feature=youtube_gdata_player

If your saying adding that battle system from that link... HELL NO!

It's far to "Japanese" for my liking, really I think BGS needs to find a way to make AP far more essential for battle.

how is too Japanese?
I think it would work very well pretty much a replica of fo1 battle system in 3d .
I have the game and it's not very "Japanese" at all.

Fallout Tactics has a great "battle system." I say lets go with that.

isn't it real time ?
And yeah batlle system I have been playing a little too much ff4

I'll second that twice

It can be, but I'd never play it that way.

I think I turned Tactics to realtime once...so I could successfully run away while under fire.

Real time in Tactics is alright, it really good for mopping up weak guys. However can get hairy when your facing down Super mutants with ma dueces!

I prefer the combat as implemented in Fallout 3 and New Vegas; although I would prefer that we couldn't access our full inventory during combat.

In my ideal system, the player would be able to carry a certain small amount of weight on their person (weapons/medicines etc) and only that could be accessed quickly in moments under pressure. These would be worn on the body visibly also. But otherwise, regular FPS combat is far superior imo.

The future of turn based gameplay is this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVGu_ydmwm8

I would kill for a Fallout game with this kind of combat.

While I absolutely love Frozen Synapse as a game (bonus, I got it free when a friend bought a copy), I would kill to keep it out of fallout.

Why? The Frozen Synapse system is just so much more elegant then the various TU/AP/round based systems that came before it (X-Com, Jagged Alliance, etc) that I can't understand why you wouldn't want it. Or is it just because you don't want to go back to turn based combat at all for Fallout?

Edit:

From your previous post I see you want to keep it realtime. That's cool too, but if they're going to keep it shooter based they need to tighten up the shooting and movement mechanics in Gamebryo. It just feels sloppy compared to (say) Mass Effect 2.

Why the hell should the next Fallout have a new battle system when FO3 and F:NV was perfectly fine. Why fix something that's not broken?

This

Like others said, why change it, its fine. Also if the combat from the first link were used, I'd imagine it would make the game eassier. It looked vats except you manually aimed so for m.ost hitting the target would be easier.

But many of us (everyone that wants the originals system to return.) the comabt isn't "fine".

Dislike doesn't mean its bad.

but it does mean it's not "better"

Better was never used, just fine. If Bethesda really tries to make it like the originals I think you dinos would actually be more upset because they couldn't pull it off correctly.

Really it's not all that complex is it? a few damage types, DT and DR(that they pretty much use in there TES games) armor has different values for each damage type. See not that hard at all.

I agree with the OP. Something akin to Valkyria Chronicles' battle system I think would be a good way of modernizing the old turn-based system. It's still turn-based to the core, relies on character's skill over the player's, but still looks and controls enough like an action game for all advertising purposes. The biggest change I would make to the formula would be that, like in FO, every action you do, from moving to shooting to throwing grenades to using healing items would be dictated by AP. Oh yeah, and you'd have effects for shooting different parts of the body, as always. Intercepting fire during enemy turns would be a neat addition as well, particularly if integrated with leftover AP.

"Too Japanese?" It may not be clear in those videos, but VC's combat system has far more in common with the original Fallout games than with the current ones. The biggest difference is that AP in VC, while still really important (far more than in FO3), only really determines the total distance a character can move.

The irony of this post is so astounding it hurts.

Concerning the bolded part, old Fallout fans have been asking that question for years.

As for the rest, it's not exactly easier. Accuracy in VC is based off of character and weapon stats, not player skill. You can aim for an enemy's head to cause potentially more damage, but it's still very possible to miss.

I used to like point based (AP/TU) systems, but there's really no need for them. Look at what Frozen synapse does, rounds are played out in fixed intervals of real time, simultaneously. You and the enemy choose your actions at the beginning of the turn and they both get resolved when you hit "go" (there's also a preview button so you can try and see what would happen before you commit). There's no need for AP because it's totally intuitive. Faster units travel further in a round. Faster weapons fire more often and are quicker to draw.

NO! Its worst battle system what mankind has ever produced. It was so awful that i uninstalled it before i finished first map.

I'd welcome a tactical TB combat any day over the current one. Even the Valkyria Chronicles one could work if tweaked a bit.


Edit -- The VC combat somehow reminds me a bit too much of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0Fx-uxbNgw as it is (good game behind the link, btw).

Did you use real time or turned based? It is the only system in Fallout that lets us prone and control up to five companions at a time. We can tell them what to do and when to shoot. We control how they level, what perks they get. In short its like having six characters at once.

Not sure why you gave up after the first quest. To much of a challenge for you? Give it another try