[Dorkneetah]

A machine gun with unlimited amo would be wonderful but never going to happen. I think my metal base ball bat will do just fine . I also know where the local hunting shop is, make it there I pretty much have everything I need as long as it hasn't been pillaged yet.

[Sam]

UniformSierra, on 02 March 2012 - 06:01 AM, said:

A spear and a sledgehammer!

What better weapon could you ask for? All you need to be is somewhat in shape and imagine the damage those could do all while staying silent?! You don't need ammo, you rarely if ever need repairs, and it's sure to kill.

The spear is sure to work. We've seen how Shane and Rick have stabbed walkers through the skulls with knives. With a spear you could do it from a much further distance. Granted you could only take on 2 zombies at a time, or 3 if you're Daryl. You can't go wrong with a sledge hammer as a backup. Any hit to the head would cause knock-out of instant death due to blunt force trauma. You just can't afford to miss at that range, which shouldn't be too much of a problem though.

What do you folks think of these old weapons? Which would you chose for this apocalypse?

A SPEAR and SLEDGEHAMMER?!! Are you even being serious with these suggestions? If you are then consider yourself one of the first to die when the ZA strikes.

Those would be terrible choices. The truth of the matter is, you would want weapons that are brutally efficient yet require fairly minimal effort to use and keep in usable condition. This rules out MANY types of firearms due to the scacity of their particular types of ammunition. If you feel it absolutely necessary to carry a firearm I'm going to make what might seem like an odd suggestion. M&P 15-22 with a sling permitting a muzzle downward carrying configuration. It's a lightweight AR15 clone that is extremely easy to use, relatively quiet and it shoots the most plentiful ammunition on planet Earth - .22 LR. Now before you suggest that's not powerful enough, consider this. The .22 LR is very accurate and easy to keep on target due to no recoil and little muzzle rise. It has plenty of power to reliably penetrate the skulls of Z's at 50 yards and even beyond. It may take 2 rounds in some cases but so what? They're quick, quiet and efficient. Not to mention that you can easily carry a box of 550 rounds on your person and barely notice the weight.

The other weapon you need to have is a machete of sufficient weight to reliably penetrate the head and/or neck of a Z. Sharpness is a secondary factor. Provided the machete has some semblance of an edge on the blade it will get the job done. this is really all you would need. As long as you can keep the 25 round magazine of the M&P 15-22 filled with half decent ammo like Federal you won't experience failure to fires (I haven't had any in 1000s of rounds through my own M&P 15-22). I would definitely raid all of the retail ammo outlets I could find and get a cache of at least 10,000 rounds built up.... You'd only need about 20 boxes...

Stick with me. I'm your Zombie Apocalypse team leader and with me you'll not only survive, you'll kick ass while doing it.

Edited by Sam, 31 March 2012 - 11:45 PM.

[jirv]

There are no corner street gun stores in Australia and I honestly think just going old school stats would work. Your enemy feels no fear and never gets tired but at the same time has no ability to think let alone use advance tactics there for. Using age old techniques surely would work I mean these are your run of the mill standard zombies. The methods to killing them would not change even if this was 1000(s) years ago.

Ultimately even muskets could be effective to a degree. I just watched  a video of a guy firing a musket three times in 47 seconds, 20 people alternating fire means you'd be having 10 people firing every 10 seconds. Use this method with modern guns and you see that the zombie kills stack up quite quickly. There are more bullets than people in this world.

Just out of  curiosity .22 caliber guns seem to be the go to what would go nicely with .22?

Hunting bows and hunting crossbows?

Edited by jirv, 01 April 2012 - 02:27 PM.

[Sam]

I think the crossbow is very overglorified in TWD television series. It's really not nearly as practical as Daryl makes it seem... Running out of bolts would be a major issue not to mention the potential infection/contamination issues you would face when trying to recover used bolts. Crossbows and compounds would be useful in certain specialized circumstances and I would definitely keep them available as options if possible. For everyday use though I would much rather carry a large bladed hunting knife, machete and .22 semi auto rifle as I've previously mentioned.

[Claw Hammer]

I would go for a .22LR semi-auto rifle with 50-round mag, with subsonic rounds and a silencer.   After all, precise head shots and not conventional stopping power are what counts in the ZA.  .22LR has the extra benefit of being low recoil and you can stock up on loads just about anywhere, it's such a common round.  The relatively quiet silenced rounds would lower the risk of the report drawing a herd on my position.

For close-quarters work I would take ruger .22LR pistol.  And, as a back up, a .22 12-shot revolver: wheel-gun as last resort.

For backup, a blunt instrument like a trench mace - don't like edged weapons that might get wedged/stuck in the first Biter and leave me exposed to the others.  Michonne's katana is pretty awesome, though.  Machete is cool too.


'Course I would also need a Kalashnikov to take care of the human 'predators'!

