Power Armour dominating late game

[JerryLove]

]Hardly, there are too many games that are great examples that end in the number 2 (or higher). No deception;

Because all ducks are birds all birds must be ducks?

Some sequels are indeed clones of the story they are sequel to. Indeed: in some cases it seems they took the old engine and the old script and just changed the nouns (See X-COM: Terror from the Deep).

Then there are other sequels that don't do that. Bioshock Infinite seems a good example there.

a sequel is a continuance, yes?

A sequel is a narrative, documental, or other work of literature, Movie, Cinema, or song that continues the story of or expands upon issues presented in some previous work. In the common context of a narrative work of fiction, a sequel portrays events set in the same fictional universe as a previous work, usually chronologically following the events of that work.

Well it ideally (with a game) it should be a continuance of the gameplay; if it's not, then it's a poor sequel (regardless of the fiction written for it); why would a fan of the game buy a different game pushing the name? If I went out to buy Chess 2, I should accept a dice game called Chess? Change that, If I went out to buy Diablo 3 I should accept a Farmville clone that has you maintaining the Church grounds and killing gofers with rat poison bought from the witch's hut, and asking the elder for gardening advice... Gameplay defines a game IP.

Does the word "powerarmor" on the item's description define gameplay?

Was Wasteland 1 (the first half, which lacked power armor) different gameplay than Wasteland 1 (the second half. which had power armor)?

Boardgames don't have sequels because they don't have narratives. There's no story or issue presented in Chess to continue. That's why there's no such thing as "Chess 2".

I have not argued that.

My apologies then; that seemed to be the thrust of your comment on Predator... that the main actor needed to remain for a sequel to be a sequel... and in light of "can we modify power armor in a sequel", that was what I inferred.

[krellen]

Wasteland isn't a movie. Movies don't have gear progressions.

[JerryLove]

Wasteland isn't a movie. Movies don't have gear progressions.

Oh? Some games then.

StarWars: Old Republic
StarTrekOnline
Enslaved: Odyssey to the West
Fuel
Resistance: Fall of Man
Gears of War
Mass Effect
Metro: 2033

All sci fi. Many post-apocalyptic. Though some have some pretty significant armor (Mass Effect, Gears of War) none is powered-armor. Also others (StarTrek) lack even significant armor.

And since you are so fond of picking at nits, let's go back to an earlier quote:

You're just wrong about this. In a medieval setting, gear progression ends with plate armour

The thing is: Medieval Europe actually did exist. Plate armor actually did exist.

Even then: Any number of series might avoid it (Assassian's creed I believe lacks it). Indeed: in historical fiction you would either be becoming a knight (so there's less "progression" than "here's your fighting armor"), or you would not (so, no plate).

Now historical *fantasy* often does that. Except when it doesn't (Play LotR).

1) There is no real post-apocalyptic future to compare to.
2) There is no consensus in the gaming (or non-gaming) industry that fictional ones have power armor.
3) Even in a setting with power armor (much like Assassin's Creed's setting with platemail), there's no guarentee it will be available to / chosen by a given protagonist.
4) Who cares regardless. The question was about Wasteland; not anyone else. That powered armor exists in the wasteland universe is established. That we will encounter it in-game is not.

[krellen]

StarWars: Old Republic

Troopers, Bounty Hunters, Sith Juggernauts and Jedi Guardians all wear heavy suits of armour with attribute-boosting abilities. For that matter, every class wears armour of various weights with attribute-boosting abilities.

StarTrekOnline

Most forms of armour, especially in higher tiers, boost damage (either melee or ranged) as well as deflecting damage.

Enslaved: Odyssey to the West
Fuel
Resistance: Fall of Man
Metro: 2033

Haven't played any of them.

Gears of War

If you think the Gears' gear isn't "Power Armour", you actually are stupid.

Mass Effect

Mass Effect armour generates force shields of protection - that's got power.

In ME2 and ME3, armour also boosts attributes.

[JerryLove]

StarWars: Old Republic

Troopers, Bounty Hunters, Sith Juggernauts and Jedi Guardians all wear heavy suits of armour with attribute-boosting abilities. For that matter, every class wears armour of various weights with attribute-boosting abilities.

That's correct. A cape boosts attributes (like "Aim" and "Cunning"). A cape is not powered armor. Therefore "it boosts your attributes" does not mean "it's powered armor".

As such: I'll skip your other "it boosts attributes" examples as they fall to the same point.

If you think the Gears' gear isn't "Power Armour", you actually are stupid.

Name calling? Your desperation is showing.

