Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Of the Tabletop, and other, lesser varieties.

Moderators: SecondTalon, Moderators General, Prelates

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Jack Saladin » Wed Nov 19, 2008 3:30 am UTC

Except for Z... But a smiley face is certainly a universal symbol (one of the few), so that's certainly the best for a safehouse.

Edit: I guess "Z" would probably become universal pretty quick after the zombiepocalypse.
Last edited by Jack Saladin on Wed Nov 19, 2008 3:36 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Jack Saladin
X is kiss
 
Posts: 4445
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 8:22 am UTC
Location: Aotearoa

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby ArchangelShrike » Wed Nov 19, 2008 3:32 am UTC

Oh damn. I got it completely wrong too, it wasn't even Rorschach, it was the Comedian after a moment of reflection. Those signs are good, not to mention the requisite arrows to point people in the right direction.
User avatar
ArchangelShrike
Rodan's Title
 
Posts: 1533
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 8:39 am UTC
Location: Waikiki

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Upsilon » Wed Nov 19, 2008 3:39 am UTC

You know what's another Greek letter that could symbolize something? Phi!

Or upsilon. Maybe.
18/M/USA
age/sex/location
Spoiler:
Upsilon avatar from TaintedDeity.
User avatar
Upsilon
 
Posts: 1118
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 1:53 am UTC
Location: Wisconsin

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Flesh_Of_The_Fallen_Angel » Wed Nov 19, 2008 3:49 am UTC

SexyTalon wrote:Z Marks the buildings, houses, etc that have zombies inside, presumeably locked in or otherwise contained, but still probably unsafe to enter.
Smiley Face marks the safe houses inhabited by people, or while currently abandoned, people once were here so it's likely still safe.
A Smiley Face with a Z on it is a safe house that went bad.
The Red Cross for any sort of medical area that's still safe.
A Red Cross with a Z on it for one that went bad...

Basically, Z overrides everything. Z says it's unsafe. Z is the sign of the Zombie, and should be respected and feared.

What about two Z's? Fast zombies inside?
User avatar
Flesh_Of_The_Fallen_Angel
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 4:20 am UTC
Location: I am a child of the city of destruction . . . So, my location is the city of dectruction!

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Gojoe » Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:17 am UTC

I am sure this has been posted before in this thread, but here it is again

http://www.wehatezombies.com/the-zombie-simulation/

pretty much the only way to win is to bust out the bombs asap.
michaelandjimi wrote:Oh Mr Gojoe
I won't make fun of your mojo.
Though in this fora I serenade you
I really only do it to aid you.
*Various positive comments on your masculinity
That continue on into infinity*

Feeble accompanying guitar.
User avatar
Gojoe
 
Posts: 3218
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:45 pm UTC
Location: New Zealand!!!

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Jack Saladin » Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:30 am UTC

... Humanity didn't do too bad in the particular simulation I just watched. I'll run it again and see if it was a fluke.

Edit: OK, turns out they didn't do that well. It looked good for a bit though.

I wonder how the simulation would look if there were city exits.
Jack Saladin
X is kiss
 
Posts: 4445
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 8:22 am UTC
Location: Aotearoa

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Gojoe » Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:32 am UTC

I actually linked to a variation that i did not see... The one I meant to link to (with out checking) is blocked at work. Where you are pretty much screwed unless you release the nukes asap.

I think this is the link, (But I can not check as it is blocked at work)

let me know if it looks about right.
michaelandjimi wrote:Oh Mr Gojoe
I won't make fun of your mojo.
Though in this fora I serenade you
I really only do it to aid you.
*Various positive comments on your masculinity
That continue on into infinity*

Feeble accompanying guitar.
User avatar
Gojoe
 
Posts: 3218
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:45 pm UTC
Location: New Zealand!!!

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Jack Saladin » Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:33 am UTC

Yeah, the one you posted isn't interactive. No nukes.

Edit: Second one is right.
Jack Saladin
X is kiss
 
Posts: 4445
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 8:22 am UTC
Location: Aotearoa

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Gojoe » Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:35 am UTC

But the second one I posted works fine? And you can try to save the human race?
michaelandjimi wrote:Oh Mr Gojoe
I won't make fun of your mojo.
Though in this fora I serenade you
I really only do it to aid you.
*Various positive comments on your masculinity
That continue on into infinity*

Feeble accompanying guitar.
User avatar
Gojoe
 
Posts: 3218
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:45 pm UTC
Location: New Zealand!!!

