I would have at least one of each. Melee weapons would merely be tools used for accessing supplies and/or fortifying, such as pry bars, hammers, etc. Ranged tools would obviously be more specialized, but would use lighter ammunition and hopefully be fitted with suppressors.
Poll: What weapons will you use in a zombie apocalypse?
- Thread starter Erttheking
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I would like to have both, maybe multiple of both.
For me I would like two Katanas and two pistols (Magnums maybe)
The bad part would be that I would have to clean the guns, get ammo for both guns and have enough to last me in that horrible world until I an improve it or give up for another gun.
The bad part for the swords is that indeed they can get stuck, you have to take good care of them and you have to get close.
Still I would like swords for the most pat.
For me I would like two Katanas and two pistols (Magnums maybe)
The bad part would be that I would have to clean the guns, get ammo for both guns and have enough to last me in that horrible world until I an improve it or give up for another gun.
The bad part for the swords is that indeed they can get stuck, you have to take good care of them and you have to get close.
Still I would like swords for the most pat.
Of the two options presented? Definetly melee. I've never held a gun in my life so I very much doubt that one would be of any use to me. Plus, ammo scaricty is a big turn off there.
If I could choose something else? Just a car. That seems like it would be significantly more useful then like say a baseball bat.
Actually, my zombie plan is to just get out to sea, maybe head down to antartica. That should be relatively safe.
If I could choose something else? Just a car. That seems like it would be significantly more useful then like say a baseball bat.
Actually, my zombie plan is to just get out to sea, maybe head down to antartica. That should be relatively safe.
I like how every "What will you do during the zombie disco" turns into a gun thread...
Be sensible, how many of you would really survive past the first week? You know after several nights of patchy sleep, second rate food and constantly being on the run from are mindless, tireless, emotionless legion?
Still sticking with original answer though, join the horde and get cheap group bookings.
Be sensible, how many of you would really survive past the first week? You know after several nights of patchy sleep, second rate food and constantly being on the run from are mindless, tireless, emotionless legion?
Still sticking with original answer though, join the horde and get cheap group bookings.
i do not see why people would use melee if it is a virus zombie infection. Getting even a little bit of their blood or spit on you will infect you. I mean, if im immune okay.
If i had to use a melee weapon...something with a bit of reach that requires the least amount of force to neutralize without getting stuck. Baseball bat is a good one, wooden sword would actually be better.
Even a mace (non spikey) would be excellent.
If i had to use a melee weapon...something with a bit of reach that requires the least amount of force to neutralize without getting stuck. Baseball bat is a good one, wooden sword would actually be better.
Even a mace (non spikey) would be excellent.
bow or crossbow would be most effective i think you can out range the zombies and retrieve your ammo if your not dealing with a horde plus if in real need you can make your own ammo but because it still needs ammo and has a minimum range as well i would also take with me a pole arm like a spear or large 2 hand ax. the true practical upside to both being relative silence.
that being said the real problem is surviving. living in the northern U.S. i would get my friends and go north to Canada and with any luck Alaska up there i give it 1 maybe 2 winters before the weather just deals with the problem for me and the reason i say Alaska is because it has more guns than people to fire them and a good boating and fishing triad plus boat would become the safest transport to gather more survivors.
that being said the real problem is surviving. living in the northern U.S. i would get my friends and go north to Canada and with any luck Alaska up there i give it 1 maybe 2 winters before the weather just deals with the problem for me and the reason i say Alaska is because it has more guns than people to fire them and a good boating and fishing triad plus boat would become the safest transport to gather more survivors.
You do realize that chopping people is not the same as chopping wood right? Waraxes are very hard to get stuck in someone. Add that it is rotting flesh and you won't get stuck. Warpicks would only get stuck in the armor but not the flesh.erttheking said:
For your question, both.
If there is one thing I've learned about zombies, it's that shotguns always do the trick.
Honey, get the M1014.
Honey, get the M1014.
Having read many many zombie stories and books, including having just finished re-reading World War Z, melée is definitely the way to go.
Firearms require a level of proficiency in their use to be able to score headshots, which being a Brit, where all my firearm experience has been .22 rifles on a range and an air-rifle of the same in the fields, is something I probably wont be able to manage consistently, especially facing a whole neighbourhood of ravenous revenants. Also availability is another issue both of the weapons and of ammo, yet again being in Britain where we don't have 20 weapons in a 20 m radius. (j/k)
Melée does require some upper body strength which is somewhat lacking at present but after a couple of hours in the post-apocalypse am sure there will be plenty of practice possibilities.
Since in Britain there are an abundance of cricket bats, tennis rackets, golf clubs, snooker cues. If worse comes to the worst, we could even start using wickets as weaponry. Haha.