Mass Effect armour generates force shields of protection - that's got power.

So "shields" are now "powered armor". I believe you are equivocating.

As to your plate-mail point:
Medieval Europe actually did exist. Plate armor actually did exist.

Even then: Any number of series might avoid it (Assassian's creed I believe lacks it). Indeed: in historical fiction you would either be becoming a knight (so there's less "progression" than "here's your fighting armor"), or you would not (so, no plate).

Now historical *fantasy* often does that. Except when it doesn't (Play LotR).

1) There is no real post-apocalyptic future to compare to.
2) There is no consensus in the gaming (or non-gaming) industry that fictional ones have power armor.
3) Even in a setting with power armor (much like Assassin's Creed's setting with platemail), there's no guarentee it will be available to / chosen by a given protagonist.
4) Who cares regardless. The question was about Wasteland; not anyone else. That powered armor exists in the wasteland universe is established. That we will encounter it in-game is not.

[nathanknaack]

In a medieval setting, gear progression ends with plate armour (or "super leather", in games with an armour/class "balance".) In a futuristic setting, gear progression ends with power armour (though, as I illustrated earlier in the thread, "power armour" can mean many things.)

This is not a thread about whether or not power armor should exist in Wasteland 2; of course it should. It's about whether or not power armor should be a mandatory piece of equipment for all characters to complete the game, as it was in Wasteland 1 and most iterations of Fallout.

Let's use your fantasy setting and plate mail example:

So you get to the late game in a fantasy medieval RPG... do you want plate mail to be absolutely required to slay the final dragon... for all of your characters? You want your rogue clanking around in heavy steel plates? You want your wizard lying on the ground because he can't even move in the stuff, let alone cast spells?

Of course not, that would be ridiculous. But that's how Wasteland 1 and most Fallout games ended up.

Elite sniper guy? Power armor.
Brainy computer hacker guy? Power armor.
Stealthy melee assassin? Power armor.
Charismatic leadership guy? Power armor.

This has a major side effect: In Wasteland 1, you went 90% of the game hoping to find enough kevlar to keep your medics alive through combat, then at one point, you walk into a room in the Guardian Citadel and half the game's combat mechanics disappear. It's a room full of suits of power armor. The game might as well end right there, because once you slip those suits on, you're basically just cleaning up helpless robots for the rest of the game.

[JerryLove]

Actually it's a thread about "Power Armor dominating late game", and the suggestion "if you walk X km in it, then expect it run out of juice eventually."

[krellen]

So "shields" are now "powered armor". I believe you are equivocating.

As I never offered a definition of "power armour", I cannot "equivocate".

So you get to the late game in a fantasy medieval RPG... do you want plate mail to be absolutely required to slay the final dragon... for all of your characters? You want your rogue clanking around in heavy steel plates? You want your wizard lying on the ground because he can't even move in the stuff, let alone cast spells?

Ideally? Yes, almost everyone should be wearing plate armour. The only reason wizards cannot do so is a genre balance convention; later editions of D&D removed this, introducing arcane spellcasters capable of casting spells in armour (and rules to do so without those classes, such as forswearing spells with Somatic components or using the Still Spell feat), and I much preferred my armoured spellcasters. In another thread, I also pointed out the solution to this in first-edition D&D (dual-classed Ranger/Mages).

A rogue going into battle probably should be wearing plate as well; as I went to great lengths to prove, it does not hamper manoeuvrability as harshly as many assume, nor is it as ungodly heavy as portrayed. Yes, it's fairly noisy to move around in, but a rogue in heavy combat (such as against a dragon) probably isn't benefiting much from stealth in the first place.

The only reason we have an impression of the fantasy divide of cloth/leather/metal armour is because of game mechanic "balance", not because of any sense of "proper gearing". A mage doesn't wear plate because a mage in plate makes a fighter mostly useless.

[JerryLove]

So "shields" are now "powered armor". I believe you are equivocating.

As I never offered a definition of "power armour", I cannot "equivocate".

You don't appear to know what "equivocate" means.

Ideally? Yes, almost everyone should be wearing plate armour. The only reason wizards cannot do so is a genre balance convention; later editions of D&D removed this, introducing arcane spellcasters capable of casting spells in armour (and rules to do so without those classes, such as forswearing spells with Somatic components or using the Still Spell feat), and I much preferred my armoured spellcasters. In another thread, I also pointed out the solution to this in first-edition D&D (dual-classed Ranger/Mages).

This isn't D&D. The reality of the middle ages is that very few fighters (and almost exclusively in Europe) wore Plate.

