This talk page is only for discussing improvements to the page "Fallout Tactics".
It is not the place for general discussion or sharing stories about the topic of this article. Please use the forums for these purposes.
Release date of the game? THat's something we should put in the articles for all the FO games...
Are all the "PLZ CORRECT" and "NOT INCONSISTENCIES" splatted across the Inconsistencies section appropriate? As for the actual content of them:
Aren't Deathclaws stated to be mutated from Jackson's Chameleons (a lizard) in FO2? Somewhere in Vault 13 if I'm not mistaken.
Exactly what IS the stance of the in-game revealed story and the FO Bible concerning fossil fuels? A point made in an earlier edit about drums representing generic explosive fluids seemed valid.
WWII era and modern weapons doesn't strike me as much of a problem - For example: FO2 had the drum-fed (the original Prohibition era style) Thompson SMG and the Grease Gun, the m60 has been around a while, the G11's development was already being abandoned at the end of the Cold War, the p90 is in use today, the Light Support Weapon is an actual (and much-hated, it seems) British gun, and the Bozar looks to be inspired by the Barrett anti material rifle. Personally, I think that a more significant issue with FOT weapons is that there are so MANY of them - it tries too hard to have a whole lot of unique (or at least almost unique) crap all over the place in what appears to be a strange attempt at giving the game more flavor. It's not entirely all bad - Some weapons will inevitably wind up useless and ignored, and a progression of weapons makes sense, picking up increasingly better basic rifles, shotguns, machine guns, etc. But there really is such a thing as too much of a good thing, and FOT is literally drowning in assorted weaponry, including a lot of things that you'll only ever see twice, once when you pick it up, look at the stats, and proceed to not use it, and the second time when you sell it to feed your ammunition/stim addiction.
- I agree that the WWII-weapon complaint isn't really valid. In the U.S., it is quite possible to buy WWII-era M1 Garands and M1 Carbines. Additionally, several companies produce semi-automatic replicas of WWII submachine and machine guns. It's possible that an organization like the Gun Runners from Fallout 1 modified them to become full auto; not to mention the ability to manufacture new weapons from existing designs.
- The biggest logical problem is that 7.62x39mm is standard (and that the SAW is chambered for it). In reality, 5.56 NATO (or .223 Remington) would be the most common. --184.108.40.206 02:33, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Airships are something of a gigantic WHY. First of all, Not An Inconsistency claims "people use whatever they could get their hands on". Preexisting technology does not necessarily equal immediately available technology, and if the idea of there being an entire flotilla of large cargo-capable airships sitting around waiting for the BoS to use does not seem sufficiently dubious in and of itself to convince you, then perhaps the intro monologue will, specifically stating that these airships were purpose-built. While the images during the intro monologue may not be perfectly accurate, being depicted as drawings in a historical document, the BoS' tendencies for preservation of history and technology would imply that they are made to be as correct as possible. Where the hell did they get enough helium to pull this off? Naturally occurring helium is mostly found with natural gas, and while fossil fuels may or may not be COMPLETELY gone, the BoS likely would not be extracting and processing the stuff themselves, and producing helium by bombarding certain elements with radiation is inefficient. They either had, or found, a truly enormous stockpile of the stuff, which is frankly a bit too useful to be used on a fleet of airships for a group of dissenters. Unless someone wants to claim the airships used hydrogen, to which I will respond that that implies the mission was probably intended to fail and that everyone on board was meant to fall to their deaths or die in a fire, and I will point at what appears to be rocket or jet engines cabled to the airships as propulsion in the intro monologue. Those aren't too good at running cold, hydrogen's not exactly stable, and solid support struts to keep them at a safe distance AWAY from the main superstructure means more resources, more weight, more fuel. While an air route is obviously faster and effectively untouchable to enemies compared to a ground convoy, airships are either an uncharacteristically expensive mode of transportation for the BoS to be expending on a dissident faction, or were intended to be doomed to failure from the very beginning.
- In fact they certainly could have used hydrogen and quite safely - it's a common misconception that the hindenburg caught fire because of the hydrogen when it was clearly not the case. And again, the intro "art" is nothing more than some artist's rendering of how they would imagine something of this sort - far from an engineering schematic.
WAS the BOS always presented as having the manufacturing capabilities to churn out power armor? Repair, yes, but build from scratch? The Enclave and T-51b Power Armor articles seem to say no. Which one is correct?
As it stands the reception section is looking quite ridiculous, I'm afraid. The idea that "most fans" were very disappointed in the game isn't really anchored in reality since the game recieved quite favorable reviews and was actively played over Gamespy when the game was still new. I'm not saying it should be changed to say that the game recieved enormous critical acclaim or anything like that though and the disappointment with the inconsistencies were and are very real. It just needs a little touch-up, is all.
