1. I repeat... Tougher enemies Damage and Healthwise. I don't want a bullet sponge but I want something that can hurt me.
2. And you play on hardcoe mode with highest difficulty and you think it's to easy.
By to easy, I mean NEVER dying and you can just run through it?
1. Upping enemies DT would make them into a different kind of bullet sponge than FO3's ones were.
And upping their damage to PL level would just be annoying since a BB gun from a hillfolk could do 40 damage.
Giving them better weapons muffs up the economy worse than it already is.
Giving them better tactics could work but can that be done with Gamebryo?
2. "Run through it"?
Anyway, no I rarely die, only opponents worthy are deathclaws and those are limited to specific areas which I steer clear off until I'm ready for them.
Other than that then yeah it's too easy.
Point was that balance is needed in a video game, even if it's singleplayer.
And that certain things from the previous game were removed and/or tweaked for this balance.
The reply I made that you quoted on was to a guy wanting the old stuff back that greatly unbalanced FO3 in the RPG areas.
It was not specifically about combat balance.
He stated that he thought it was wrong to remove those as he likes to build a demi-god character.
And it was to that that I said "Singleplayer needs balance too."
Not just in combat but also in the RPG aspect.
What I would like is hardcoe Mode +1, Nightmare Mode and Extreme Mode.
But I doubt they're gonna add any of those so IMO New Vegas is a lost cause when it comes to combat balance.
Self-gimping is the only solution and a bad solution at that.