Basically this. Gameplay > Realism/Canon.

If Power Armor was bulletproof in the game, it'd be a game breaker. You could just go anywhere and fight bare handed without fear of consequences.

PA was never bulletproof in any of the games. No developer would put an item that would unbalance a game that much in there.

So you're saying you want to be invincible when wearing power armor?

Glad you didn't design the game...

You get shot, and although the armor prevents the bullet from finding your spongy flesh, it does still leave a bit of a bruise. And it kinda hurts. Now imagine lots of those little bruises accumulating all over your body, everywhere and over top of each other, each exacerbating the previous bruise until it leads to massive internal bleeding. Good thing you've got plenty of stims, otherwise you'd be screwed.

It's too bad Power Armor was the only viable option for the end-game in those games. I prefer the ability to have more choice there than having walking tank armor. Ideally, it would be really hard to find, it would live up to its reputation, and it wouldn't be the only option to survive the end of the game.

The catch with this is that if Medium armor is end-game viable there is no non-RP reason to wear Heavy, nor to wear Medium if Light is end-game viable. The entire point of armor progression is that you eventually put aside the lighter types and work your way up to the heavy stuff, so that you don't get obliterated by the opposition's opening salvo. I would further argue that since Fallout games do not have character classes there is no real need for the lighter types to be equally viable, since you aren't inherently limited in which armors you can wear.

Since it's something that seems to get constantly either overlooked or outright ignored, I'll reiterate it: end-game opposition, by its very nature, is meant to require that the player have the best weapons and armor in order to be able to successfully defeat it. This is something that, sadly, most current-day game developers seem to have lost sight of.

PA in Fallout, Fallout 2 and Tactics is pretty much "Bullet proof" against small arms. Against laser weapons, miniguns and missiles that's another matter. PA in those games can take far more damage then in New Vegas and PA in Fallout 3 is just total crap, because there is no Damage Threshold. At least New Vegas has that. The Originals also had Armour Class. Lore Wise and in early Fallout wise PA is damn near indestructable to small arms.



It all depends on how you develope you're character. It's hard but you don't need PA to get through Fallout. You do need PA in Fallout 2 because, you can't get onto the Rig without having it on as a disguise, because without it the Enclave will kill you. Still you can get through the Oil Rig and end the game without getting into a major battle. There are ways to get around Frank Horrigan without firing a shot.

I don't think he's saying that your medium and light armor choices would have to be equable or only slightly inferior to heavy/Power Armor.
What he is saying is that you should be able to choose a light armor or medium armor and not be totally screwed when going for end game battles.
Deciding to use the light or medium armor variants would off course offer less protection, which would ideally be off set by some other bonus (either through perks or intrinsic).

They could've made Power armor more viable by simply making a full set give 40-50 DT rather than 28-38, while simultaneously lowering the DT of light and medium a tad. LA would be fine with a maximum DT of 15, Medium would be fine with a max of 25-30. Alongside that, give them good stats. Let the Light users have crit, let the medium users get a damage bonus and let the Heavy users have Damage resistance. Sticking to JUST the DT aspect and not expanding beyond that makes some armors inferior, and typically Light armor is always superior, save for maybe the Elite Riot Armor.

I was actually accounting for all of that in my assessment, but I'll expand on it a bit to clarify.

Traditionally, end-game opposition is supposed to be of a threat level that provides a goodly amount of risk for a character in the best gear. As such, wearing anything less is usually guaranteed death, which is why RPGs offer better and better equipment as the game and/or the character's level progress. Wearing Medium, let alone Light, armors against end-game content isn't meant to be even remotely viable in the end-game, as doing so would break the entire armor system, so no provision is made to allow it.

In order to go against this, you have to do one of two things: either nerf the crap out of the opposition, or buff the hell out of the light(er) armors in order to make them competitive with the heavy stuff. This will have the effect of putting the efficacy of the lighter classes too close to that of Heavy, which is exactly what you're trying to avoid.

Deciding to wear the lighter types for less protection should mean exactly that: less protection. Unfortunately, it doesn't, because the sorts of weapons you'd want to wear the Heavy stuff against blow right through it anyway thanks to the absence of DR. If anything, you're better-protected in Light Armor, because you can nullify the opposition's ability to get critical hits while simultaneously running rings around them and strafing them to death, whereas Medium and Heavy Armors cannot offer anything like that and have only their DT to lean on, which doesn't go that far once you start facing high-end opposition.

I agree with you that the armor system could use some work (stricter and more clear-cut advantages and disadvantages for each armor type) but I don't agree at all that you should be railroaded into using certain equipment. If that's the case, I see no point in having an armor class system, as you'd just be expected to pick up what is clearly better anyway. You should be able to finish the game wearing any of the classes but they should actually fit certain playstyles, so as not to limit player choice.

Indeed. Although I think that might be one inherent problem with New Vegas; unlike the previous games (admittedly, including 3), the endgame enemies wouldn't really stand up well against a lore-accurate Power Armor wearing protagonist. We don't have a horde of Super Mutants armed with gatling guns and rocket launchers that can kill you instantly, or an army or Enclave soldiers wearing even better Power Armor. We have a bunch of guys wearing football pads and skirts on one side, and some dudes in varying amount of kevlar on the other. Really, the only solution I think to incorporating lore-accurate Power Armor in NV would be to not have Power Armor in it at all, something I personally wouldn't have minded, but some people...