Firearms require a level of proficiency in their use to be able to score headshots, which being a Brit, where all my firearm experience has been .22 rifles on a range and an air-rifle of the same in the fields, is something I probably wont be able to manage consistently, especially facing a whole neighbourhood of ravenous revenants. Also availability is another issue both of the weapons and of ammo, yet again being in Britain where we don't have 20 weapons in a 20 m radius. (j/k
)Melée does require some upper body strength which is somewhat lacking at present but after a couple of hours in the post-apocalypse am sure there will be plenty of practice possibilities.
Since in Britain there are an abundance of cricket bats, tennis rackets, golf clubs, snooker cues. If worse comes to the worst, we could even start using wickets as weaponry. Haha.
Melee weapons of some type. We have a lot of gardening tools lying around, so, provided I had time to go get them, I'd be set. I'd love to have a shotgun, though. It's got to be handy at least a few times. And, living in the USA, I'd be able to get access to one.
The one thing that grinds my gears is that everyone seems to assume when talking about extreme survival situations (and not just zombie apocalypses, either) is that they will be able to stay calm long enough to actually *get* a weapon and the rest of their crap together before they are destroyed themselves.
And then, there's always the smarty-pants "Well, we'll just go to the nearest army base and get some guns and food!" crowd. You ever tried to sneak into an army base before, sport? Yeah, I don't think a zombie apocalypse is going to make those soldiers any more keen to have a civvie storm their base looking for the nearest gun and food rations.
The one thing that grinds my gears is that everyone seems to assume when talking about extreme survival situations (and not just zombie apocalypses, either) is that they will be able to stay calm long enough to actually *get* a weapon and the rest of their crap together before they are destroyed themselves.
And then, there's always the smarty-pants "Well, we'll just go to the nearest army base and get some guns and food!" crowd. You ever tried to sneak into an army base before, sport? Yeah, I don't think a zombie apocalypse is going to make those soldiers any more keen to have a civvie storm their base looking for the nearest gun and food rations.
Both!
A shotgun for spread and they do brutal damage up close. If any machine gun it would have to be a mounted one with a large caliber bullet for insane spray and pray.
As for melee weapons, no blades, go with very blunt objects. Large hammers, heavy axes, baseball bats, shovels.
A shotgun for spread and they do brutal damage up close. If any machine gun it would have to be a mounted one with a large caliber bullet for insane spray and pray.
As for melee weapons, no blades, go with very blunt objects. Large hammers, heavy axes, baseball bats, shovels.
My biggest problem would be no access to guns. Would I stumble upon one in my travels, I'd take it and it would be my first weapon of choice (taking the ammunition into account o/c).
But for functionality a melee weapon would most likely be better; (probably) more silent, no ammo, easily accessible and a work-out on top of it. =D
But for functionality a melee weapon would most likely be better; (probably) more silent, no ammo, easily accessible and a work-out on top of it. =D
I put 'other', because defending yourself in a zombie apocalypse is never one item/weapon/tactic.
I would use a firearm, due to the damage and range capability of a firearm over any comparable melee weapon.
However, there will always be times where a firearm is unusable or less efficient- for example, if the gunshot would alert others, a melee weapon is more efficient *in that situation*. Heck, if you have to reload and a zombie is too close, you want a secondary option.
Plus, there's an entire separate category of weaponry- traps. As the old saying goes, you have to sleep sometime...and you don't want a random zombie to interrupt your nap.
Thing is, you'll always want a combination. No matter what your level of skill with a melee weapon, you want a stand-off weapon at least some of the time. No one weapon or tactic will work 100% of the time.
I would use a firearm, due to the damage and range capability of a firearm over any comparable melee weapon.
However, there will always be times where a firearm is unusable or less efficient- for example, if the gunshot would alert others, a melee weapon is more efficient *in that situation*. Heck, if you have to reload and a zombie is too close, you want a secondary option.
Plus, there's an entire separate category of weaponry- traps. As the old saying goes, you have to sleep sometime...and you don't want a random zombie to interrupt your nap.
Thing is, you'll always want a combination. No matter what your level of skill with a melee weapon, you want a stand-off weapon at least some of the time. No one weapon or tactic will work 100% of the time.
Depends on the type of zombie.
Romero type zombies are slow but tend to find you eventually whatever you're doing, so noise is less of an issue here. You need to destroy their brains to stop them, so headshots are the way.
D&D 3E zombies are resistant to piercing damage, so you'll want a slashing melee weapon, like a sword.
Walking dead zombies sense with their weak eyes and ears, so loud noises are bad. They aren't particularly strong, so even a knife works if it's two survivors sneaking up on one zombie. Loud weapons are for when the horde detects you.
A brisk walk in the other direction also works well around these zombies.
Against the infected of L4D, survivors don't stand much of chance so it doesn't matter.
Romero type zombies are slow but tend to find you eventually whatever you're doing, so noise is less of an issue here. You need to destroy their brains to stop them, so headshots are the way.
D&D 3E zombies are resistant to piercing damage, so you'll want a slashing melee weapon, like a sword.
Walking dead zombies sense with their weak eyes and ears, so loud noises are bad. They aren't particularly strong, so even a knife works if it's two survivors sneaking up on one zombie. Loud weapons are for when the horde detects you.