Last but not least: reinforced motorcycle leathers all over to guard against bites - helmet and facemask too.  Extra duct-tape around the wrists, forearms and ankles... and neck!!!!  And the faceguard will stop the gunk/blowback from splashing me in the mouth/eyes... score!!!

[jirv]

Claw hammer nailed it on the spot (lol)

We have weapons yes but what about the rest of the gear? I mean this is awesome. Is this guy just playing around or do the 25th actually run around with this sort of gear?

[Shola]

why are guns such popular choices?

time and time again they prove to be the worst weapon choice.

Unless of course ur in a videogame and u can pilfer ammo from random boxes and barrels.

[jirv]

Well the learning curve and usability would be higher for melee weapons due to the fact that they rely heavily on strength and place the wielder in harms way however with correct training and right gear to go with it there is nothing I would rather have than a line of well trained spears. If you could funnel a horde into a narrow area say any main city street you could just got all Greek style and form a phalanx. An impenetrable wall of steel and humans have a few people on the roof tops armed with anything rifles, rocks, rocket launches anything you can use.

There are many ways to survive the zombie apocalypse I prefer culling all the bastards.

Edited by jirv, 04 April 2012 - 03:59 AM.

[Shola]

jirv, on 04 April 2012 - 03:58 AM, said:

Well the learning curve and usability would be higher for melee weapons due to the fact that they rely heavily on strength and place the wielder in harms way however with correct training and right gear to go with it there is nothing I would rather have than a line of well trained spears. If you could funnel a horde into a narrow area say any main city street you could just got all Greek style and form a phalanx. An impenetrable wall of steel and humans have a few people on the roof tops armed with anything rifles, rocks, rocket launches anything you can use.

There are many ways to survive the zombie apocalypse I prefer culling all the bastards.

I'm not too sure about that.

The learning curve for firearms is way steeper than that of a bladed weapon.

Any idiot knows how to hit someone with a blade but one has to be trained to use a gun. Even trained users waste bullets.

I take it that you are approaching the issue as though it is sword battle.

Its not its a hack and slash fest where the victims are slow moving meat sacks, One instinctively knows if a weapon is too unwieldy within moments of holding it. Any fullgrown adult knows how to use a machete or a hatchet.

The weapons that were inside the sack in season 2 was the best kkind of melee

[Sam]

Shola, on 04 April 2012 - 10:53 PM, said:

I'm not too sure about that.

The learning curve for firearms is way steeper than that of a bladed weapon.

Any idiot knows how to hit someone with a blade but one has to be trained to use a gun. Even trained users waste bullets.

I take it that you are approaching the issue as though it is sword battle.

Its not its a hack and slash fest where the victims are slow moving meat sacks, One instinctively knows if a weapon is too unwieldy within moments of holding it. Any fullgrown adult knows how to use a machete or a hatchet.

The weapons that were inside the sack in season 2 was the best kkind of melee

I disagree. The learning curve for a simple semi auto rifle is less than learning how to effectively employ a bladed weapon against aggressive, moving subjects. In many cases people simply wouldn't have nearly enough strength to penetrate deeply to produce kills. A protected position and a simple to operate semi auto rifle wil produce plentiful Z kills even in the hands of a relative novice.

Edited by Sam, 04 April 2012 - 11:11 PM.

[Shola]

Sam, on 04 April 2012 - 11:11 PM, said:

I disagree. The learning curve for a simple semi auto rifle is less than learning how to effectively employ a bladed weapon against aggressive, moving subjects. In many cases people simply wouldn't have nearly enough strength to penetrate deeply to produce kills. A protected position and a simple to operate semi auto rifle wil produce plentiful Z kills even in the hands of a relative novice.

They are zombies. Not ninjas.

A simplistic gun like the mp5 would be easy to use but it will prove useless after only a few kills but even so, none of the guns mentioned prior are relatively easy to use at all.

[Sam]

Shola, on 05 April 2012 - 06:58 AM, said:

They are zombies. Not ninjas.

A simplistic gun like the mp5 would be easy to use but it will prove useless after only a few kills but even so, none of the guns mentioned prior are relatively easy to use at all.

The MP5?!! Easier than a Ruger 10-22 or my S&W 15-22 or any AR15? The MP5 is less accurate than those options but it would still be easy. People are so delusional... It doesn't matter that they're slow moving zombies... They often travel in hordes and that spells big danger for anyone that exposes themselves by trying to cut one down. I'd carry a bladed weapon too but it would be a secondary option only in most cases.

Let me ask you something. Have you ever tried to split firewood logs? You ever notice how easy it is to miss your mark when you're swinging a splitting maul or axe using two hands?... Yet the log is STATIONARY and sitting right there on the ground in front of you! It's not moving or trying to consume large quantities of your flesh. Now imagine swinging a machete or sword at a moving beast that knows no fear and will stop for nothing. It's not as easy as you'd like to think.

