Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Leatra]

Yup.
Our missiles 'n' nukes are much more safer now.
Modern science RULZ!

[Vherid]

The amount of fallout is more related to whether the nuke explodes hitting the ground or up in the air. Needless to say, WW2-style free fall bombs don't detonate until they hit the ground, so they kick up a lot of radioactive dust. Modern missiles are programmed to detonate much earlier.

While ground level or airburst explosions do change how much "fallout" is produced, as I was saying and as Morley started to talk about, there's a mathematical equation for judging the relationship between explosion level and radiation. However what I was saying has nothing really do with the fallout. I literally mean the amount of radiation that is expelled from the bomb.

Actually they explode shortly before they hit. The Little Boy (Hiroshima) exploded at an altitude of 1968 feet (~600 meters) and the Fat Man (Nagasaki) at 1650 feet (~500 meters). Though for a 4 mile blast radius it's still gonna kick up and irradiate a lot of dust xD

From what I've read, it's that the way they worked was just plain inefficient compared to the modern methods.

As an aside, I think one scientist once dared to argue (translation: got fired for suggesting it) that since as the explosive damage goes up with modern nukes, the relative amounts of long-term fallout goes down (basically it doesn't climb at the same rate), so we actually tend to greatly over estimate the potential to wipe out all life on the planet with our current nuclear arsenal. We could pretty much wipe out civilisation and knock mankind back a few thousand years minimum sure, drastically alter the surface of the planet permanently and reduce the life expectancy of every individual on the planet to their mid twenties, but enough of us could still survive for the human race to endure long-term. Personally I'm not wanting to find out if his theory is right or not but it's an interesting idea ^^

[Bdthemag]

I think that nukes and radiation in Fallout are more based on what people in the 1950's believed.

[Sergius]

I think that nukes and radiation in Fallout are more based on what people in the 1950's believed.

That's accurate. For example it makes insects grow to absurd sizes and turn people into glowing mutants.

[Doomchild-]

remember the bomb in megaton, detonating that one caused an interesting lightshow and a big dustcloud but all it did was change megaton from a crater to an irradiated bigger crater. and that was a large bomb compared to the warheads on the missiles in NV.
in all fairness, those warheads are confusing, pushing the button and bombing whoever covers said area in healthy green mist of radiation, yet during your trek to ullyses you manually detonate several of said warhead and can pass the site of the explosion without your geigercounter going berzerk. in fact, the damned things are more radioactive before they detonate than after. so either those warheads are so degraded that they're basically just oversized landmines or they are different from the ones that ended the war/world. and if the missiles launched were carrying the same warheads, how many were launched to get the effects witnessed at the end of the dlc?

[Astral]

Annoyed at an anti materiel rifle not being able to blow open someones' skull in a single shot? I'm currently working on a headshot rebalance mod, since the one I originally used seemed to be broken with the most recent patch. As I'm not currently at my home computer, I can't upload the basic version, but I plan on having multiple (fomod ready) versions, as follows:

Boom Headshot 5x: Makes headshots do 5x damage (as opposed to 2x) and affects such enemies as Cazadors (which have only a 1x on all body parts... bastards)
Boom Headshot 25x: As above, but 25x.
Boom Headshot 50x: Is this getting easy to guess yet?

Certain enemies will not be affected by the same degree as everything else. Deathclaws, for example, will only have a 5x multiplier due to their being much harder enemies in general. Sentry bots, similarly, will have more armored playing on their head regions, and will get a 5x as well. Certain parts that are difficult to hit, such as the combat inhibitors on the back of robots and the targeting lens on turrets will give a higher damage multiplier due to, well, being difficult to hit. My logic behind this is due to it being considered a weak point, it should become a vulnerability, rather than simply a frenzy button.

I'm also looking into making a script that causes helmets to reduce headshot damage by maybe half, or variably given the DT of the item. Have to do more research into this, based on what the range of helmet DTs can be.

There will also be "hardcore" versions where the player is affected by the headshot multiplier to a lesser degree (perhaps with some sort of script that detects if a player would be killed by a shot to the head, it sets them to 1 health instead and cripples your head... considering you survived two canonically the first time, it makes sense from a certain perspective) as well as reducing the chance to hit enemies heads in VATS by about half. I don't consider the latter too unbalancing, as I tend to use Project Nevada's bullet time or simply shoot them as if it were a FPS rather than utilizing VATS, most of the time. Adds a bit of challenge either way.

[FunctionZero]

If anyone was waiting for it, the Fallout Overhaul Kit (FOOK) was updated yesterday. Changes include Lonesome Road support, plus many new things.

http://www.newvegasnexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=34684

Seems they've done some pretty cool stuff.

[Astral]

Oh goody, I was waiting for that one.

[Flying Dice]

I've been wanting to come back to this for a while, and I'd prefer to rebuy it on PC rather than keep playing on console, but I wasn't sure if I could run it, and a fairly extensive search hasn't found a definitive answer for my model, and I'd prefer not to waste the money testing it. The main sticking point is the graphics card; I'm not sure of the exact relative quality of the Intel HD intergrated graphics as compared to ATI or nvidia cards, again, there was little information available online that addressed this game specifically, and I was hoping someone had personal experience/knowledge with it.