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Jack Saladin » Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:36 am UTC

You can try. And fail miserably.
Jack Saladin
X is kiss
 
Posts: 4445
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 8:22 am UTC
Location: Aotearoa

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby oneofthedragon » Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:49 am UTC

My best score was 3560/4000
sje46: tell them to shove plungers into their anuses
sje46: make clear that that was only for OOTD

Kells: OOTD, I am giving you my death stare
Kells: Just so you know

Christmas: OOTD I will burn your village and make slaves of your children
User avatar
oneofthedragon
Modfather
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 3:26 am UTC

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Random832 » Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:51 am UTC

Flesh_Of_The_Fallen_Angel wrote:I thought about the idea of using TNT (assuming you have/can find some) . . . its not like a grenade in that it doesn't rely on shrapnel to wound/kill . . . I know that it doesn't keep to well, sweats glycerine and is insanely unstable.


That's Dynamite. TNT is actually very safe. Well, it's poisonous - it's safe in terms of it being unlikely to accidentally detonate (though of course any device you make will have weaker links that would have their own risk of accidental detonation).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinitrotoluene
GENERATION 99: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and subtract 1 from the generation. Social experiment.
Random832
 
Posts: 2462
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:38 pm UTC

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Flesh_Of_The_Fallen_Angel » Wed Nov 19, 2008 6:26 am UTC

Random832 wrote:
Flesh_Of_The_Fallen_Angel wrote:I thought about the idea of using TNT (assuming you have/can find some) . . . its not like a grenade in that it doesn't rely on shrapnel to wound/kill . . . I know that it doesn't keep to well, sweats glycerine and is insanely unstable.


That's Dynamite. TNT is actually very safe. Well, it's poisonous - it's safe in terms of it being unlikely to accidentally detonate (though of course any device you make will have weaker links that would have their own risk of accidental detonation).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinitrotoluene

I always thought Dynamite and TNT were the same thing . . . I guess ya learn something new every day . . . should I post this on one of those threads?

Also, thank you for correcting me. :mrgreen:
User avatar
Flesh_Of_The_Fallen_Angel
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 4:20 am UTC
Location: I am a child of the city of destruction . . . So, my location is the city of dectruction!

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby SecondTalon » Wed Nov 19, 2008 2:33 pm UTC

Flesh_Of_The_Fallen_Angel wrote:
SexyTalon wrote:Z Marks the buildings, houses, etc that have zombies inside, presumeably locked in or otherwise contained, but still probably unsafe to enter.
Smiley Face marks the safe houses inhabited by people, or while currently abandoned, people once were here so it's likely still safe.
A Smiley Face with a Z on it is a safe house that went bad.
The Red Cross for any sort of medical area that's still safe.
A Red Cross with a Z on it for one that went bad...
Basically, Z overrides everything. Z says it's unsafe. Z is the sign of the Zombie, and should be respected and feared.

What about two Z's? Fast zombies inside?
Why not a Z for every zombie inside? A double Z for every fast zombie? Zs covering the house! Z'S FOR EVERYBODY!!!

....

No. A Z on the Door, maybe Z on the windows. The number of Zs, how close they are, should be irrelevant. A Z anywhere says it's not safe. If you're escaping a place and you shut the doors behind you to hopefully seal the zombies inside, odds are there's a couple on the street. Even if there's not, there will be soon. You don't have time to make a huge diagram counting the speed and type of a zombie inside (Nevermind that Fast Zombies are stupid) .. you've just got time to make a Z on the wall and run like hell to find a safe zone.

And if your dumb ass goes inside a house without walking all the way around it, looking for marks, or you just wander inside because you see a smiley face on one part of the building and you aren't checking to see if it went bad first (because, let's face it, it's possible that when it goes bad, no one will be able to make it out to alter the sign) .... you're an idiot. Really, the Z is just to signify "This place IS Bad. No question". Everything else is "Uh, it might be bad, might not, but people have been here, for what it's worth" ... so if you yell inside and get no answer, you know it went bad or has been abandoned. But you should assume the first, until you and/or your party has deemed it safe.

