I need help deciding whether or not to install and play FO Tactics. I played and enjoyed FO 1, 2, and 3, but was just never able to get into Tactics. Is it worth playing? Or is it skip-able? Thanks for the advice. :tops:

It's worth playing, but it isn't RPG, it's tactical squad game. That was pretty much stating obvious. It isn't as good as certain classics of that genre like old X-Com's or Jagged Alliances. Some of special encounters are pretty hilarious.

Yes it's awesome the story is great. Play it!

Yes, you actually might like this game because the combat system is a bit different: you can switch between turn-based or real-time.

And there is an option to sneak/prone.

Hmm..alright. I mean I have the game, might as well try it; if only to complete the Fallout experience. What do you guys recommend for gameplay mode: Real-Time or Turn Based? Thanks again!

I switched between turn-based and realtime depending on the situation. I wasn't able to keep a solid overview of what was happening when playing in realtime constantly, enemies run around or duck and cover on different sides of the map, my team is usually divided in smaller groups to flank enemies, things tend to get out of hand and squadmates getting killed whenever I'm not looking. So I switch to turn-based in the bigger fights, while I quickly dispatch small groups or set up traps in realtime.

Play it. Especially since R. Lee Ermey does the voice of one of the main characters.

I play it Real time.

Uugghhh...this game is putting me to sleep. Like, I just played it, and I'm literally tired now. I've been playing turn-based just to make it more managable for a noob like me but I'm going to have to turn all that off. Is it normal for it to take an hour just to kill 10 raiders? I feel like I want to play it but on the other hand when I play it I feel like my whole day is wasted. I'll look at the clock, start playing, then 45 minutes later I'm like "Wtf!?! I've only killed 4 guys how did time fly so quickly?".

I'll keep trying...not sure if turning off Turn-Based works when you toggle it during a game cuz I didn't notice anything, but if the game keeps up this pace it's going to take forever to play through it. :nope:

Don't play turned base, play real time. Put max blood and keep the language filter off. It's alot more fun if you just play real time.

Yes, its okay, as long as you don't expect Fallout, its quite a playable game.

I kept playing anyways just because Fallout 1 was the exact same way for me: I hated it then loved it. Now I'm addicted to Fallout Tactics lol. As soon as my Small Guns skill got better the game got better. I'm not even playing F3 anymore because I want to play through Tactics now. It's still slow paced but it's pretty fun; it actually feels just like Fallout 2 but with better graphics and a lot more combat. Thanks for telling me to play it guys! :foodndrink:

I like Realtime strategy games a lot. (but I'm overly partial to TB for the Fallout series). Playing Tactics I started out TB mode without a thought (its just natural); Later I switched to Realtime and played for a while, but I soon switched back and never played RT again. FO:Tactics TB Mode is what Fallout should have been and I find it a joy to play. ~What I don't understand is why I didn't much care for Jagged Alliance 2 (the only game of that series I have played... I see the awesome potential in that game... but its just not very compelling to me at the moment).

I can't manage my team in Real-Time in Tactics I noticed. My comp is old so the game is a bit sluggish when scrolling and whatnot, so if I misclick it's a pain. And clicking is slightly laggy too. But in TB I'm having a great time, and I can watch TV while I play while waiting for the computer's turn.

I agree. BTW when it comes to Jagged Alliance 2, it's one of most realistic combat systems in any of squad level tactical games I have seen. It has plenty of flaws, like too short ranges and stuff, but like how the aiming, movement and stance system works. Lack of stances was turn off for me original games and lack of variable aim time in Tactics. It was possible to run, walk, crouch and crawl, then you could sneak in any of those movement modes. You could spend 10 action points with gun that can be shot with 4 and have much greater changes to hit. JA2 has pretty many Fallout like traits, realism is subjective (platoon of mercenaries conquering country.... definitely plausible... if country in question is smaller than Monaco.) and absurd humor in dialogues. Character creation was probably best ever in any type computer game. It also has some RPG like features like dialogue, player is just given very simplified generic choices, along lines and .