Spoiler: For reference, specs (click to show/hide)

Intel core i5 450M processor
4GB RAM, DDR3 SDRAM: 1333 MHz
500GB HD (no problems there, obviously. 
Intel HD Graphics (integrated, laptop. Hence why I don't just buy a real graphics card.)
Windows 7 64bit


Also, with this laptop, I can run CS:S at 65-75fps, and can run the following games with no issues, if this information helps any: Deus Ex, all Source games, Bastion, Medieval II: Total War, Morrowind, Mount & Blade, Torchlight, Terraria, Minecraft, vars roguelikes (incl. DF, Aurora). I've yet to test Far Cry, but if I don't get any answers elsewhere I'll be using that as my test to see if I should buy or not.

[Jay]

I'm not sure of the exact relative quality of the Intel HD intergrated graphics as compared to ATI or nvidia cards, again, there was little information available online that addressed this game specifically, and I was hoping someone had personal experience/knowledge with it.

Spoiler: For reference, specs (click to show/hide)

Intel core i5 450M processor
4GB RAM, DDR3 SDRAM: 1333 MHz
500GB HD (no problems there, obviously. 
Intel HD Graphics (integrated, laptop. Hence why I don't just buy a real graphics card.)
Windows 7 64bit
Also, with this laptop, I can run CS:S at 65-75fps, and can run the following games with no issues, if this information helps any: Deus Ex, all Source games, Bastion, Medieval II: Total War, Morrowind, Mount & Blade, Torchlight, Terraria, Minecraft, vars roguelikes (incl. DF, Aurora). I've yet to test Far Cry, but if I don't get any answers elsewhere I'll be using that as my test to see if I should buy or not.

Yeah, no.  Integrated chipsets are useless in pretty much any gaming scenario.  Yes, that still includes the new generation ones on Sandy Bridge cores (which yours is not).
None of the games you listed are graphically challenging in any way.
You might be able to run the game at low graphics settings, but I wouldn't bank on it.

[Astral]

Most of the games you listed are on the five-ten year old range (Deus Ex? Its graphics consist of concrete and pain!). Of course it'll be able to run those. I wouldn't bet on Fallout, though; although I ran Oblivion on an old Gateway with 256 MB of integrated goodness, it ran like crap until I tuned every setting and downloaded approximately three different mods to reduce meshes, monitor framerate and help eliminate crashes due to lack of memory (as well as aggressively scrub unused textures from memory). Even then I was maxing at 30 fps on interiors and Deus Ex looked fairly pretty compared to this stripped down version of Oblivion. Not to mention that particle effects (See: any and all magic in the game) caused my computer to have a minor heart attack every time they occurred.

It was more trouble than it was worth, to be honest. Trying to run Fallout 3 on the same machine was an exercise in pain as well, considering that the "card" didn't support some key feature... that made me have to make every person in the game headless via an .ini edit (something with the lip sync or some other annoying thing... don't wanna talk about it). While amusing for a short while, this led to other problems as well. Namely, the game zooming into the far reaches of the landscape in search of a head to lock on to during conversations... and making headshots nigh impossible in VATS due to their heads not being there (keep in mind, I relied on VATS heavily due to getting at most 20 FPS on interiors and the crappy aiming in Fallout 3).

However, if you're a masochist, give it a shot.

[Flying Dice]

That was pretty much what I was figuring, but I have seen videos of people managing to run NV at decent rates on what they claimed were factory standard 15Rs, as well as a reviewer who was claiming that the Intel HD intergrated chips were equivalent to low-range proper graphics cards, so I was trying to determine if I could get some performance out of it on minimum settings. Eh, I needed an excuse to buy a functional 360 anyways. Thanks for the response!

[Darkmere]

If anyone was waiting for it, the Fallout Overhaul Kit (FOOK) was updated yesterday. Changes include Lonesome Road support, plus many new things.

http://www.newvegasnexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=34684

Seems they've done some pretty cool stuff.

When I saved yesterday I was at 237 lbs. When I loaded after updating FOOK, I was carrying 350+ lbs.  Seems they removed some item weight tweaks. Also I feel bad about wanting the next FOOK version already, to standardize the GRA/existing weapons stuff. Still, if you haven't you *must* visit Violet, Nephi, and Cook-cook wearing a Khans disguise. The re-added dialog is priceless.

[Trapezohedron]

Annoyed a bit with the Gun Runners arsenal. There aren't a lot of new plain and ordinary weapons. Instead, we get rehashes of the same weapon, only labelled (GRA). Those (GRA) weapons have mods though, but a lot of the pack's items are just rehashes.

And about the unique weapons department, a lot of them are melee weapons, which is nice. But somehow, they still feel lacking...

One of it's redeeming features is that the Gun Runners now sell (GRA) Mininukes, which can only be used on (GRA) fat men and Esther, a unique fat man.

[Astral]

Yeah... I was annoyed when I found a Ripper early on, bought some Carbide Teeth for it then realized that it wasn't compatible with the normal version of the weapon.