I think you're using "gimp" unfairly here. This isn't about purposely choosing not to use advantages that everyone has, or that have no cost, simply to increase difficulty.

This is about choosing explicitly how to develop your character, especially in early-game when perks are precious. You're looking at it from the standpoint of a lvl 40+ character who can have BOTH Gunslinger and Rifleman maxed. How about if you're level five and you've just found that snub .44 near that unmarked water pump thing to the east of Sanctuary? That is when these decisions matter because you can then decide whether or not to make this weapon a significant part of your game, spending the perks to support it as you grow your character or not. OTOH, if you found a hunting rifle earlier and have already moved in that direction, you might decide to ignore the .44.

This is (nominally) a role-playing game and the weapons are balanced to provide role-playing choices that are still viable for playing the game.

To be fair, Rifleman perks kinda balance the armor penetration problem and eventually make it better than a .44 pistol in that regard.

Absolutely it is. That is, in fact, THE reason that the .22LR is the most lethal in number killed per year. But that doesn't change the point that even the piddly .22LR is still a lethal round.

Persoanlly, in FO4 I rarely use a .50 rifle, though in FONV I really loved the scoped Anti-Materiel version. In FONVE I carried the .50 AMR and a .50 cal hunting pistol exclusively, after I got high enough level to get them.

In FO4, I use a scoped (medium range scope) .308 and back it up with a highly modded suppressed 10mm. The reason for the pistol? It's just a question of whether I need to hip-fire or aim. Ever try to hip-fire a .50 rifle at a radroach or ghoul that is ten feet in front of you? and aiming with a scope is even worse at that range...

Me too for most of my game. Only at the very end did I switch to the Gauss.

I would also submit that the people who have mentioned a few times in this thread that long range isn't that important simply haven't played that kind of game. Opportunities for sniping are constant.

They are, but I can easily snipe them with my scoped .44, so I don't see the point of switching to a .50 cal sniper just for that. Except for immersion, or conserving .44 ammo

Yeah, I don't know what they are talking about. I use the ranged weapon continuously when outdoors. Especually though when I have opponents on high towers and platforms armed with a Fat Man...

.44 is a beats of a gun and rightly so, after all (see bottom).

Kellogs is quite useful as a sort of manual Grim Reapers Sprint - switch to it when you have a crtical to recharge AP.

I've found an explosive version which is awesome, 4/5 shots with +15 explosive deals with most threats.

And yeah, .44 is awesome:

"Uh uh. I know what you're thinking. "Did he fire six shots or only five?" Well to tell you the truth in all this excitement I kinda lost track myself. But being this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and would blow your head clean off, you've gotta ask yourself one question: "Do I feel lucky?" Well, do ya, punk?"

With even moderate Sneak, I use it indoors. A lot.

I've recently re-started a DiD sniper character who is level 5. Perks are Sneak 2, rifleman, gun nut, and armorer. Yesterday I snuck into a certain satellite station and peaked through a window to snipe the named Raider captain with the minigun and heavily wound one of her minions before they knew I was there. Unfortunately for me, one of her companions picked the dang minigun up from her corpse and chased me all around the place before I was finally able to kill him, but I made it out of there. I would never, ever have been able to face all four of them in a stand-up fight - even with the .44.

Except for the fact that as close as he was, the punk could see whether or not there was a bullet in the cylinder.

He was a punk, and too busy worrying about where he can get some fresh underwear than to bother checking the chamber (-;

I thought Harry had the hammer back, so the pistol was cocked. If that were true, there would have been no way to tell... Didn't he just pull the trigger next?

EDIT:

Eh, I just watched the clip, and he didn't [censored] it until after. Honestly though, I couldn't see anything in those dark holes, and I doubt I'd bet my life on whether it was visible in that dark or not...

EDIT EDIT:

That's funny! I can say he had it cocked, but I can't say he didn't [censored] it...

There are other factors to consider other than damage, For example you can not silence a .44 nor does it have the range of a .50 caliber. It does good damage but has a long reload and only holds a max of 6 shots. It's probably my least used weapon

Except there is nothing even slightly realists about mini nuke.

I wanted so badly to love the .44 pistol, but the limitations of the 6 shot cylinder and single action only design, it just doesn't suit my play style. I'd rather pump 8+ rounds of 10mm into a target than fire 2 with the .44 in the same amount of time.

edit: also the cylinder spin animation EVERY time I draw a .44 irks the living [censored] out of me.

But what makes you or OP think .50 does more damage in real life then .44? And how do you define what "more damage" in real life is in any objective way?

Oh I don't know about that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_%28nuclear_device%29#/media/File:DavyCrockettBomb.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_%28nuclear_device%29#/media/File:Davy_Crockett_bomb.jpg

A .50 can take down a helicopter quite easily. A .44 cannot.

Not that hard.

And if you want to get scientific, the .50BMG round delivers over 10x the kinetic energy compared to the .44 magnum, all else being equal.

For the love of god it was an example, stop getting caught up in semantics you big baby. My point stands.

Edit: And apparently you're wrong on that point too, I guess mini-nukes do exist. Interesting.

With all damage affecting perks, and their secondary effects, the .50 cal is superior.


The extended range makes up for the decreased fire rate, especially when you consider that the .50 can be silenced while the .44 can't. What does silencing matter anyway? Sneak boost damage, and the number of enemies you can 1 shot before you lose that bonus. A .44 max bonus is 3.9 (I could be wrong, it could be 3.5, but I'm pretty sure it's 3.9 with C&D) while the .50 max bonus is 5.9 (should be 6.2 with C&D but it is never displayed as such).


So max damage from a sneak attack: .44 - 168 x 3.9 = 655.2, .50 - 128 x 5.9 = 755.9. That's without any crazy legendary effects. The .50 is superior if you're playing a sniper character, especially if you're playing a stealthy sniper character. The ability of the .50 to make use of the Sandman perk is a massive advantage.

The hunting pistol was chambered in .45-70 Gov't...which is still a totally badass round, but lacks the range, delivered energy, and velocity of the .50 BMG....or did I miss something with the whole "FONVE"(?) thing?

I, for one, would have liked for the weapon design and ammunition system from New Vegas to have transferred directly over to FO4....the these conversation would have been more interesting.

Solid point, my character is critical focused but not stealth focused, so I didn't really take that into account. I guess that might have been the intention with the .50 cal or snipers in general.

I don't use VATS. The 44 pistol is useless in any real fight.

I will take plaZma pistol over .44 everytime.

It's not really a question of which does more damage in real life, it's more of a perception of which does more damage. The .50 will penetrate an engine block, a .44 won't. To the truck driver, that means his vehicle will take more damage from the .50, yes? To a person hit in the head with either one, I don't suppose there will be much difference. To the man hit by the .50 or the .44, it won't likely matter much, but the difference might be huge for the man standing behind the man standing behind the guy who got hit by the .50...

ORLY?

https://youtu.be/XT5jo7aZzTw