View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sat Dec 28, 2024 3:17 pm



This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 421 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 29  Next
 (now a zombie killing effectiveness thread) 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 9:57 am
Posts: 4886
Location: some compy
Post Re: (now a zombie killing effectiveness thread)
Loen wrote:
Outfit would be primairly strong cloth, zombies would have quite some trouble biting through denim, leather, or USGI cargo BDUs.
Leather jacket & biking pants, here I come. Might have to pull together some woollen/leather gauntlets too. Normal denim wouldnt offer much protection against biting though, it sure doesnt offer much against abrasive surfaces.


Sun Nov 01, 2009 8:39 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 7:24 pm
Posts: 20
Post Re: (now a zombie killing effectiveness thread)
Geti wrote:
Leather jacket & biking pants, here I come. Might have to pull together some woollen/leather gauntlets too. Normal denim wouldnt offer much protection against biting though, it sure doesnt offer much against abrasive surfaces.


Assuming we're up against Romero zombies, do this: Get a pair of jeans and try biting a chunk out of them.


Last edited by Loen on Sun Nov 01, 2009 8:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Sun Nov 01, 2009 8:43 pm
Profile
Banned
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 14, 2009 9:22 pm
Posts: 826
Location: Lookin' forward to mocking people on Jan 1st 2013.
Post Re: (now a zombie killing effectiveness thread)
Or simply wear leather pants. They wear out a hell of a lot harder than denim ones.


Sun Nov 01, 2009 8:45 pm
Profile YIM
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:09 am
Posts: 1115
Location: Being The Great Juju
Post Re: (now a zombie killing effectiveness thread)
Loen wrote:
Ragdollmaster wrote:
Well alright, a 'real' Uzi on single-shot mode would be a lot more accurate than a micro-Uzi, I'll admit, but which do you think is more common in Amerikah?

Image


Hi, I don't believe you answered my question at all. Micro Uzis are more common than Uzis in NA, or at least in the US. Thanks for irrelevance.

Loen wrote:
Ragdollmaster wrote:
No, not all are, but the two civilian models of the HK G3, the HK41 and HK91, are both semi-automatic. Admittedly, I hadn't thought of the M14 and I agree that it would be a better choice, since the G3 uses a .30 calibur, not as common a round as the 7.62.


The G3, M14, FN FAL, et cetera all fire the same round. 7.62X51 NATO. It isn't reccomended to fire commercial .308 through them though since it's higher pressure than NATO standard.


The G3, the German battle rifle from the '50s, was originally chambered in different variants for .30 caliber, 7.62x51mm, 7.92x33mm, and 7.65x35mm rounds. The M14, the American battle rifle from the '50s, was chambered solely for 7.62 rounds. Maybe I wasn't talking about a G3 variant that's compatible with 7.62 rounds.

Loen wrote:
Ragdollmaster wrote:
My choice of words wasn't the best in my first post (I did it in a hurry) so let me clarify; what I meant was it's harder to find 12GA buckshot rounds than handgun rounds and they are more cumbersome than handgun rounds or AR rounds.


Everything is cumbersome to a different extent. My pencil is cumbersome because it weighs half a gram and I have to therefore exert force to move it. It's easier to move a handgun round than a shotgun round, ergo, shotgun rounds are more cumbersome than handgun rounds. Do you not understand how modifiers work in the English language?

Loen wrote:
Ragdollmaster wrote:
I'd go for an HK416. As for shotguns, specifically I'd hit up a SPAS 12.


You do realize even the upper receivers for HK-416s cost upward of thousands of dollars and are incredibly rare? The HK-416 is just a hunk of overrated garbage anyway. Also, the the SPAS-12 compared to oh say the Remington 870, Mossberg 500/590, and Saiga 12 shotguns are bulky, excessively heavy, internally complex, unreliable, hard to disassemble, reassemble, and clean.


Firstly, why would you care about the cost of a weapon in this situation? Are you really going to pay in an apocalyptic setting? Secondly, not everyone knows how to maintain a SPAS-12, no, but not everyone knows how to even shoot something like a simple handgun. Some people don't know how to whistle or snap their fingers. What's your point?

(Also you put in "the" two consecutive times in your third line horhorhor. Clearly you are not fit to participate in this discussion.)

