I`m actually getting in to Wasteland 2 a bit more now. I might leave a higher score for it now. I had to reroll a new team, but I think I have a pretty decent group. I`m also beginning to understand the tactics better. It`s a lot easier to kill and stay alive if you have a bit of space and use cover. In enclosed spaces it`s another story, but again, not too bad if you use the `bait and switch` tactics: lead a monster one way on a wild goose chase while your other men shoot it to death. Oh and have a SNIPER. This can take a long time, but at least it works and everyone survives... Well nearly everyone.

One thing I find annoying is though my main character has 1 leadership, new Followers stupidly stop following orders.
BEWARE SPOILERS. DON`T READ IF YOU DON`T WANT TO SPOIL YOUR GAME.
There was an apache woman I found and I was glad for the extra hands, but in battle she kept suddenly deciding not to follow order and do her own thing. In my games were I like people to follow my orders cos I know what i`m doing and so they`ll LIVE, this is suicide. We were in a smallish cavern fighting these giant bullet soaking honey badgers that know no fear. I kept all my men running back and forth while taking pot shots with our limited ammo. It was working, everyone still alive, then my apache woman decides to refuse Orders and stand still. badger bites her, she collapses, bleeding out.

Through skilful manouevering (while still fighting the badgers) I get my excellent medic to her and stop the bleeding and she gets up. Great! A couple of turns later, she does the, "I`ll do my own thing!" crap again and runs towards the 3 badgers still giving us a hard time. badger bites her, she collapses in a critical dying state. I just mange to get my Medic to her (after he had to runa round avoiding the badgers with my other men baiting them) and she dies.
Good riddance. It took me over an HOUR to defeat those honey Badgers, i wasn`t going through that again for one stupid Follower that can`t follow orders. So she stays dead.

Followers do their own thing far too much in battles,like they don`t care if they die, even if you have one Leadership skill early game. One Leadership skill should be much more more effective than that. Guess i`ll have to put skills into that. I wonder if 2 Leadership will make much difference?

Another whine, more to do with the writing. The writing is usually pretty good, but this bit irked me as silly:
I took my team to the AG Centre late, choosing to help some other guys out first. I liked how the situation got worse there while I was elsewhere with the radio calls getting fainter.
Anyway, when I got there, the scientists woman is already caught by a plant and it`s strangling her. The game writing says, to paraphrase, `As the tendrils tighten about her, she lifts her hand and raises a midle finger at you.`

Er, what? Ok, so she`s not happy that we arrived late, I understand that, but would anyone be so insulting at the moment of their death when we have arrived to try and help? No, they wouldn`t. They are DYING, but STILL ALIVE. Perhaps she still has a chance at life if now we are here. People don`t put up a middle finger unless, perhaps they were doing it to people they knew were enemies, like Raiders.
Even then, she was still available to answer a load of questions, which made me think maybe she`s not as badly hurt as I thought. Then the plant killed her.
The writing should have been: As you try to free her from the throttling giant plant, the woman squeezes out a few tortured words..."Serum... between here and door... cure... find it..."
Then the creature kills her. That`s it. No clunky exposition on anyone else or anything else, there`s no time she`s dying. What info the Player loses, he loses - he should have arrived earlier. A note with any more details could be left with the serums found.
END SPOILERS

I`d also like a way to remove that kill screen that pops up on the right after a battle shows how many points I got. It often gets in the way of me trying to save a critical bleeding out teamm8.

However, I am getting more into the game. I like the radio updates thing. The graphics are very nice and everything seems to work very well. Not as bad as ome reviewers made out. Reminds me of Baldurs Gate 2, but now you can rotate your views. Some nice little touches such as animated vegetation and I like when a guy rubs his hands before tackling a trap! So I`ll give this 4 stars instead of my 3.

Welcome to the old school. This has been a mark in the first Wasteland, and I can't remember if Fallout 1 too.
The leadership skill has ranges of NPC levels which can be "Tammed" by each skill point, I think that in the NPC screen stats indicate the levels. So not, 1-3 points will not guaranteeing you a good time with extra NPC (maybe in the first 7 levels), 6 probably will do it before level 30. Anyway, the another benefit of the skill is the extra critical crtic percentage that your team get. So, is a good skill to invest.