And, of course, a place with no markings should be assumed to be Z inhabited and left alone unless you need something from in there.


Honestly, X might work as well as Z, but the way I figure it.. you can spraypaint Z in one continuous motion. You don't have to stop, or slow down or really think much about what you're doing. Right, downleft, right. Hell, a backwards Z should mark it just the same. X might possibly get confused with a Cross, leading people to think it's somehow medically related. Crosses take a little time, but not much. Smiley Faces take a lot of time, comparatively speaking.
"When Archie is too progressive for you, that's how science identifies you as an earlier species" - Luke McKinney, Cracked.com

Honestly, if you're talking BBQ and 'a guy in a parking lot' isn't part of the conversation, something's wrong."
User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
 
Posts: 21552
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Jebobek » Wed Nov 19, 2008 3:12 pm UTC

Lets fast forward to a few days, to when and IF the miltary responds. When a swat team comes in and begins to clear out zombie houses that were appropriately marked with Z, what should they mark it with to tell people they've turned it into a safe house? How do they cancel out the Z? I like the Z idea, but when they did a full clear, moved on, but left supplies for survivors, I would like to know its "safe, even though there WERE zombies".

Also, I ran the simulation a few times. The best-case scenario I've seen so far was when the zombies are close to the armory, but separated by a building or two. Also, the armory is in a wide open space for many people to run to. If the army would ever drop a gun supply crate, it needs to be in front of a crapton of people:
Spoiler:
Good Armory Location.PNG
Good Armory Location.PNG (12.88 KiB) Viewed 1606 times
When all the zombies were exterminated:
Spoiler:
Good armory ending.PNG
Good armory ending.PNG (11.89 KiB) Viewed 1606 times


EDIT: Luck is a factor: Does the zombie get to see someone right away? Do they mull around in one place for too long? Here is the same simulation ran again:
Spoiler:
same armory, bad luck.PNG
same armory, bad luck.PNG (10.87 KiB) Viewed 1603 times
Image
User avatar
Jebobek
 
Posts: 2213
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:19 pm UTC
Location: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Geohash graticule

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby SecondTalon » Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:21 pm UTC

Jebobek wrote:Lets fast forward to a few days, to when and IF the miltary responds. When a swat team comes in and begins to clear out zombie houses that were appropriately marked with Z, what should they mark it with to tell people they've turned it into a safe house? How do they cancel out the Z? I like the Z idea, but when they did a full clear, moved on, but left supplies for survivors, I would like to know its "safe, even though there WERE zombies".
If you're working on a plan to clear a block, a town, a state, a nation, whatever... In the cases of a block/town, clearing it would require weeks/months. You basically would start in one home and form a defensive perimeter. After such time as you are 100% confident that you have cleared your area (Since you're starting with one house, it should be cleared already, we'll count this as 0 time. In the case of a military force moving in, I'd expect they'd do the same thing, so we'll say an hour to to two hours to completely search a single home. Because I mean completely. Search the crawlspaces, the attics, every closet, cabinet, entertainment center.. everything. If there's a big screen TV, pop the back off just to be sure. Because you have to be 100% sure. Sure enough to let your spouse and children sleep on the floor without a guard sure.)

So you start with the one house and you form the defensive perimeter and kill off all visible zombies. This will take however long it takes and will likely kill off most of the mobile zombies in the area. In the case of a military force, I'd assume they'd set this up outside of the town.. we'll get to cities later. You then send a team to the house next door to search it completely - again, we'll say roughly one to two hours of searching time. Once they have deemed the place as completely clear, you extend your perimeter to that home, kill any visible zombies, once there are no more, you continue on to the next home. And so on, in this fashion, until the area you're taking is clear.

I would not try to take more than one home in a day (Otherwise, your search team might get lazy and just start assuming things like there's no way a zombie is in the cabinet under the bathroom sink, or forget to check the crawlspace ["Was that this house, or the last one?"] and somehow miss one) so.. if your average block has 25 houses, that's almost a month.