Loen wrote:
My personal loadout would be either a SIG-556 or Armalite AR-180b along with 8 Magpul PMags (cheap and much better compared to USGI STANAG mags) and for a sidearm a SIG P226 with 4 extra magazines. Load bearing would be a 5.11 Plate carrier with type III ranking trauma plates (can stop repeated 7.62 NATO fire) in the front and back, appropriate amount Magazine and supply pouches mounted onto the MOLLE system ofcourse. Haven't decided on the backpack or holster yet though. Outfit would be primairly strong cloth, zombies would have quite some trouble biting through denim, leather, or USGI cargo BDUs.


Seems like needless planning from "Load bearing" onward. We're not talking about L4D zombies, it was established earlier that these are the cliche slow moving, mentally degenerated retard zombies which moan and groan loud enough for you to hear them from a block away. Why would you need a protective vest? These aren't terrorists, they're zombies. I don't even see how you could get bitten by a zombie in that scenario, it's not like they can sneak up on you or outrun you, and if you're in any half-decent shelter they won't be able to get at you while you're asleep.

Geti wrote:
something about l4d2 videos


To say that your comment was completely unrelated to what I'd said and also a bit dumb, along with the fact that it was the result of you doing no more than hopping onto the "SPAS-12 sux" bandwagon train, would be an understatement of monumental proportions. So I won't do that. I'll just call you a momentary retard.

Hey, Geti. That was retarded.

EDIT: Oh wait you're drawing something about zombies and a lawnmower. I retract my previous statement and look forward to the result.

Loen wrote:
"I CAN BARELY LIFT A PAPERWEIGHT"


I lol'd.

EDIT:
Geti wrote:
Normal denim wouldnt offer much protection against biting though


Could you bite through denim? Regardless, it's tough enough to bite through bare skin. Not impossible but with denim impeding the way, something that was hard to begin with becomes even harder.


Sun Nov 01, 2009 9:12 pm
Profile
REAL AMERICAN HERO
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 10:25 pm
Posts: 5655
Post Re: (now a zombie killing effectiveness thread)
Loen, you ♥♥♥♥ rock, bro.


Sun Nov 01, 2009 9:54 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 7:24 pm
Posts: 20
Post Re: (now a zombie killing effectiveness thread)
Ragdollmaster wrote:
Loen wrote:
Ragdollmaster wrote:
Well alright, a 'real' Uzi on single-shot mode would be a lot more accurate than a micro-Uzi, I'll admit, but which do you think is more common in Amerikah?

Image


Hi, I don't believe you answered my question at all. Micro Uzis are more common than Uzis in NA, or at least in the US. Thanks for irrelevance.


Putting US barrel length laws into consideration and through my personal experience, Full size 16 inch barrel Uzi carbines are the most common.

Ragdollmaster wrote:
The G3, the German battle rifle from the '50s, was originally chambered in different variants for .30 caliber, 7.62x51mm, 7.92x33mm, and 7.65x35mm rounds. The M14, the American battle rifle from the '50s, was chambered solely for 7.62 rounds. Maybe I wasn't talking about a G3 variant that's compatible with 7.62 rounds.


The ones in ".30 caliber" (god knows what you're referring to), 7.92 Kurz, and 7.62x53 were all experimental prototype models. Next to all modern G3 rifles are in 7.62 NATO.

Ragdollmaster wrote:
Everything is cumbersome to a different extent. My pencil is cumbersome because it weighs half a gram and I have to therefore exert force to move it. It's easier to move a handgun round than a shotgun round, ergo, shotgun rounds are more cumbersome than handgun rounds. Do you not understand how modifiers work in the English language?


No ♥♥♥♥ ♥♥♥♥ sherlock, now you're just resorting to presumptuous insults to make yourself look better?

My point is that unless you're some feeble nerd who can barely lift a paperweight you shouldn't be complaining about some shotgun shells weighing a couple ounces more. Especially considering the firepower and versatality they have.

Ragdollmaster wrote:
Firstly, why would you care about the cost of a weapon in this situation? Are you really going to pay in an apocalyptic setting?


Uh yes you ARE going to pay in a post apocalyptic setting. Especially considering how rare HK-416s are. What, you think you're just going to find that incredibly rare HK-416, which even the upper receivers for are within the dozens in terms of how common they are?

Also, you really think those weapon traders are just gonna let you take their weapons? You also have to put parts availibility into consideration and whether it's really worth it compared to that other weapon that works just as well.

Ragdollmaster wrote:
Secondly, not everyone knows how to maintain a SPAS-12, no, but not everyone knows how to even shoot something like a simple handgun. Some people don't know how to whistle or snap their fingers. What's your point?


My point is compared to a more readily available shotgun that's much more practical, lightweight, cheaper, reliable, easy to disassemble, reassemble, and clean; it's a waste. The only thing SPAS-12s have going for them is collectors' value. They're the Desert Eagle of shotguns.

