Sign in or 
Share this
RainofMails |
20. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 12:43 AM EDT
One zombie is not much a threat. Why would you risk running straight into a mob of several dozen instead of just putting an axe in it's brain?
Do you find this valuable?
|
Carnack |
21. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 12:45 AM EDT
"One zombie is not much a threat. Why would you risk running straight into a mob of several dozen instead of just putting an axe in it's brain?"Because it is just as easy to go around and avoid engaging because at those ranges one wrong more or a variable can kill you. Do you find this valuable? |
TreeLegs |
22. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 12:50 AM EDT
"One zombie is not much a threat. Why would you risk running straight into a mob of several dozen instead of just putting an axe in it's brain?"That's the difference between you and me then. I consider every zombie at a high threat level. I could be grabbed, bitten, contaminated from splash, too focused on the one zombie that I didn't see the one or dozen around the corner. A lot of things can happen once you decide to initiate combat. I'd rather avoid the situation entirely. Do you find this valuable? |
|
RainofMails |
23. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 1:01 AM EDT
It's not so much that I view them as zero threat as that I view a small number of zombies as a manageable threat and running around all the time as a huge threat.Running along a known route to a known destination like a fort or an escape vehicle you're 99% sure will be safe is fine, running in the opposite direction from every zombie you see when you're in unknown territory is incredibly dangerous. Your chances of being killed by one slow zombie are really small compared to your chances of twisting your ankle, slipping and hitting your head, or just getting too tired to keep running right before you run into several more zombies is not worth risking. Not even mentioning that if you're carrying a full pack, a rifle, a handgun, some tools, spare mags, a light, etc you're going to either have to be in amazing shape to run any distance in it. Which is great if you're active duty military or a full-time athlete but not so great if you're out of shape like most Americans are. I would be doing well to run more than a hundred feet without even bringing gear into the equation. Do you find this valuable? |
|
TreeLegs |
24. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 1:13 AM EDT
"It's not so much that I view them as zero threat as that I view a small number of zombies as a manageable threat and running around all the time as a huge threat.Yeah, but it's always that 1% that gets you in the end. There is a difference between retreat and running for your f**king life. Running with no direction in a place you've never been can result in disaster. You should plan your routes before just blindly heading off towards a destination to include escape routes if things get rough, Running to a destination can cause the same injuries as running away from a threat. If you can't run more than 100ft without your gear, I don't have high hopes for your stamina in melee combat. I can see more out of shape people getting bit by trying to engage a zombie in melee than getting out of the area. Do you find this valuable? |
|
RainofMails |
25. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 1:25 AM EDT
I've done strenuous 2 hour workouts at the dojo with no problems. It's a whole different kind of activity than sprinting. You don't have to be in great shape to swing an axe once and it's not like a zombie is going to dodge or parry until you get tired.
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
TreeLegs |
26. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 1:45 AM EDT
"I've done strenuous 2 hour workouts at the dojo with no problems. It's a whole different kind of activity than sprinting. You don't have to be in great shape to swing an axe once and it's not like a zombie is going to dodge or parry until you get tired."Ok, you were talking about sprinting not running. That's two different things. Sprinting is that running for your f***ing life thing I was talking about. If you have to get out of Dodge that fast, you're probably going to have to ditch your bag to reach that kind of speed to get away. So were you talking about sprinting to your location when you said running? Sprinting anywhere other than to find cover is a bad idea in my book. Trying to all out sprint then engage in combat severly cuts your ability to do such unless you've trained for it. Your ability to aim, strike and move is limited after blasting through your stamina. You need to manage your energy to get to your location and still have enough to fight or work if the need arises. This is even taught in military movements. Though they may not be parrying you, a tossed up arm trying to grab you might deflect a blow or slow it down causing it to be eneffective. Remeber, your adversary doesn't care about pain. A broken or severed limb isn't going to stop it from still trying to eat you. Do you find this valuable? |
|
Carnack |
27. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 1:56 AM EDT