During the entire process, you need fireteams on the perimeter, watching, clearing any approaching zombies. I figure the World War Z approach would work for this - get half your best shots on the line, the other half is relaxing, napping, etc. As soon as someone misses a shot, they're taken off the line and replaced, forced to go take a break as they're obviously getting tired. Doesn't matter if they were on the line for a half-hour, or for six, as soon as they miss, they're on break for at least six hours.

Your office buildings and the like are, obviously, going to take a lot more time to clear. Even a small strip mall type building will take a whole day to clear out, much less an actual block of offices. In large cities, I can see skyscrapers taking a month or more to clear out 100%, what with all the closets, cubicles and the like. When clearing a building, you have to assume two distinctly opposite things - the first being that at any moment, right as you open a door or turn a corner, there's going to be a raring to go zombie right there, not even an inch away, trying to bite you. Every time. Which is stressful as hell. The other thing you have to assume is that there are zombies that are little more than detached heads hiding in places - in trash cans, in cabinets, under piles of junk, and so on.. just waiting for someone to come along later in this supposedly clear area and stick their hand in somewhere without looking... only to get bit by what's essentially just a head.

So to clear a building, you have to make sure that you've searched everywhere a softball could fit. Because you have to be 100% sure before you can say the building has been cleared.


So, I figure, during the days and months and years of clearing an area, you've got plenty of time to paint a large block of paint over the Z to erase it.


As far as clearing cities goes... I'm looking at the city I'm in, Louisville, Jefferson Co. Kentucky.. 700,000+ people in the county. I say that number just to give you an idea of the number of houses, apartments, condos and so on. Getting Jefferson Co. to the state where you can say it is 100% Clear of the Zombie Menace would take years. I'd rather not even think about how many people would be required to do so. By the time the defensive line extended out that far, you'd need thousands of marksmen to man it, or thousands to build a wall around the place, to funnel zombies in to an area where there are guards.

Which is kinda the problem, I suppose. To keep a defensive perimeter up for even a single block of houses, you'd need dozens of people to construct a wall or something, even if it's just sandbags, and dozens to be guards, especially at first. Eventually you could drop down to the point of just having eight or so constantly patrolling (Basically, as one team rounds a corner, another team should be starting on that straight stretch) but that would still require at least 24 guardsmen (three shifts a 24 hour period) if not 32 for four shifts.
"When Archie is too progressive for you, that's how science identifies you as an earlier species" - Luke McKinney, Cracked.com

Honestly, if you're talking BBQ and 'a guy in a parking lot' isn't part of the conversation, something's wrong."
User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
 
Posts: 21552
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Berengal » Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:30 pm UTC

Clearing zombies is moot if the cause is space radiation from Venus stimulating the dead's pineal glands. There'll always be zombies in that case, and the only way to keep them down is to kill every dead person. Again.

There'll always be dead people.
It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students who are motivated by money: As potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.
User avatar
Berengal
Superabacus Mystic of the First Rank
 
Posts: 2707
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:51 am UTC
Location: Bergen, Norway

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby SecondTalon » Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:39 pm UTC

Eh, that's just a matter of changing your funeral rites. Upon death, as the Doctor says "Time of death, blahblahblah", one of the doctors, nurses, orderlies, or whatever, is already swinging a sledge at the cranium. Of course, the head-trauma could be attended to first, then the time of death called.

In the cases of accidental death or, sadly, severe injury, it's likely that bystanders will take matters into their own hands and bash the skull in with whatever is handy. The various Good Samaritan laws that currently exist* and Manslaughter laws will be extended to exonerate someone who had a "reasonable belief of imminent death" and as a result, bashed someone's head in with a heavy blunt instrument.


*The ones that keep someone from being sued if the medical treatment they gave was wrong and resulted in further injury under the assumption that bystanders giving aid is better than bystanders ignoring the problem and watching someone bleed out while waiting for an ambulance. Your city/state/country may differ.
"When Archie is too progressive for you, that's how science identifies you as an earlier species" - Luke McKinney, Cracked.com

Honestly, if you're talking BBQ and 'a guy in a parking lot' isn't part of the conversation, something's wrong."
User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
 
Posts: 21552
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby LtBonzai » Wed Nov 19, 2008 5:06 pm UTC