Ragdollmaster wrote:
(Also you put in "the" two consecutive times in your third line horhorhor. Clearly you are not fit to participate in this discussion.)


God forbid I make a spelling error!

Once again, being a presumptuous foot.

Ragdollmaster wrote:
Seems like needless planning from "Load bearing" onward.


Yeah, how dare I have compartments for storing supplies!

Ragdollmaster wrote:
We're not talking about L4D zombies, it was established earlier that these are the cliche slow moving, mentally degenerated retard zombies which moan and groan loud enough for you to hear them from a block away. Why would you need a protective vest? These aren't terrorists, they're zombies.


Are you forgetting you won't just being going against zombies, but other people also? You really think everyone will be working together? ♥♥♥♥ no, your friends and neighbors will be fighting you over a measly gallon of gasoline or a can of beans.

Ragdollmaster wrote:
I don't even see how you could get bitten by a zombie in that scenario, it's not like they can sneak up on you or outrun you, and if you're in any half-decent shelter they won't be able to get at you while you're asleep.


A common way people get killed is that they're overconfident in their abilities. It's always best to be as prepared as possible and be with atleast one extra person you can trust your life on.

I suggest you do us all who know our ♥♥♥♥ a favour and quit fighting a quarrel you've already lost.


Sun Nov 01, 2009 9:56 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 9:53 pm
Posts: 9
Post Re: (now a zombie killing effectiveness thread)
"YO RILLER, THERE'S A BUCH'O'ZOMBIES OUT TA EAT YA BRAINS!"
Yeah, so what? Lemme unscrew the handle of this broom, fill my bag with canned food and get upstairs. As the stupid f'ers tries to advance on my position, i systematically poke out their eyes with my broomhandle using my right arm, and eat baked beans or industrial ham with my left arm.

"YO RILLER, YOU'RE OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE WITH WHATEVER THE F'CK EQUIPMENT YOU WANT! ZOMBIES STILL WANT YOUR BRAINS"
AKS74U, two soviet messenger-bag-style ammo bags with spare magazines, a duffel-bag full of canned food. I don't even want any clothes, i'll rock out with my cock out. A thing you're missing is, you don't need accuracy to kill these f'ckers. As long as a man-sized target at 200 meters will get a hole in it, you're good to go. All the weight you don't use on guns and ammo and clothes and porn mags (I can wank to my imagination, thank you very much), you can use on canned beans and industrial ham. I'd also like a toyota hilux. Cause they're cool and ♥♥♥♥.

"YO RILLER, WHAT 'BOUT SURVIVAL AND ♥♥♥♥?"
Face it, guys. You spend your f'cking life discussing gatlin shotguns and zombie survival on the internet. You can't ever reproduce, you won't need to f'cking survive. Me, on the other hand, will impress some survivor-girl with my incredible air-guitar skills (did i forgot to mention a iPod with only "The Trooper" on it and a battery powered speaker system? Sorry). And a whole world full of Riller's will be born. And Rillerines.

"YO RILLER, ... Dude... You're f'cking retarded... Go die in a fire please..."
THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID!

"YO RILLER, IN CONCLUSION?"
Zombies are awesome, i'm awesome, you're not.







On the subject of gatlin shotguns, i once saw three 10/22's welded together on a spinning engine, and you can get .22 shotgun shells. Great idea, or greatest idea ever?


PS: The G3 will kill you dead no matter where it hits. It's also not that heavy (i know for i have carried one long and far). But as i said, the less gun you carry, the more canned beans and industrial ham you can carry.


Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:06 pm
Profile
Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 3:53 pm
Posts: 1896
Location: in my little gay bunker
Post Re: (now a zombie killing effectiveness thread)
I just want to point out that if you're going to be fighting slow decomposed corpses that shamble at 1km/h then I sincerely doubt that whatever local armed forces you have won't be able to combat them to extinction. Hell even a semi organized group of your average thugs could probably kill dem ded if they wanted to.


Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:34 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 9:53 pm
Posts: 9
Post Re: (now a zombie killing effectiveness thread)
p3lb0x wrote:
I just want to point out that if you're going to be fighting slow decomposed corpse that shamble at 1km/h then I sincerely doubt that whatever local armed forces you have won't be able to combat them to extinction. Hell even a semi organized group of your average thugs could probably kill dem ded if they wanted to.