Stay concealed and pick off the zombies with a rifle and when you need to get out in the open be prepared to strike quickly and then move even faster.

Edited by Sam, 06 April 2012 - 07:10 AM.

[Shola]

Sam, on 06 April 2012 - 07:10 AM, said:

The MP5?!! Easier than a Ruger 10-22 or my S&W 15-22 or any AR15? The MP5 is less accurate than those options but it would still be easy. People are so delusional... It doesn't matter that they're slow moving zombies... They often travel in hordes and that spells big danger for anyone that exposes themselves by trying to cut one down. I'd carry a bladed weapon too but it would be a secondary option only in most cases.

Let me ask you something. Have you ever tried to split firewood logs? You ever notice how easy it is to miss your mark when you're swinging a splitting maul or axe using two hands?... Yet the log is STATIONARY and sitting right there on the ground in front of you! It's not moving or trying to consume large quantities of your flesh. Now imagine swinging a machete or sword at a moving beast that knows no fear and will stop for nothing. It's not as easy as you'd like to think.

Stay concealed and pick off the zombies with a rifle and when you need to get out in the open be prepared to strike quickly and then move even faster.

Think about what you're saying for a minute....

You're saying you would engage a horde of zombies regardless of the weapon you're carrying?

I'm just asking because the numbers of bodies will outnumber the amount of killing bullets you will fire. That's to say that after you finish firing there will still be Zombies so you just wasted your ammo.

No.

If there's a horde; u flee. You don't engage.

That's Zombie Survival 101. The risk to benefit ratio is way too unbalanced with the risk being at 99 and the benefit at 1.

There's no point, u will never be able to kill them all.

The fact that you say your bladed weapon will be your SECONDARY and your firearm will be your primary boggles my mind.

It goes against common sense no? Even Rick and the others recognized the folly in such a strategy and opted to rely mainly on melee weaponry upon attaining the bag of blades.

Guns are only useful on rare situations like trying to save a buddy or stifling a surprise attack all which should be rare if you're doing things right.

I don't see the point of relying on firearms since the situations you guys postulate are fallacious to begin with. A gun might be more useful against a horde but you shouldn't even be engaging hordes to begin with.

And in regards to your melee analysis; I said hatchet not axe. An axe is very heavy in order to aid in the force of the vertical cutting motion and that is the very reason why it is inaccurate, the majority of the force in it's downward trajectory is gravity not your own power so you have no control.

If you're saying this phenomena will translate similarly to an individual swing a machete or a hatchet at someone's face then lol @ u.

If you're telling me that you can't strike a zombie in the head with a single handed bladed weapon with relative ease then it's no wonder you're against the idea of melee weaponry cuz that's just crazy talk.

Lastly, what's with this sniping scenario u brought up in the last sentence?

Only two situations I can see that happening.

1. A lone zombie wandering in the distance a la Andrea fail.
If that's the case, why waste ammo shooting at it when u can just walk up to it and slice it? Thats what everyone was going to do anyway until they found out it was Merle's brother. They specifically decided to kill the potential zombie with melee rather than shooting it. Why do u think that is? U think they forgot about the rifle that was on the trailer? Lol ur bugging dude.

2. a horde of zombies wandering towards you.
And if that's the case you might as well flee because you are never going to make a dent within their numbers and at the end of the day you're just wasting precious ammo.

Edited by Shola, 06 April 2012 - 03:31 PM.

[Goat]

Give me a sturdy utility machete and a ball-peen hammer to slip into a beltloop in case the blade on the primary weapon breaks.  I'm not a huge fan of guns for the zombie apocalypse, but I wouldn't turn down a pistol or shotgun either.  Ammo is precious, and headshots are difficult in combat.  A gun would be something to use only with the luxury of distance or the necessity of opening up a path for flight.

[Sam]

I would not take on a horde of zombies unless I had a belt fed machine gun.

My point was and is that people dramatically overestimate their abilities and the bladed weapon argument might sound great on paper but doing it in real life would be significantly more difficult. A lot of people on here talk like martial arts movie fans...enamored with how cool it looks but not recognizing the practical limitations. You ever notice how you don't see that fancy martial arts crap in UFC fights? Because its not practical in real life scenarios. This concept would also apply to some of the sword play that people envision themselves enacting on zombies... Just not as practical or easy as they thought.

[Sam]

And another thing... People on here talk about the zombies like they're completely passive and you can just walk up to them and make mincemeat out of them... Sure in some cases they're so rotted they're easy prey... Or stuck in the mud like the one Carl found... But in most cases they will be actively engaging you and making the task of capping them in neck or skull that much more difficult.