A rogue going into battle probably should be wearing plate as well; as I went to great lengths to prove, it does not hamper manoeuvrability as harshly as many assume, nor is it as ungodly heavy as portrayed.

That depends heavily on the plate. I can do moderate acrobatics in the plate I wear (though I don't have nearly the amount of underlying chain that an authentic knight would have), but I would not do the same in my friend's jousting plate.

The only reason we have an impression of the fantasy divide of cloth/leather/metal armour is because of game mechanic "balance", not because of any sense of "proper gearing". A mage doesn't wear plate because a mage in plate makes a fighter mostly useless.

And isn't that game mechanic exactly what the original poster was addressing?

Of course it is.

[CaptainPatch]

Ideally? Yes, almost everyone should be wearing plate armour.

Now that's one of the things about fantasy games that I find utterly ridiculous. Look at this clip from the movie "Excalibre": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dV_HaaQfLU&feature=related EVERYBODY is tramping around in full plate armor. Why is that? Because simply wanting a suit is enough to provide a suit -- provided you have enough money. That means in practice, EVERYBODY could have a full suit. That idea is utterly ridiculous: http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/aams/hd_aams.htm#time_b

It apparently took the court armorer Jörg Seusenhofer (and a small number of assistants) about one year to complete a horse armor and a large garniture commissioned in November 1546 by King (later Emperor) Ferdinand I (1503–1564) for himself and his son, and delivered in November 1547.

There weren't enough smiths/armorers in the world able to crank out as many suits of full plate armor as you saw in the "Excalibre" clip. Furthermore, in game terms, it seems like everybody can just waltz into Ye Olde Armour Shoppe and just buy "off the rack". The stuff was expensive; craftsmen couldn't afford to maintain an inventory large enough that _anyone_ could just walk in off the street and mix-and-match parts such that you achieve a perfect fit. No, greater than 9 times out of 10, you leave a hefty deposit, have some measurements taken, then get told, "Come back in about a year. Try not to get killed in the meantime."

Entirely ludicrous.

[nathanknaack]

So you get to the late game in a fantasy medieval RPG... do you want plate mail to be absolutely required to slay the final dragon... for all of your characters? You want your rogue clanking around in heavy steel plates? You want your wizard lying on the ground because he can't even move in the stuff, let alone cast spells?

Yes, almost everyone should be wearing plate armour.

And I'm done replying to this troll. Thanks for playing!

[abyss]

Yes, almost everyone should be wearing plate armour. The only reason wizards cannot do so is a genre balance convention;

A rogue going into battle probably should be wearing plate as well

[JerryLove]

It apparently took the court armorer Jörg Seusenhofer (and a small number of assistants) about one year to complete a horse armor and a large garniture commissioned in November 1546 by King (later Emperor) Ferdinand I (1503–1564) for himself and his son, and delivered in November 1547.

There weren't enough smiths/armorers in the world able to crank out as many suits of full plate armor as you saw in the "Excalibre" clip. Furthermore, in game terms, it seems like everybody can just waltz into Ye Olde Armour Shoppe and just buy "off the rack". The stuff was expensive; craftsmen couldn't afford to maintain an inventory large enough that _anyone_ could just walk in off the street and mix-and-match parts such that you achieve a perfect fit. No, greater than 9 times out of 10, you leave a hefty deposit, have some measurements taken, then get told, "Come back in about a year. Try not to get killed in the meantime."

An armor smith would not have maintained an inventory of full plate. Armor would be passed down family lines. The reasons that knights were nobility is because that's who could afford the horse and armor and training. There's more than you would assert, but your point to Krillian is valid.

PS. The Armor in Excalibur is mostly functional and is hand-made (it's from a group of SCA armorsmiths).

[krellen]

And isn't that game mechanic exactly what the original poster was addressing?

Of course it is.

No, the original poster wanted to make sure something besides power armour was "viable" for end-game because they wanted to be able to emulate "classic" post-Apocalyptic figures like Mad Max.

(Looking back, it actually looks like the original post has been removed. Woolfe did not start this thread.)

[Woolfe]

And isn't that game mechanic exactly what the original poster was addressing?

Of course it is.

No, the original poster wanted to make sure something besides power armour was "viable" for end-game because they wanted to be able to emulate "classic" post-Apocalyptic figures like Mad Max.

(Looking back, it actually looks like the original post has been removed. Woolfe did not start this thread.)