No no no. This is all about how much you're gonna assume. First of all, we'll ASSUME a sort of virus or parasite or something that makes people kill other people for their brains exists. We also ASSUME that said virus makes them incredibly slow and incredibly stupid. We also ASSUME it isn't eliminated fairly quickly due to it being ♥♥♥♥ easy to spot. Then we ASSUME it takes over 999‰ the world's population. Then we also ASSUME all armed forces and law enforcement are excluded from the 6794299,129 non-infected people we got left. Then we ASSUME that everyone in this thread aren't infected so we can see who'll live the longest with the incredibly rare weapons they ASSUME they'll find lying right outside the door. Cause that's how the world of imaginary enemies work. And it's ♥♥♥♥ wonderful.


Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:43 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 7:24 pm
Posts: 20
Post Re: (now a zombie killing effectiveness thread)
p3lb0x wrote:
I just want to point out that if you're going to be fighting slow decomposed corpse that shamble at 1km/h then I sincerely doubt that whatever local armed forces you have won't be able to combat them to extinction. Hell even a semi organized group of your average thugs could probably kill dem ded if they wanted to.


This is assuming they overthrow them before they begin infecting hundreds to thousands of them. Not to mention according to George A. Romero's Living dead series; the recently deceased, regardless of cause of death (the brain being intact of course), become the living dead from radiation emitting from a probe which orbited within the Venusian atmosphere. Combating them then would be quite a challenge.


Sun Nov 01, 2009 10:50 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:09 am
Posts: 1115
Location: Being The Great Juju
Post Re: (now a zombie killing effectiveness thread)
Loen wrote:
Ragdollmaster wrote:
Firstly, why would you care about the cost of a weapon in this situation? Are you really going to pay in an apocalyptic setting?


Uh yes you ARE going to pay in a post apocalyptic setting. Especially considering how rare HK-416s are. What, you think you're just going to find that incredibly rare HK-416, which even the upper receivers for are within the dozens in terms of how common they are?


Unless close to everyone is dead. I said about a page ago when talking about living in a department store (or something along those lines) that I understood the little situation here to be a "HOLY CRAPNOODLES 6 BILLION PEOPLE ARE INFECTED GET IN THE CAR" If you found an empty gun shop, you wouldn't have to pay anything. And in a rapidly onset and high-stress situation like this, not a lot of people would keep their cool and think rationally enough to pour into shops etc. There would probably be a fairly low ratio of survivors/looters to infected.

Ragdollmaster wrote:
Also, you really think those weapon traders are just gonna let you take their weapons? You also have to put parts availibility into consideration and whether it's really worth it compared to that other weapon that works just as well.


Above. You wouldn't need a weapon trader if you found a gun store.

Loen wrote:
My point is compared to a more readily available shotgun that's much more practical, lightweight, cheaper, reliable, easy to disassemble, reassemble, and clean; it's a waste. The only thing SPAS-12s have going for them is collectors' value. They're the Desert Eagle of shotguns.


BUT THE DESERT EAGLE IS A GOOD GUN

Loen wrote:
God forbid I make a spelling error! Once again, being a presumptuous foot.


In what way? That was more or less a pinch of satire tossed in. It's not like the world's fate depends on how serious this discussion is.

Loen wrote:
Yeah, how dare I have compartments for storing supplies!


Imagine how indignant people without pockets would be. Here you are, toting along not only with ideally a pair of jeans/leather pants/whatever you said you would wear, but you also have a holster and tactical vest! This is the type of thing that might get you shot.

Loen wrote:
Are you forgetting you won't just being going against zombies, but other people also? You really think everyone will be working together? ♥♥♥♥ no, your friends and neighbors will be fighting you over a measly gallon of gasoline or a can of beans.


Well again, I was thinking of the darker, 'holy crap everyone is dead' scenario. I imagine the few humans left alive would be willing to settle their differences in lieu of blowing the ♥♥♥♥ out of each other and attracting a horde of B-Movie undead monsters.

Loen wrote:
A common way people get killed is that they're overconfident in their abilities. It's always best to be as prepared as possible and be with atleast one extra person you can trust your life on.


I wasn't trying to seem overconfident. I wouldn't be running around like Resident Evil characters and killing anything that moved, I'm simply stating that if you were focused it be pretty damn hard to get attacked by zombies, and so it wouldn't exactly be necessary to be as prepared as you were. True, it's best to think out everything you can, but I just don't see the point.

Loen wrote:
I suggest you do us all who know our ♥♥♥♥ a favour and quit fighting a quarrel you've already lost.