220.127.116.11 18:42, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
Really this entry has pretty gross violations of NPOV, absolutely lambasting the game for, really, relatively small flaws. I'd say it merits even a cleanup tag 18.104.22.168 00:40, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Yeah I agree. Even though the article has been cleaned up a bit many different articles (not just this one) state this as being a rather sub-par game. I don't agree at all! This is probably my second favorite Fallout game (after 3 of course). Chaos ian7 04:34, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
I feel the same as the above posters. Most of the "inconsistencies" are actually quite feasible with a little imagination, and in fallout 2 the vault experiment story elements were taken out for a reason - they are quite absurd. Why would a government use such an enormous amount of resources to conduct such experiments when the experiments depended on almost all civilization being wiped out to operate, something that said resources could be used to prevent, and something that would un-prioritize the need for scientific data of such a tedious type...
- I'm not a fan of the Vault Experiment either, but it's been part of the canon since Fallout 2. Ausir 22:00, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
- Not to mention that the Vault Experiment plotline IS CANON. President Dick Richardson states, EXPLICITLY, that the experiments took place. You don't get it, do you? Shaur M. S. Grizlin 21:25, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
The other complaints seem to just involve a lack of imagination or insight. The only Deathclaw who talks in Fallout Tactics is the Queen, and she doesn't talk very well. It is fairly reasonable that the queen might have a higher IQ than the rest of the deathclaws, and perhaps this is what inspired the Enclave research in the first place. Furthermore the deathclaws are mutants, and should not be expected to have features matching what they originally were.
- Not true, other deathclaws also talk in Tactics (they might not have much to say in the missions themselves, but they talk e.g. in taunts). If there was a species of numerous talking deathclaws already, there would be no need for the Enclave to conduct their experiments. Ausir 22:00, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
- Furthermore, tell me, why would the Enclave be INSPIRED by the talking deathclaws if all they needed was to capture the Mother and keep her on the Oil Rig as a pet, with deathclaws following in her wake? Shaur M. S. Grizlin 21:25, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
There is no reason to believe that Fossil Fuel Vehicles were completely abolished in the Fallout Universe especially sense the war was supposedly over fossil fuels... and most of the vehicles in fallout tactics are either junk vehicles or extremely heavy vehicles that might more power to run (power in the physics sense of energy in a short time period). It could also simply be implied that combustion engines were retrofitted to vehicles to take advantage of power sources that the brotherhood had access to.
- They weren't abolished, but were pretty much completely depleted. Ausir 22:00, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
- Oil was too precious to waste on vehicles. Simple as that. Shaur M. S. Grizlin 21:25, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Finally, I don't see the problem with the airships. I am not sure we are meant to know exactly what technology was meant to be behind these airships, but we do know that the brotherhood does not have access to more advanced aircraft like the enclave does. The dissenters were given the important mission of chasing down the remaining super - mutant army and not just given resources to start over with. Given how many of the airships were supposedly destroyed by storms I don't see any reason to believe that hydrogen wasn't used in the airships. A militaristic organization like the brotherhood would likely take such a risk to complete such an important mission.
- Nice try to dodge the point.
- 1. WHERE did they get the airships?
- 2. WHY would they waste resources on pursuing a fleeing enemy?
- 3. HOW would they manufacture the airships and get enough gas to gain lift and fuel auxiliary engines?
- And while we're at it, explain where would they get the proper knowledge to manufacture heavy lift airships. Shaur M. S. Grizlin 21:25, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
I am not really sure how all silly ideas related to fallout canon came to be... Some guy snooped in the fallout 2 files and treated what he found as part of the fallout universe, but that stuff was taken out for a reason. Now this mindset has become the vocal majority and the absurd idea of vault experiments has permeated the new fallout 3 title...
- No, it was stated by president Richardson in Fallout 2. It is canon. Shaur M. S. Grizlin 21:25, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
If anything tactics should be considered canon and fallout 3 non canon, since tactics came first and the vault experiments idea was never officially part of any fallout game before fallout 3!
- Hate to break it to you, but they were, ever since Fo2's conception. Shaur M. S. Grizlin 21:25, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Regarding the criticisms, this game has a high meta-critic rating both from player and critic reviews. A lot of people whined about what they thought was missing, but there was no evidence that they were anything other than a vocal minority. The game had a strong multiplayer following for a long time after it's release. The game was a lot of fun and easily comparable to earlier titles.