Actually I did, I put it up as a possible solution somewhat for the thread you are talking about Krellen, but did it as a seperate thread, because I was looking at the mechanic of having Power Armour cost "power". I did this for 2 reasons.
First my concept of power armour is that it uses "power" to either provide some extra protection (shield type) or to allow heavier armour to be worn (servo motors that enhance movement etc).
Both of these types to me, should require some form of active power usage to work.

Energy weapons did a lot of damage but had the downside of requiring a specific, and mostly limited ammo. Power armour was needed to deal with the energy weapons, but didn't require "ammo".

Which to me is the key difference.

Energy weapons were useless once you ran out of ammo. But power armour was forever.
Now with the Servo Motors Power armour, you would assume there was some form of power depletion even just walking. Especially if the actual defence mechanism was simply thicker/denser armour that effort moving the weight has to come from somewhere. Thus continuous usage of power.

However with the shield type, if something expends power to cause damage, wouldn't it logically require an equal expenditure of power to prevent that damage? So power armour could be like plate or psuedo chitin armour, but with a element of when force applied, apply opposite force to negate/reduce.

So anyway my thought on the matter was that power armour should in theory be using power cells, or "ammunition" that is used up over time.

This also had the added affect of modifying how power armour dominates the late game. Because you would need a constant supply of "ammo" for the armour.

I am not suggesting that Power Armour should be equivalent to leather armour + amazing stats. No sir.
Power armour should be dominating. Someone in leather armour + amazing stats with an Energy gun/rocket launcher, may be able to beat someone in Power armour with an energy gun, right up until the point the power armour dude scores a hit. (After which the leather + stat dude is toast)
But would you use your power armour when facing off against mutant bunnies when you offset it against the cost of powering it?

Also I personally would like to see some some variation in Power armour. A light suit for scouting, a heavy suit for combat and a normal suit as an example. But that is a different argument.

[Woolfe]

Yes, almost everyone should be wearing plate armour. The only reason wizards cannot do so is a genre balance convention;

A rogue going into battle probably should be wearing plate as well

I actually agree with this.

Wizards not wearing armour is explained away as being unable to perform necessary movements/messing with the mana flow.

Rogues however are different. You wouldn't wear noisy heavy armour whilst pickpocketing someone. 1 its noisy, 2 it attracts attention (unless everyone is wearing it, in which case neither 1 or 2 matter).
So in a day to day situation, you don't wear it. Because you are expecting to be stealthy.
But if you are about to get into a big fight, and you know you are going to have guys with sword stabbing at you, wouldn't you wear the best armour you could get your hands on. Being nimble and dextrous isn't going to help if you get hit, and in a battle or serious melee you. are. going. to. get. hit.!!!

[cmagruder]

Yes, almost everyone should be wearing plate armour. The only reason wizards cannot do so is a genre balance convention;

A rogue going into battle probably should be wearing plate as well

I actually agree with this.

Wizards not wearing armour is explained away as being unable to perform necessary movements/messing with the mana flow.

Rogues however are different. You wouldn't wear noisy heavy armour whilst pickpocketing someone. 1 its noisy, 2 it attracts attention (unless everyone is wearing it, in which case neither 1 or 2 matter).
So in a day to day situation, you don't wear it. Because you are expecting to be stealthy.
But if you are about to get into a big fight, and you know you are going to have guys with sword stabbing at you, wouldn't you wear the best armour you could get your hands on. Being nimble and dextrous isn't going to help if you get hit, and in a battle or serious melee you. are. going. to. get. hit.!!!

Lots of folks didn't wear armor. It took as long to get into a suit of plate as it does a Hollywood makeup job for a horror movie. Chain/scale/brigandine is the neglected intermediary you're looking for though.

[Woolfe]

Yes, almost everyone should be wearing plate armour. The only reason wizards cannot do so is a genre balance convention;

A rogue going into battle probably should be wearing plate as well

I actually agree with this.

Wizards not wearing armour is explained away as being unable to perform necessary movements/messing with the mana flow.

Rogues however are different. You wouldn't wear noisy heavy armour whilst pickpocketing someone. 1 its noisy, 2 it attracts attention (unless everyone is wearing it, in which case neither 1 or 2 matter).
So in a day to day situation, you don't wear it. Because you are expecting to be stealthy.
But if you are about to get into a big fight, and you know you are going to have guys with sword stabbing at you, wouldn't you wear the best armour you could get your hands on. Being nimble and dextrous isn't going to help if you get hit, and in a battle or serious melee you. are. going. to. get. hit.!!!

Lots of folks didn't wear armor. It took as long to get into a suit of plate as it does a Hollywood makeup job for a horror movie. Chain/scale/brigandine is the neglected intermediary you're looking for though.