I find it ironic that after calling me presumptuous (AND TWICE, AT THAT, YOU SCOUNDREL) you go and say something as unfounded as that :roll:

Long story short; if there's enough people left alive for there to be a functioning society of survivors, as you paint it, chances are the military is still largely operative and as p3lb0x brought out they would quickly eradicate an infection. Now, if somehow enough of the military was slaughtered so that the surviving members couldn't do any rescue missions and the like, I think it would be safe to assume that normal civilians who were closer to the infection than the military would be all but wiped out.

Loen wrote:
This is assuming they overthrow them before they begin infecting hundreds to thousands of them.


That's a much more reasonable and probable assumption than "trained, armed, heavily protected and organized forces will die but civilians won't"?

Loen wrote:
the recently deceased, regardless of cause of death (the brain being intact of course), become the living dead from radiation emitting from a probe which orbited within the Venusian atmosphere.


You're citing from a book series? What makes Romero's perception of zombies more accurate than say the authors' from World War Z or the Zombie Survival Guide? We've only in this thread established that the 'zombies' are the slow moving dim-witted cliches from old movies, and that they infect others by biting/attacking.

And... the Venusian Atmosphere? Is that the atmosphere of Venus? Why would there be an orbiting probe there that emits radiation powerful enough to supposedly revive recently dead humans on Earth? That's a very far-fetched theory even when compared to the typical "virus infection" or "mutation" explanation for zombies.

Ergo... your planning is useless, and your perception of society (gun traders etc) is an unrealistic one since the military would rein in control of looters and traders. OR; the military is all dead and there's maybe a few dozen survivors scattered across the US, who are free to take food and weapons to their wont as nothing impedes them. The few that find other survivors won't have to dispute about anything as there's plenty of supplies in an entire city for two or three people.

This would mean that a lot of your refutes to my points, eg "Expensive guns", "Need protection from people", don't really apply to the situation at hand. You can't mix and match scenarios. Pick one or the other; either there's very few people left and nothing but zombies deters survivors or there's an entire underground society of hostiles that you need protection against and who control most if not all the supplies, which the military will bring under control.

Your argument and refutes are flawed and inconsistent. Unless of course you're proposing it's a realistic concept that an entire nation's military force can be wiped out by slow moving animated corpses while a decent portion of the nation's untrained and dimwitted (this is America, after all) civilians, at least enough to form trades and still worry about money, will survive. In which case you're just being dumb about the whole affair. Pick one or the other =|


Sun Nov 01, 2009 11:12 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 7:24 pm
Posts: 20
Post Re: (now a zombie killing effectiveness thread)
Oh my ♥♥♥♥ god you are a completely clueless idiot. Have you even WATCHED the living dead series? I mean god damn, by this point you're just trolling.


Last edited by Loen on Sun Nov 01, 2009 11:24 pm, edited 2 times in total.



Sun Nov 01, 2009 11:20 pm
Profile
REAL AMERICAN HERO
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 10:25 pm
Posts: 5655
Post Re: (now a zombie killing effectiveness thread)
if a gun is expensive

there are not a lot of them

as in, good luck finding your spas-12 and hk416 and gold plated deagle brand deagle


Sun Nov 01, 2009 11:22 pm
Profile
Loose Canon
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 11:07 pm
Posts: 2992
Location: --------------->
Post Re: (now a zombie killing effectiveness thread)
This the the "zombie killing effectiveness" thread. Not the "let douchebaggy ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ make a plan to survive a zombie apocalypse, covering every detail and nuance possible, assuming we have airlifted supplies specifically tailored to us, and dropped right at our feet" thread. There is no way that that would fit.

Loen wrote:
Oh my ♥♥♥♥ god you are a completely clueless idiot. Have you even WATCHED the living dead series? I mean god damn, by this point you're just trolling.

First: We established that the zombies are clinically retarded walking meatbags who want to eat brains in a feeble attempt to replace their own retarded brains with non retarded ones. I don't know, nor care what evil dead is. None of this is strictly based upon on movie, book, or other piece of fiction.

Second:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pot_calling_the_kettle_black


Sun Nov 01, 2009 11:26 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 9:53 pm
Posts: 9
Post Re: (now a zombie killing effectiveness thread)
Well... You know Fallout, right? I think it's that kind of society Loen speaks of. Take that, remove the slavers and add more zombies, less supermutants and mutants and ♥♥♥♥. Keep a couple of bandits and raiders for good measure, though. Kind of optimistic to think such a society would form in such short time, but who cares. It'd be more fun that way.

Disregarding that, my epic survival plan, visualized.
Image


Sun Nov 01, 2009 11:31 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.   [ 421 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 29  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.
[ Time : 0.063s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]