- Vault Experiment Program was mentioned in Fallout 2, actually, then explained in more detail in the Fallout Bible. And the biggest problem with Fallout Tactics is the fact that it pretty much completely abandoned the 1950s retrofuturism. And the view that FT is not entirely canon but only semi-canon is held not only by Bethesda, but also e.g. by Chris Taylor, who even worked on some parts of Tactics. Ausir 21:55, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
The only convincing inconsistency in the article is the abandoning of the retro-futuristic style. On the other points:
- The phrase "military vault" is an obvious storytelling device: the designers needed to introduce both the Brotherhood of Steel and Vault 0 in the intro, but without coming right out and saying that the BoS was seeking Vault 0, so they stretched a point by referring to Mariposa (or Lost Hills) as a vault. This gave them an excuse to mention the vaults. They weren't actually retconning the BoS as coming from a proper Vault-Tec vault, just awkwardly foreshadowing.
- If intelligent mole rats (the Brain and Keeng Ra'at) can evolve without any help from the Enclave, why not intelligent deathclaws?
- Who said anything about fossil fuels? Tactics is in the Midwest; the Midwest = biodiesel! Perhaps fusion wasn't the only alternative energy explored before the war.
- Vault 0 and the Vault Experiment are compatible in several possible ways, see Vault 0#Possible_Explanations_for_Inconsistency
- With regards to manufacturing power armor, Maxson in Fallout 1 says that the BoS manufactures most of the guns in the Wasteland, so why not armor too? Or airships, for that matter... The calculator 00:02, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
- You're freely interpreting facts. Fact is, the intro narration claims they are from a military vault. It's an obvious mistake and definitely not foreshadowing. Vaults are introduced after completing the first three missions and the initiation.
- Because it's never hinted at in the original Fallout. The Brain and Keeng Ra'at are two of the more stupid additions to Fo2.
- As stated below, there were giant food shortages in the United States, so manufacturing biodiesel when your citizens are starving would be idiocy of the finest sort.
- They're not. In Van Buren, Cheyenne Mountain was a radioactive crater in the ground.
- Because they stated they cannot manufacture new suits of powered armour? And tell me, WHY would they produce airships. WHY would they waste resources? That Furry Bastard 11:00, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
- In response to your bio diesel idea, there was a a food shortage i really doubt they had large quantity's of corn or used cooking oil.--OfficerBlue 10:34, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
- Of course the "military vault dwellers" line in the introduction is an "obvious mistake"--it's SO obvious that I can't help but think that it's deliberate, an idea which is supported by the fact that it is immediately preceded by two paragraphs of talk of vaults, and then is immediately proceeded by a description of the BoS. So it is at least a clumsy segue.
- Even if you only accept Fallout 1 as canon, the fact remains that the FEV Experiment Disk at the Glow says that FEV increases intelligence. And the Lieutenant says that everyone in the wastes has been exposed to FEV.
- Even if you accept the Van Buren document that speaks of a food shortage as canon (Link), that very document specifies that the shortage could well have just been regional. Besides... the FO2 Sierra Depot GNN transcript (and everything else, really) portrays a world gone mad with energy fears. Imagining a United States whose vast stretches of arable land are used for fuel rather than food is the easiest thing on earth in this context.
- Well, sure it's radioactive and decimated. Plutonius saw to that. ~_^
- The fact that it was the *vocal minority* who were sent in the airships clearly demonstrates the Elders' motivations: get rid of an annoying faction in a humane way. After all, they couldn't kill them or exile them for no reason, acting so dishonorably to their own Brothers would be out of the question politically. But letting them stay to stir up discontent would also be risky. So instead you let the Scribes take a break from pretending to invent laser pistols that already exist and let those spaceheads have some fun making obviously rickety airships to send the minority to their deaths. I mean, "on a scouting mission." And they would go, since we know from Fallout 2 that at least some Brothers swore oaths to destroy mutants. The calculator 12:17, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's a mistake, not a plot device, get it into that head of yours. Given the rest of the errors (airships etc.) it's pretty damn obvious that it's not meant as a storytelling device.
- Even if, that's only account for the West Coast, which is, oh, I don't know, a few hundred miles away from the Midwest. So no, not plausible nor possible.
- Food riots were part of the Fallout world from the beginning, check the timeline. And no, converting vast stretches of arable land for biodiesel production is not viable, since it's very low yield and the United States' energy demands were extreme. In short, too much effort for too little gain.
- Vree reconstructed the pistols from schematics, you dolt. That's what the Brotherhood does, primarily. And you still haven't provided a reason why they would waste their extremely limited resources on building rickety airships for a suicide mission, when all they had to do is sent them walking after the army. http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/thumb/5/5c/Scribe.jpg/15px-Scribe.jpg Tagaziel (call!) 14:58, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
FoT online[edit source]
I know it has been yeeeeeeeears since FoT has had any multiplayer servers, but does anyone wanna set up a server and play online? I have never gotten to experience FoT online and I wanna see what it would be like. 22.214.171.124 19:44, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Come on, I know there are people out there who want to play online! 126.96.36.199 20:10, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Its quite bad, i remember it always used to lose sync.