I don't know about the "putting on of armour" and how long it takes. But yes that is an effect as well. But if you know youa re going into a fight, you would take the tiem to get prepared.

Not neglecting... Chain/scale suffer from the potential noise element, as they have interlocking metal. Brigandine/Studded Leather whatever, less so as the metal is generally not interlocking (massively generalising here).

In most RPG's it is assumed that Rogues wear leather and similar type armours. In which the "metal" element is muffled and therefore not as noticeable in a crowd.

Certainly I would expect all adventurers who weren't actively out and about on a quest/in foreign lands to be wearing the lighter types, simply from a comfort point of view. On the road to battle however. You put up with the discomfort so that you don't suffer the discomfort of a sword in the gut.

[Inca]

It is somewhat perplexing to follow some arguments in this thread real life and gaming conventions get mixed up, times, tactics, movies everything gets thrown into the mix and presented as a fact or a valid argument depending on what point particular person decides to make his/her stance, no matter how silly or inacurate such arguments are (this is not directed at anyone in particular, since so many in this topic are guilty of the same thing)

Let's start separating and organizing thing a little bit, shall we?

First of all, let's take a look at social organization of the armies, we have:

-militias/tribes-where every able bodied man (sometimes woman as well) is part of the armed forces and largely responsible for his/her gear (which some times graded by income)
-Private armies-as in condottieri/warlord hires professional soldiers, sometimes equips them and pays for it with proceedings from granted lands, loot, or gold for services rendered.
-Conscripts-as in janissaries, folks pressed into service by the ruler of the land and supplied and equpped by that power.

Second, let's look at the basic division of each kind of troops:
Just about every infantry, cavalry, artillery, navy is usually divided into "heavy" and "light" type, depending on the tasks that they are given (and not necessary by equipment)
The "heavy" part is tasked with frontal assults and primary defence
The "light" part is tasked with flanking strikes, persuit, scouting, mobile defense

Historically and practically you do not want to give your troops any more armor than they actually need (if you refer back to militia/private/conscript trifecta you will see that no one in that group wants to spend any more money than they absolutely have to). Also, historically, wealthy citizens who could afford a horse and an armor did so for the sake of prestige as much as for necessity. Companions, equites, boyars-were such troops and would qualify as heavy cavalry most of the time designed to break enemy with frontal charge. Mind you they were relatively minor group in every army (except maybe Mongols), in fact their usefullness is questionable, since most of the time heavy infantry would have them for breakfast.
The main push for plate was not a result of melee fighting, but rather as a counter measure to missile. Heavy infantry fought shoulder to shoulder with a wall of shields, they were well enough protected by the shield and 5 guys around them.
Ultimatly, shield and helmet were best friend of a melee fighter, and heavy cavalry eventually abandoned shield but replaced it with (adopted) a breast palate instead.

The ultimate in Western Europien combat 14-16 century, when armor and blade reached their peak in quality and form, and still had to fight side by side with a musket and a bow. Heavy cavalry near dissapeared and massive unstopable infantry was armed with helmet and breastplate-just enough to protect what mattered yet keep as much weight as possible off the fighter.

The point I guess that I am making-full plate armor was not an apogee of armor, it had a specific narrow niche for a specific type of troops, with very specific narrow function-and later remained as part of tradition, pride, sport. The actual useful troops, the ones that were making a difference, were armored to a much lesser degree as it was suitable to their tactics.

[Gizmo]

You're just wrong about this. In a medieval setting, gear progression ends with plate armour (or "super leather", in games with an armour/class "balance".) In a futuristic setting, gear progression ends with power armour (though, as I illustrated earlier in the thread, "power armour" can mean many things.)

Yes. I remember Power armor in the Mad Max series of future settings, and I remember it in Book of Eli, and The Road, and Waterworld, and all those 80s post-apocalyptic moves, and the Planet of the Apes series. I remember it in Alas Babylon. I see it in all those non-apocalypse SciFi moves too, like Star Trek and Star Wars, and Battlestar Galactica.

Wait. I didn't see it in any of those.

But at least you are right about medieval-era movies and games. Lord of the Rings certainly ended up with all of our protagonists in plate mail (BTW: Which plate are you discussing? There are quite a few varieties), didn't it?

How about "The Name of the Rose". That was medieval wasn't it? When did Sean Connory get his PlateMail? LadyHawk had a couple pieces of plate didn't it? Dragonslayer? Conan?

What's the point of points in this post? (None of these are games.)