Although if there was one weakness I think Power Armor should always have, it's that it should pretty much destroy your ability to sneak around. Ideally, a stealthy character should stick with lighter stuff then.

are you guys talking about Doom 2?

Moondog, you're awesome

I disagree. It doesn't have to be that your only choice is to go with the heavier/power armor. That's one way of designing an RPG. The other way is to give each type of armor a role in combat that has advantages and disadvantages.
Allowing players to choose whether they accept the lesser protection from light or medium armor for the advantages they offer to certain play styles.
A strictly linear system of armor progression makes gear decisions a no-brainer, rather than something that requires thought and decision, which I'd argue is something an RPG should avoid.

Which is basically an unbalance in the and an incomplete implementation of the system rather than an inherent flaw to the system.
The idea wasn't to just nerf Power Armor to be comparable to others. The idea was to have it be something strong, but rare and expensive, while light and medium armors also brought something to the table to be a consideration beyond the start and middle of the game respectively.

Another contradiction is that Lt. Haggerty at Helios One said that they had the BoS outnumbered 20-1 and they still "put up one hell of fight" before being forced to retreat but in the game a BoS Paladin and an NCR Veteran Ranger will kill each other 5/10 times. Even savages like the Legion are capable of killing them 2/10 times. And also, Cannibal Johnson, the Enclave Remnant can actually be defeated by a Legion Praetorian. This cannot be taken seriously.

These quotes are perfect examples of the central issue in designing armor systems: should, or should not, the system allow for flexibility in armor selection in the end-game. As I mentioned previously, 'inflexible' is the traditional model because it allows for a clear progression of armor types, something that has long been a staple of RPGs. That doesn't necessarily make it a better model, however it does reinforce the notion that you should be replacing your older gear with better stuff as you find it. The 'flexible' model calls this basic premise into question, instead claiming that all types should be viable end-game choices in order to accommodate a wide range of character builds.

One of the key questions in the debate is 'at what price diversity?', and from what I've seen over the years the answer tends to be 'too much'.

Which is basically an unbalance in the and an incomplete implementation of the system rather than an inherent flaw to the system.
The idea wasn't to just nerf Power Armor to be comparable to others. The idea was to have it be something strong, but rare and expensive, while light and medium armors also brought something to the table to be a consideration beyond the start and middle of the game respectively.

The catch is that, comparably, it's not strong enough to provide any actual incentive to wear it when facing the sorts of opponents it's meant to be worn against. To me, at least, that is an inherent flaw with the system, since in order for the lighter types to be viable the Heavy stuff cannot be as strong as it really ought to so as not to completely overshadow the lighter types you're trying to encourage the use of in the first place.

I do agree that in this specific instance it's more a failure of implementation, however I'm not sure that you actually can properly implement Heavy-type armors in such a system without rendering the opposition nigh-impotent in the process. Remember, Heavy armor is meant to take hits from the strongest opposition the game can throw at you and keep on going, while Medium and Light are not. If you accurately model this, Heavy armor will be, by default, far more effective than the other types; if you don't, then either Heavy armor will not be strong enough to warrant its use or Medium, and even Light, will be (potentially severely) overpowered for their 'weight class' and become the default option(s) in situations where Heavy is supposed to fill that role.

Well I do share your opinion that heavy armor would need to have the best protection stats. A power armor should hold the highest DT and DR.
And my point in the post you quoted was that the person you originally responded on was making that point as well. It's obvious the game failed to deliver that.

I do think that higher/end level light and medium armor should have some redeeming qualities. Obvious ones being stealth, speed and maneuverability, with heavy armor making being stealthy very hard.
Others might be stat boost that exemplify a role the armor plays (light: fast and stealthy, medium: flexible combatant and heavy: receiving damage, while dealing it).
If heavy armor does get the high protection it should offer and medium gets a place, than light armor actually needs perks like light touch.

The slit in the helmet isn't open, it has a chunk of bulletproof glass in it. The helmet has to be self-contained in order for the air filtration systems to work.

So yes, the slit is bullet proof to small arms fire.

So basically when your talking small arms you mean things that wouldn't be military grade like some pistols and what not?

But armor piercing bullets would still go through right?

Some glass can, not deflect, but stop penetration from even AK-47's. Look how I said stop penetration so you would have cracks thorughout the eyepiece.

Pistols and SMG's shouldn't pierce it at all.

Close, but not quite. By 'small arms' we mean anything less than about .44 caliber, and even those in AP wouldn't quite suffice against the top-end sets of PA. You know that stupidly heavy .50cal Sniper Rifle? It's called the Anti-Materiel Rifle for a reason, and this is it. Basically, if you're going to a PA fight you'd better bring the heavy artillery, cause you're gonna need it.

Yea, the Medicine Stick and the Anti-Material Rifle should be enough to kill a PA user with several well placed shots. I imagine PA's durability to be on the level Robocop's armor.

From my understanding Anti-Material Rifles are a cheap way to destroy very costly equipment. A $5 bullet can destroy the jet engine of a $5 million dollar fighter plane. It also makes a great sniper rifle for killing people over a great distance.

Another thing about the original Fallouts. Brotherhood were armed with some very powerful weapons. If you shoot at them, you will be lucky to get a second shot. So getting several well placed shots would be a very hard thing to do against somone in PA. Because PA also allowed people to carry weapons normally mounted on vehicles.