Could you make another day because I missed that one.-Razuk
Making one now 9:20 March 26 2011 -Alpha
Ummm, can I play too? Just got Fallout 1-2 and Tactics the other day and wanted to play some online but I guess I was a little too late. June 8, 2011 1:42 pm
Who decided Fallout Tactics is not canon?[edit source]
Really, who "decides" if a game in a story such as this is "canon" or not?
Because by all rights Fallout 3 shouldn't be canon because it was made by an entirely different company.
Can someone answer me this?
And yes, this article needs a clean up tag. The point of view of the author is biased, especially against the game.
--Killchain 23:37, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
- Bethesda said that Tactics is semi-canon. And there is nothing wrong with the article, since FoT in many respects is not a Fallout game. http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/thumb/5/5c/Scribe.jpg/15px-Scribe.jpg Tagaziel (call!) 08:21, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Bethesda didn't originally develop the Fallout franchise. So I don't think Bethesda has a say in it. All they did was recycle the stories from the first two and put it into an FPS, and take a cut portion of Fallout 2 and ran with it. (I'm referring to the "Vault Experiments.") The general consensus is that Tactics isn't "canon" because it was made by an outside company. Bethesda is not only an outside company from the original two "canon" games, but used cut material for their storyline that contradicts with the two first games' canon. --Killchain 20:49, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
- Cut content doesn't automatically mean something is non-canon, not to mention that Vault Experiments are an official piece of Fallout canon, confirmed over and over again by the original developers (Tim Cain and Chris Avellone in particular) and are mentioned by President Richardson in Fo2. Go play the games for real this time. http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/thumb/5/5c/Scribe.jpg/15px-Scribe.jpg Tagaziel (call!) 22:27, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Oh bah. If Bethesda is the "canon issuer" then so be it. --Killchain 03:41, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
It seems cannon to a point as a few characters in both fallout 3 and new vegas reference this group. However it would seem they are a lot smaller now. The most canonical ending would suggest that the calculator was destroyed, the BOS was greatly weakened and now has to, or at least a possibility since they are pretty close, contend with the arrival of Ceasars legion and loss of tribals (new recruits). As for power armour.... Who knows, wasnt it just upgraded T-51B suits? --i shot the sherrif... but i was out of ammo when i got to the deputy.... 11:16, August 21, 2011 (UTC)
How do you get it to work?[edit source]
i got the dvd version for christmas but it wont work! it just says i need a disk but i only got one dvd! please help!
it would b cool[edit source]
it would b cool if they made another fallout tactics not fallout tactics: brotherhood of steel 2 (that failed) but sumthing like fallout tactics: enclave dat would b cool :D --Chiefsean16 16:28, January 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Fallout Tactics does improve on the normal Fallout system with CTB but it doesn't have the true Fallout feel. I haven't gotten into it too much but it does feel to much like an RTS with a Fallout background. Personally Fallout 3's system kind of eliminates the need for a new Fallout system. However that feels too much like a FPS knock off. What's right here? Anyway it would be interesting to play as the "villain" but nothing gets interesting until Fallout 2 and then what? You get beaten by a tribal. That's really sad; a bunch of professional military people beat by a tribal and some of his/her cronies. Although to the Enclave's defense, the tribal did get their gear...KnightNapier 23:36, February 2, 2010 (UTC)
- I was thinking the same thing myself. However I figured that it would be hard to make in 3D (which it would inevitably have to be in). It would be cool to see another tactics though... Chaos ian7 04:44, April 28, 2010 (UTC)
Given that the timeline split from ours at some point, it's entirely possible that the BOS did not build the airships. They might be the Fallout equivalent of the Akron and Macon, assuming that the split meant that they did not crash, and that the former did not return from the west coast before funds were diverted towards the up coming war.
On the other hand, the timeline isn't supposed to have split until after WWII, which means there would be WWII weapons hanging around. Particularly in National Guard armories, which wouldn't have been priority targets anyway, and wouldn't have been targeted later because of the nuclear counter strokes.
Then again, it's possible that it's a completely different timeline from the other three games. However Jameson does mention the BOS fighting Super Mutants first out west, then in Chicago. Ignoring the airships, the Capital BOS might be a further splinter from the Midwest group. It's never explained how the Capital Wasteland BOS actually reached it, whether on foot or potentially in airships lost from the main group, or if they're simply more dissenters sent off.Triaxx2 13:24, June 4, 2010 (UTC)