In addition at those sorts of ranges one mistake can kill you. Missing a shot on a target 30 yards away still leaves you wriggle room.Missing a slash at 3 feet away leaves you open to an enemy that is in the position to press the advantage. Trips, stumbles, and glancing blows all invite a myriad of problems but all it takes is one to ruin your day. And your footwork also matters. At those ranges you will need to block or dodge blows as failure will result in a wound. Do you find this valuable? |
|
RainofMails |
28. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 2:16 AM EDT
I would rather risk melee with one zombie than risk fleeing into a mob of them with that zombie still behind me. I think that maximizes my chances of survival. If you want to retreat from every encounter I won't tell you you're an idiot, because you may be right. But I'd advise you to make sure that anyone you are traveling/foraging with knows you are going to disappear at the first sign of trouble so they don't expect you to have their back.,
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
TreeLegs |
29. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 2:44 AM EDT
" I'd advise you to make sure that anyone you are traveling/foraging with knows you are going to disappear at the first sign of trouble so they don't expect you to have their back.,"If I was with a group, I'd advise them to avoid all combat unless it is absolutely neccisary. If it isn't, then we should try to go around the threat if possible. Now if the group wants to "clean up" as we go along, then I'll do that. I'm confident in my abilities with melee and firearms that this doesn't bug me. I don't flee I retreat. One is collected and controlled while the other is a save yourself run for the hills move. I have enough tactical ground movement experience in urban and forested areas that I know my options and I know how to plan my movements to maximize safety and speed through hostile territory. My team would be well enformed as to the route and the rally points if we were to be seperated from one another. When it comes to combat its not all guns and blades. It's strategy and part of that strategy is making sure my team makes their goal with everyone present. I always have my team mates back and that means that I have to be willing to go out there and put my life on the line for them. Even when they do something asinine like walk up to what they thought was a loner zombie to take it out even though there were more around the corner he didn't see when we could've used a side street and gotten around the entire mess. Our group would be weaker because now we had to use ammo we could've save, supplies had to be left to retreat quickly and we are out one guy that wanted to play billy bad*** for his amusement. Rambo is for Hollywood. Avoiding conflict when your enemy has an unknown number of people saves lives and accomplishes the mission. Do you find this valuable? |
|
RainofMails |
30. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 2:48 AM EDT
Your enemy doesn't have an unknown number of people. They have roughly six billion. Eventually you're going to have to kill a lot of them. Better to do it when you catch one walking around alone than wait for a thousand of them you could have killed one or two at a time to find your base camp.
Do you find this valuable?
|
Braydonn |
31. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 8:32 AM EDT
| Post edited: Mar 12 2012, 8:33 AM EDT
It only takes one mistake during CQB to get yourself killed or your friend killed though, so there is roughly chance for six billion mistakes as well! Why make one when you can make none? If you play with fire sooner or later you are going to get burnt.Although it depends really on where you are, if the lone walker was close to my BOL and if the safety of my group was at risk I would have a team of guys scout it for a bit and then move in on it. I haven't read all the posts on this thread so I am unsure if you addressed what I have just said, sorry if so. Do you find this valuable? |
LJ126 |
32. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 11:06 AM EDT
I always hear "running out of ammunition" being cited as a reason why melee weapons are advantageous over firearms... How many zombies (raiders?) are you planning on dealing with? Planning on being part of the clean-up crew? You'll want a rifle (and bayonet) for that.Who here, who owns firearms, doesn't also stockpile ammunition? I have a fair amount, and yes, while it *could* run out, it would take a LONG time. I'm not planning on shooting it out all day long for three days straight - if crap hit the fan, I doubt I'd average out to shooting more than a cartridge a day. I will last for decades at that rate with my current ammo stocks. That's a fact. Incidentally, bladed weapons require maintenance and also have a life expectancy as well. Broken swords happen, even amongst the best swords. Take one skilled rifleman and hand him even a rudimentary bolt action rifle, and he would reduce a line of pikemen long before they presented a challenge to him. A person armed with a revolver will absolutely destroy someone holding a sword. Archers would fare better against riflemen than bladed-weapon users, especially if they applied sound tactics (they can fire up and over things like buildings, hills, etc., where rifles are essentially line of sight.) Nothing changes the fact that while bladed weapons are lethal, they were replaced by firearms in modern military and defensive applications for a reason. If swords were truly better, the US Army, Marine Corps, and Navy SEALS would be fielding them instead of the various small arms they use now. It's that simple. Indiana Jones sums this up nicely: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3I_Ds2ytz4o 1 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