JA2 Urban Chaos mod is pretty nice, difficulty is just hilariously fun, you come out of metro with 12 armed to teeth (Assault rifles, grenade launchers, machine guns, pistols, RPG's with thermobaric warheads...) soldiers wearing heavy body armor with ceramic inserts, drug addict gangers (armed with knives and sharp sticks or something) initiate dialogue giving you options to: A) give them all of your belongings, B) die or C) give them everything and die. Once they attack... If you fail interrupt rolls, half of your merc are dead before first turn due fact that combat started with range of meter or so.

I am glad you like playing Tactics, now if only more people would see the light. Fallout tactics is as it's titled Tactics based. It was meant to get people use to the new system. Being able to prone, crouch and the new ways to control followers. Also to get people used to the real time game play. I think that is why it has both real time and turned based options. It was to be between fallout two and Van Buren. Van Buren aka fallout 3 was to have many of the features of fallout tactics.

Anyways glad you like the game :foodndrink:

I'm not privy to the real reason, but I'd expect that it was likely forced on them as a condition of publishing, (Like the 'trying' FO2 temple "tutorial" may have been). :shrug:

The TB improvements are great, but the "tacked on" RT system kind of defeats the point and [IMO] would have been better had they managed to omit it. The Fallout series is not like Myth and the http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0t3paCm21E is not like Fallout (though both are exceptional). I don't consider RT of any kind (in Fallout-s) to be an improvement, or something that fans should be made 'used to' ~any more than I'd like a real time non-linear variant of Chess or Go. :shrug:

It is the only game (to my knowledge) that incorporates this line of text on a critical hit: "Humanoid Robot's backup file 'OhSh*t.exe' kicks in". Simply hilarious.

hahaha indeed, looking back on fallout tactics I found it to be quite a good game.

You could be right but fallout one and two are turned based games, fallout tactics has real time (has the option). Alot of times I will be walking and get shot to hell by a super mutant I could not see . With turn based things would stop and go red and I would have time to notice. Tactics came out in 2001 so it was new or at least to fallout. If they went right away to fallout Van buren Aka fallout 3 with everything tactics has people might have been freaked. I could be way off on this.

Oh well it' great game .

As I understand it, the Van Buren demo just had the RT mode working, but was planned to be TB (perhaps even by default?). Tactics was a spin-off combat game set in the Fallout game world, [FOBOS, was also a spin off ~of a different kind]. I don't remember the dates, but one of them (I think Leonard Boyarski) commented a few years ago, that their idea for a Fallout 3 was always to be turnbased ~Its a large part of the game, and seriously affects how you choose to develop your PC. AP's are important in Fallout, and insignificant in Fallout 3.

In FO3 Perks are given out like candy (devaluing them tremendously IMO), and your characters stats don't really mean much. In Tactics and Fallout, your PC can't be a walking rocket fountain and still carry a sledge or minigun. all those weapons are heavy, and the guns have heavy ammo ~The guns are self limiting by design. If you want to carry 20 rockets, that's about all you'll be carrying... You have to be strong enough to haul that stuff, and choosing that actually affects the cost of the rockets if you take away from charisma (and barter), or it takes away from your ability to hit with them if you subtract from Perception.

The idea behind the series was to have a turn based RPG (first as GURPS, then as ACELIPS ~quickly changed to SPECIAL ). The combat engine came first IIRC.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc6gvAzuipU#t=01m06

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kd9SiAIhss
Look closely at the second clip's menu options :drool:

Assuming Fallout would have been using GURPS it would be pretty different game when it comes to character builds and development, as it's driven by character points and doesn't have levels. Character has limited number points to start with and those can be distributed on skill, advantages and attributes, then there is disadvantages that give you more points but give you limitations. Experience gives you more character points, that can be used just like in character creation. Skills depend on attributes and have multiple difficulties, that variate cost of level in that skill. In my opinion GURPS has one serious flaw, attributes. There is just four of those and dexterity and intelligence are dominating depending on type of game and setting (intellectual or physical), almost all physical skills are derived from DX and rest on IQ. Pretty much only things health and strength affect are hit points and endurance with HT and with ST weapons ST minimums and melee damage. High IQ character has automatically sharp senses, is very charismatic and has massive will power makes him almost impossible to be intimidated (unless there is disadvantages related to these). Still SPECIAL is worse rule set in every other aspect than attributes.