A brisk walk in the other direction also works well around these zombies.
Against the infected of L4D, survivors don't stand much of chance so it doesn't matter.
Look here people.
full power firearms like a mosin nagant have a significant recoil, shoot a lot of zombies and your shoulder will hurt
Besides, for zombies you dont need that much firepower (unless you need the range)
Youll want to use a .22 rimfire.
The humble 22 is commonly used in a childs first gun
Advantages:
Super low recoil (feels like an airgun)
Tiny rounds, you can carry 500 rounds in the same space as 50 rifle rounds
Its everywhere, every gun store and wal-mart has thousands of rounds on a shelf.
Subsonic rounds are available (think silenced firearm without the hard to find silencer)
Its essentially the "just enough" round, just enough power to destroy the brain, but not so much that extended firing will hurt your shoulder, and the report is mild enough to draw fewer zombies.
Disadvantages
Low power, a headshot is the only shot that counts, even on humans, carry a sidearm of higher caliber.
Those looking for range, the 22 will easily do headshots at 50-100 yards in a half decent rifle. it also chambers in pistols for the oh shit moments.
Suggested firearms
Marlin rifle in any form for long range, they make sweet shooters.
Ruger 10/22 with a bullpup stock for fast paced action, 30 rd mags are easy to find, stock up.
Double action revolver with subsonics for indoor and silent work, pick up an expensive one after the apocolypse, they are smoother.
As for peeps drooling over the katana, unless you have training skip it for a falchion, a rough and ready hack and slash weapon for the amateur from medival european history, combines the power of the axe with a broader blade for use on humans. You arent fencing with the zombies, so leave the fine cutlery at home next to the tea set.
full power firearms like a mosin nagant have a significant recoil, shoot a lot of zombies and your shoulder will hurt
Besides, for zombies you dont need that much firepower (unless you need the range)
Youll want to use a .22 rimfire.
The humble 22 is commonly used in a childs first gun
Advantages:
Super low recoil (feels like an airgun)
Tiny rounds, you can carry 500 rounds in the same space as 50 rifle rounds
Its everywhere, every gun store and wal-mart has thousands of rounds on a shelf.
Subsonic rounds are available (think silenced firearm without the hard to find silencer)
Its essentially the "just enough" round, just enough power to destroy the brain, but not so much that extended firing will hurt your shoulder, and the report is mild enough to draw fewer zombies.
Disadvantages
Low power, a headshot is the only shot that counts, even on humans, carry a sidearm of higher caliber.
Those looking for range, the 22 will easily do headshots at 50-100 yards in a half decent rifle. it also chambers in pistols for the oh shit moments.
Suggested firearms
Marlin rifle in any form for long range, they make sweet shooters.
Ruger 10/22 with a bullpup stock for fast paced action, 30 rd mags are easy to find, stock up.
Double action revolver with subsonics for indoor and silent work, pick up an expensive one after the apocolypse, they are smoother.
As for peeps drooling over the katana, unless you have training skip it for a falchion, a rough and ready hack and slash weapon for the amateur from medival european history, combines the power of the axe with a broader blade for use on humans. You arent fencing with the zombies, so leave the fine cutlery at home next to the tea set.
I wasn't arguing against bows, I was pointing out that it's very easy to learn how to use a firearm. I imagine more people know how to use a gun than how to use a bow. Also, without someone to teach you, you might never learn how to use a bow, so many people don't even know enough of the basics to ever get it right. You know how many people I've let shoot my bow who try and grip the arrow between the thumb and fore-finger? Most of them actually. And then they try to draw it with their arms instead of their back. And guns are much easier to get headshot accurate. I've been shooting with my bow for 8 years, I wouldn't trust myself to hit a head-sized target at more than 15 yards(don't get me wrong, I'm still taking it with me, but still). All in all, if you don't know what you're doing with either, and you have access to both, a firearm will do you a lot more good than a bow and arrow.The Heik said:
Bullets are easier and faster to make than arrows, though you won't ever run out of supplies to make arrows. Again, I'm not arguing against bow and arrow, I would use them myself, I'm just saying that firearms are the better choice for most people because they are easier to learn to use, and you will be a lot more accurate at longer ranges even if you have no idea what you're doing. Also, it depends on your situation. While yes, you would theoretically run out of ammo eventually, in my area, there are so many more .22 bullets than there are people that even if 3 of them were fired for each person that died, I think you would still run out of people and zombies before you ran out of ammo, and that's not even counting the higher caliber rounds and the potential to reload.
As to the paint-ball masks, you must use a very different mask from me, I've never gotten so much as a fleck inside my mask. yes they are designed so you can breath but those gaps are small and if the incoming liquid is larger than the gap it will usually stick to the mask instead of landing on your face. Also remember, the paint from a paint-ball is moving with much more force than any blood from a zombie would, I doubt blood would get even into your mask. Also, any protection is better than no protection, I'm still advocating long range firearms as a primary weapon of choice.