TreeLegs |
33. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 11:45 AM EDT
"I always hear "running out of ammunition" being cited as a reason why melee weapons are advantageous over firearms... How many zombies (raiders?) are you planning on dealing with? Planning on being part of the clean-up crew? You'll want a rifle (and bayonet) for that.Love that clip lol. Right on pretty much everything. Thats why I love my big ol Mosin w/ bayonet. If I run out of ammo, I can strap that bayonet on and have a pole arm lol. Do you find this valuable? |
|
LJ126 |
34. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 12:36 PM EDT
I will offer the concession that a sword (as that's the "blade" I'm assume to which we're referring in the OP) beats the living Hell out of being barehanded. It's ability to cause harm is virtually unquestioned; I dare say that more lives have been taken with a sword or spear than by firearm.However, most swords have some deficiencies. They have almost no secondary purpose. Can't really hunt with them. Can't really depend on them to clear trails. Can't chop wood, for long anyway, before it breaks. They require a lot of maintenance after use on live targets; refer back to texts from the Civil War on the proper care of a cavalry sabre after combat, it is outlined there. For this reason, I think a hatchet or tomahawk is probably more versatile, as is the machete. Those do other things on top of being useful as a weapon. Do you find this valuable? |
Zee-Man |
35. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 1:14 PM EDT
"For this reason, I think a hatchet or tomahawk is probably more versatile, as is the machete. Those do other things on top of being useful as a weapon."Another thing to mention is cost. A usable sword's cost is rather high. An axe is much more reasonable cost, as is a hatchet. Machetes can be inexpensive to costly. Tomahawks tend to be costly. However, even the best of them tend to be a fraction of the cost of a real sword. Truthfully, I do not have the budget to spend on a sword considering its limited use. I am skilled in the use of swords, but considering there are other melee weapons that can be had for very low cost, I intend to use my budget to get a firearm or two. Do you find this valuable? |
|
Carnack |
36. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 1:57 PM EDT
"Your enemy doesn't have an unknown number of people. They have roughly six billion. Eventually you're going to have to kill a lot of them. Better to do it when you catch one walking around alone than wait for a thousand of them you could have killed one or two at a time to find your base camp."No actually you won't. There's a reason why humans seek dry, warm places in the cold, and cool dry places in heat. Our flesh suffers when it's overdamp or too dry. That's mechanical. So this puts an expiration date on how long a person can last with no shelter. Get the Kill Em All thoughts out of your head. The goal is to prolong your life and take the safest possible steps to do so. Going after random walkers is not it. You go after targets that present likely threats in the near future and stay low and quiet otherwise. Because the more fights you get into the more chances you get to roll snake eyes. And you don't get do-overs. Do you find this valuable? |
CallsignPyro |
37. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 2:27 PM EDT
"I've done strenuous 2 hour workouts at the dojo with no problems. It's a whole different kind of activity than sprinting. You don't have to be in great shape to swing an axe once and it's not like a zombie is going to dodge or parry until you get tired."This is why i do weight lifting & parcour training as well as putting your BOB on & running everyday to condition your body to the stresses. Weigh your bob, empty & full of gear, subtract to find out exact weight of gear ionside, then weigh down the bag & run with it, youll be able to run longer with it on & faster with it off after you have conditioned yourself. Do you find this valuable? |
ubersoldat |
38. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 7:40 PM EDT
would you rather face a horde of undead cannibals with the ability to engage from distance or be forced to cope with them at arms length every time you face them?
Do you find this valuable?
|
|
RainofMails |
39. RE: guns or blades
Mar 12 2012, 8:22 PM EDT
Tomahawks are not that bad, you can get a good one (made by SOG or Cold Steel) for under 30 dollars on amazon. I have had a SOG fast hawk (a smaller lighter version of their tactical tomahawk) and have been completely satisfied with it. Just because you CAN spend several hundred dollars on something doesn't mean you NEED to spend that much to get a usable piece of gear.
Do you find this valuable?
|