But that's the series and the style of the games. Its what made the reputation, its what the designers set out to create. :shrug:... In the first, in the second, and even somewhat in Tactics. Combat-wise Tactics was a great improvement (I thought).
In case I didn't mention it before... I found Tactics to be well worth playing, just not as an rpg ~Which it wasn't trying to be anyway.

You'll have to explain a bit of how the SPECIAL stat/skill system is worse [if you would] ~I'm open to differing opinions, and we all know its flawed, but I've not seen much that's better for a cRPG...
(except maybe the Palladium rule set? or rollmaster? but neither have been used in video games that I know of).

:)

Wooow! GURPS looks awesome! I never ever seen so many targeted shots! :drool: :drool: :drool:

Is this some kind of demo?

Nevermind, speaking of demo's: Is there a way to obtain Van Buren's demo? I've seen lots of video's, but I never had the chance to play it. :blush:

EDIT: Nevermind the Van Buren's demo, I found it. Thnx again...

When we use compare skill mechanics, outside of character creation, stuff works quite identically in GURPS and SPECIAL. There is skill value, some modifiers (environmental stuff like darkness, how tired character is, possible resisting action) and success roll, little adding and subtracting later we know did character succeed in task or how long it took to do it. GURPS has much more skills and most of skills are more specific, simplicity is virtue to certain extent. Besides skills there is bit similar stuff that are called combat manouvers, special attacks and blocks for melee weapons or special firing methods for firearm as an example. By default melee combat skills include basic attacks.

Biggest flaw in any RPG in my opinion are level and class based rule systems, D&D has both, SPECIAL has levels and GURPS has neither. In GURPS character does something and is rewarded experience, witch he/she assigns to some skill or something else and becomes more powerful character. In special same happens, she/he suddenly becomes more bullet proof as character passed level barrier. In GURPS characters hit points remain same unless HT or some advantage is added that changes it. Rambo might be more skilled than average Joe on street, but both of them die as easily if they are hit by something. Lets compare what happens in GURPS after 7.62mm retroactive abortion from evil communists AK hits to leg of both of Rambo and average Joe, if they have similar hit point affecting statistic. Rambo has advantages like combat reflexes, high pain threshold and strong will +3 that allow him to remain calm and actually enjoy little fun communists provided him and patches his leg with pressure bandage, then Rambo continues being Rambo and goes on being Rambo by impaling thousands of communist lackeys with his bit oversized knife. In mean time average Joe rolls on street he was picked from to evil communist experiment, screams in agony and bleeds to death on rate of two hit points per turn as he cannot recover from pain caused by hit.

GURPS combat mechanics aren't especially good, but when compared with SPECIAL it has plenty of features like lot more hit locations. Those hit locations have different damage resistances and passive defense values. In GURPS certain hit locations cannot take more than certain damage. If character with 20 hit points is hit to hand with .50BMG sniper rifle that causes 48 points of damage, he doesn't die because his hand isn't vital organ and he takes only four points of that damage and hole in middle of his palm that bleeds 1hp per two turns until bandaged.

There is lot better combat mechanics when compared to GURPS, for example all games made by Leading Edge like Living Steel (one of best sci-fi game settings tied with Fallout). Living Steel has combat system that is simplified version of Phoenix Command Combat System tactical game by same company. Phoenix Command is definitely most realistic combat simulation I have ever seen, it takes into account pretty much everything and that is it's major failure, it's practically that complicated that it isn't playable without computer to actually check tables if advanced damage tables is used. For example shot into head with assault rifle from distance of 4 yards... damage can be anything from 1 (scratch) to 20 (just an flesh wound) to 800 000 (definitely not an flesh wound).