The leadership has a radius (impacted by the charisma) , so, if your PC with the skill is the sniper, you are forcing to have the other 3 NPC close to him (at least that sniper has a very high charisma).

By the way, the same game say that someone begin to be proficient with a skill when he has 3 points invested in it (if I remember well, the game hinted for the weapons skills). I differ totally with your viewpoint, she was losing everyone in the AG center meanwhile the rangers were busying doing other sh%ts . She even begged by the radio. And you don't know how much time she had spent trapped by the plant feeling how the press slowly grow in her chest.

To me, someone who is feeling her death coming, already lost everyone and everything, and suddenly its "guardians" appears... yeah, a mid finger is a good way to welcome them.

P.d. The cavern with the badgers, is another old school thing, if you explore too much you risk to find a place ill suited for low levels (or better said: You need common sense for detecting when to flee). You can reach before reaching lvl 9, but at least you already bring a lot of weapons which can bypass 5 of armor... OUCH

Thanks for your reply...

Well I stand by my words on the writing. I write for a living and that just isn`t the way I would make a person act who is dying under those circumstances, people do not act like that in those cases, but that`s just me. I am aware that was used in a mad max film, but it made sense as those guys were crazy AND the enemy.

Another thing that I found silly was when I finally got into the Citadel and went into the museum. There`s a nuke sat in the museum with a flashing red button. I decided to press the button and the nuke destroys the entire base- game over...
Yes, I shouldn`t have pressed it, but-
Are the writers saying that in 15 years of the Citadel being open and occupied to the Rangers, nobody ever pressed that completely unguarded button with the only possible warning that it was a nuke? Someone of the Rangers calibre never thought, `Maybe we should put a covering over that button? Or fence it up! Or even stick a guard by it"
I could understand if the Citadel had JUST been discovered and we were exploring it, then I would`ve been much more careful. Even Fall Out 3 doesn`t make it so ludicrously easy to kill an entire base.

Also, why would you have a button that would kill the operator instantly? Is that a suicide button?

That citadel should have been destroyed any time between 1st and the 15th year with its terrible lack of care for that `tickling` bomb. I suppose the Devs put that in there for a laugh, because it makes no logical sense.

There are things I don`t mind like when an entire settlement attacked me for digging up their graves- That makes sense.

I`ve played many rpgs and the REALLY good ones avoid silly one hit instant kills like this unless you did something really bad and ignored all the warnings. But that`s just me.

Actually... there... I have the theory that plot-hole was 4th wall break for toy with the players, Brian Fargo (The author) has a little tendency to try to screw us (More advanced in the history the nuke is again mentioned and is like was disarmed). There is another NPC which only purposes is to make us make crazy theories about him.

Wasteland 2 is way more tongue in cheek and less serious than Fallout series is. This is largely inherited from it's prequel, Wasteland 1. I can assure you you will discover a lot of whacky, crazy and just plain silly stuff in this game. I assume you did not choose Ag Center as you haven't met giant man eating bunnies. They're cute until they eat your face. Or man sized carrots and tomatoes. Or piles of booby trapped cow poop. Or... Or... Or... Err, you haven't actuallu played or watched a LP of Fallout 3 have you as in middle of the first settlement you encouter there is a live nuke just sitting in a radiaoctive pool of water and people are worshipping it too. You are tasked to either defuse it or attach detonator to it and get to see city disappear into nuclear mushroomcloud.

And the nuke in citadel is entirely intentional. Using it is even one of the official endings allowing you to export you characters into a new game (unclothed as you clothing will evaporate in the blast :-p). Havent you heard the saying "curiosity killed the cat" or that telling some to do or not to do something result's in them doing exactly opposite.

Yes there was a nuke in that town, but it was clear that it was live and dangerous and no one was really looking after it. Megaton is an obviously messed up city, there`s no real organisation. the Sheriff is barely holding things together. Immediately, the Player knows to be cautious. The fact that the only people by it were worshipping it was another sign for the Player to be careful. Also, you could not detonate the bomb by simply carelessly pressing a button. In fact, to detonate or diffuse it you had to have some skill. The instant radiation when you went near it was also another `warning off` factor.