[Shola]

@Sam

Again, u will never be able to decimate a whole horde of zombies. You said that bladed weapons were no good because u will be limited if you engaged a horde of zombies now u are saying u would only engage a horde with a belt fed machine gun.
*sigh*
My point is that if I had the choice between a bladed weapon and a firearm, I would choose the former.

Now in regards to your second comment, I have yet to see a zombie dodge an attack and you don't have to chop them to bits when using a bladed weapon.

A simple deep penetration does the job so this implication that I'm saying I can slice and dice multiple zombies like Wolverine is unfounded.

[Shane-Walsh]

My weapon of choice would be my Benelli SuperNova Tactical 12 Gauge with a pistol grip. Buckshot and slugs are the ammo of choice.

[Njbudman81]

Drill nurse, on 28 March 2012 - 09:09 PM, said:

Get rid of the optics.  Battary will surely die when your engaging the most bad guys

It has dual lithium cr123 batteries. They say the sight can be on a year and still work. Plus the grip has 2 spare batteries in it. When they all die the magpul flip up sights work with the halographic sight on there. The battery issues were with the ones that used standard batteries.

http://www.eotech-in...ucts/sights/516

[p230]

This is a tricky question because it depends on where you live.  We have several posters from places other than the USA.  Here is good old America  firearms/ammunition and the training to use them is more common although it vaires from place to place.  We have plenty in my part of the world.   Also you will want a combination of weapons.  After all if 3-4 people came towards me in the ZA with hammers/axes they won't be backed off easily by the same thing....now Mr. 9mm will give them all pause.  Diffenent weapons for different apps.  I already have on hand an assortment of firearms, bayonets and things like hammers and other tool that would come in handy.  Learning how to use something like a spear would come in handy beacuse they are easy to make and work well to defend a static/reinforced postition if you have several survivors.  Save the ammo it you are poking them through chain link fence.  No really wrong answers for this question since everything can break/dull/run out ouf gas/ammo.  All these are good things to think about in case of natural disaster as the folk in the Dallas are are finding out.  In the last few day many looters have been arrested according to the news I listened to on the way to work.  Plan ahead and you won't be dissapointed.

[Sam]

Shola, on 07 April 2012 - 05:09 PM, said:

@Sam

Again, u will never be able to decimate a whole horde of zombies. You said that bladed weapons were no good because u will be limited if you engaged a horde of zombies now u are saying u would only engage a horde with a belt fed machine gun.
*sigh*
My point is that if I had the choice between a bladed weapon and a firearm, I would choose the former.

Now in regards to your second comment, I have yet to see a zombie dodge an attack and you don't have to chop them to bits when using a bladed weapon.

A simple deep penetration does the job so this implication that I'm saying I can slice and dice multiple zombies like Wolverine is unfounded.

Bladed weapon over firearm? Only if you could stage yourself in a relatively uninfested area and hide in a secure location as needed. Otherwise, provided that you have access to ammunition it would be silly to pass up a firearm! Bladed or blunt force trauma objects are easy to come by in comparison to a reliable firearm that uses commonly found ammo. So really this is a non-issue and not worth even debating because I foresee no problem with being able to arm yourself with both.

[Shola]

Sam, on 10 April 2012 - 11:34 PM, said:

Bladed weapon over firearm? Only if you could stage yourself in a relatively uninfested area and hide in a secure location as needed. Otherwise, provided that you have access to ammunition it would be silly to pass up a firearm! Bladed or blunt force trauma objects are easy to come by in comparison to a reliable firearm that uses commonly found ammo. So really this is a non-issue and not worth even debating because I foresee no problem with being able to arm yourself with both.

The way u write is very funny.

You are creating a situation that makes ur ideas seem plausible.

If one has access to ammunition then of course the obvious choice is a firearm but this isn't a videogame, this is a zombie infestation. You will never have the required amount of ammo to justify using firearms  like its Devil May Cry.

I feel like I'm beating a dead horse with you, I don't think you understand the need for conservation of ammo.

If u r in a stronghold and ur infested with zombies, the stronghold is lost. Any weapon being used will be intended to help escaping not in winning it back.

Bullets are not found on trees and it will be a rare occasion that they will be able to save you when a blade will not so they wise usage of guns is always paramount

[Jon W]

There is no “ideal” weapon… there are some good combinations, though.  Mine would be

  

  

• Combat      Knife.  This is the ‘final backup’.
• Bokken      (wooden katana).  You won’t slice      yourself open, you can crunch zombie heads quite effectively and a little longer      than arm range.
• .22      semi auto with silencer (for when you don’t want them quite that close).
• Crossbow      for distance.  And dinner.

  I don't want to have to worry (too much) about ammo.

YMMV

[Barry Cade]

I always get antsy whenever anyone offers me a crossbow for dinner.

[Njbudman81]

I got plenty of ammo so it won't be scarce anytime soon.