This is very different from the `trap` Wasteland 2 leads you into, where you are in a `safe` Citadel, controlled by an apparently `organised` smart Rangers who should logically be smart enough to make it a little harder to set off a nuke in a museum in a building that`s been occupied for 15 years! Like I said, anyone in that Citadel should have thought, `Let`s maybe put up a warning not to touch the button on that nuke because it might be live? Like just maybe?` Of course it`s intentional. It is also stupid and the Devs are gaming the game in a way that is not fun for the Player, but for them. It`s basically a trap set by the Devs, but one just about every player will fall into, because of the lack of any logical warnings, except the red button.
I am explaining the logic of this. There are ways to do things logical, so that when you get curious, there are enough logical signs to tell you, you may be making a mistake. It is illogical to have a live nuke in a museum with NO warning excpet a red blinking button that you can press. That`s like going into a modern day military museum where you see a stack of C4 explosives on show, with the other exhibits, with a flashing button, no barrier or warning. Nothing. just that flashing button. How many people passing through aren`t going to press the button?
It`s illogical.

Ejem, is not funny for you, because if you search a little more in this forum you will find like 3-5 topics about us joking about our "premature" game-over.
And again, in this case, is 4th wall break. Inside of the cannon, the bomb is disarmed until later in the game.

And is a simply joke, nuke + red button == Too tempting to not press it. That is the joke, plain and simple.

I refer to the above I wrote.
I believe this kind of thing takes away from the game. You may disagree, they may disagree, but I believe it`s bad gameplay to kill the player for a `joke` on the Devs part. You don`t kill the Player so simply in any game for a `joke.` I don`t want to play vs the Devs, i want to be immersed in the `world`, not thinking what the Devs have done.
I want my game to make sense, not wondering if there are more `instant death` jokes waiting around the corner.

Oh, so the game reacts properly when you wait with fulfilling that quest? That's pretty cool. Still, I don't have a problem with writing itself - I think the game is written quite well, all things considered. I do believe that "clunky exposition" lies far more in the dialogue system itself, which I'm really not a big fan of. The keyword-based conversations end up looking like this:
"I like water. I also like trees."
"Why do you like water?"
"I like water because Pipi likes water and because it's wet."
"Why do you like trees?"
"I like trees because trees are awesome and green."
"Why are trees green?"
"Trees are all green because we cover them with color."
"What is wet?"
"Wet means you are covered with water."
"Where do you get the color?"
"We get color from flowers."
"What is flowers?"
"Flowers is tasty."
"Who is Pipi?"

Any dialogue with more than a few keywords soon becomes a mess, without at least a semblance of natural flow that tree-based dialogues give you, not to mention that you can't ever get back to already discussed topics (god forbid you decide to not pick a persuation option first time around, as you will never be presented with it again.)

True, this can be a bit frustrating at times, and I often go through the same dialogue several times just to cover the bases and get all the info I'm probably intended to get. I do sort of like the system, but it works less well in complex dialogues. At some point you make the "wrong" call, and are locked out of info. Or maybe this is too meta-gamey thinking. Hmm.

Well I know my logic is basically right. I write stories and have to deal with logical acts, words and decisions of all kinds of characters all the time. I know how people would act in weird and even extreme circumstances and in context of those circumstances. So while some of you would argue what you don`t know, I certainly know when something strikes me as `not right`, just like bad dialogue in a movie should. It`s actually not that hard to do and defending it, just because you`re a `fan boy` is really silly.

There`s no shame in saying, `You know what, you`re right that doesn`t make sense.`

Oh well, just more information for writing characters who are so stubborn they refuse all logical reasoning.

There's a difference. When writing a story, you only need to consider the characters' responses to things that actually happen in the story. When writing a game, however, you need to consider anything the player might say to the NPC, and anything else the player might do.

I suggest you try your hand at writing Interactive Fiction, or even just a Choose Your Own Adventure type story.