You know, I think the biggest threat of a Zombocalypse that has not yet been addressed in threads like this one are threads like this one. Because a hosting server has little use in a clandestine fight for survival, it is unlikely that existing servers would be compromised. As such, the free flow of WWW information would continue. Now, you can probably see where I'm going with this, and I know you want to know how. How will the hordes of zombies be able to look at the interwebs? Well, Romero zombies, of course, could not and, moreover, -would- not have any interest in doing so. We have to consider, though, that Romero zombies are not the only inevitability. What about insane, possibly-radiated, but otherwise intelligent humans? What about stupid, bumbling zombies who are controlled by an intelligent, albeit malevolent creator? These and more possible organizations of Zombocalypsery could and, moreover, -would- be using the intartubes as a resource and have potential access to this thread and others like it. This is very important, so I want to say it as clearly as I can: YOU'RE TELLING THEM OUR PLANS!!!
User avatar
LtBonzai
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:48 pm UTC

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby SecondTalon » Wed Nov 19, 2008 5:09 pm UTC

Sure, but the idea is to make the plans so idiot proof that, even with an intelligent force behind the zombies, they are foolproof plans that will work.

The only real way they will fail is if the zombies retain all knowledge they had in life AND possess a hatred of humans beyond a desire for food. Then we're fucked, as they'll be launching nukes.
"When Archie is too progressive for you, that's how science identifies you as an earlier species" - Luke McKinney, Cracked.com

Honestly, if you're talking BBQ and 'a guy in a parking lot' isn't part of the conversation, something's wrong."
User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
 
Posts: 21552
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby ArchangelShrike » Wed Nov 19, 2008 5:14 pm UTC

...actually, I'm telling them your plans. We've all got contingency plans behind the plans we put up on the forums in case there are evil scientists that want to take over the world using zombies, and mine includes a rubber ducky, top hat and picture frame.

Damnit, time for Plan C.

Also, I think crazed people driving with no sleep might accidentally drive into a telephone/powerline pole and bring down power for the area, or maybe a group of random zombies slowly shuffling along might become attracted to the buzz of a transformer or some other such problem that would stop us from using basic utilities.
User avatar
ArchangelShrike
Rodan's Title
 
Posts: 1533
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 8:39 am UTC
Location: Waikiki

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby SecondTalon » Wed Nov 19, 2008 5:37 pm UTC

Power would be gone in a matter of days, a couple of weeks tops. So I don't think that would be too much of a problem.
"When Archie is too progressive for you, that's how science identifies you as an earlier species" - Luke McKinney, Cracked.com

Honestly, if you're talking BBQ and 'a guy in a parking lot' isn't part of the conversation, something's wrong."
User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
 
Posts: 21552
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Lolsaur » Wed Nov 19, 2008 6:27 pm UTC

Cycle-powered generators.

It'll keep you fit while cooped up in the fortress/house and will give you something to do, as an extra asides.

People could just be on a rota basis. If there are many people, it shouldn't be too tiring or, you could have two or three going at once if there are heaps (number still to be determined) of people.
Worst Fight Scene Ever

This cosy, special made for this Teapot

Spoiler:
You've never looked better than you did that night
And your eyes have never looked so blue
And when we kissed it was like nothing else existed
As time stood still for me and you
User avatar
Lolsaur
 
Posts: 630
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 2:40 pm UTC
Location: Stonehaven, Scotland

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby ArchangelShrike » Wed Nov 19, 2008 6:32 pm UTC

Meh.

LtBonzai wrote: Because a hosting server has little use in a clandestine fight for survival, it is unlikely that existing servers would be compromised. As such, the free flow of WWW information would continue.


Energy generation and all is a good thing to think about, but my post was more to refute this. If you need anything more than a cooking fire, gas lanterns/battery powered flashlights, etc. you might be doing it wrong from a survival perspective. Unless you need some sort of dialysis/refrigerated medical treatment, which would make your chances of survival a bit lower in general.
User avatar
ArchangelShrike
Rodan's Title
 
Posts: 1533
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 8:39 am UTC
Location: Waikiki

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Random832 » Wed Nov 19, 2008 6:57 pm UTC

Has anyone thought about water - how long would city water hold out? (given reduced demand, the stuff in water towers may last a while, though it may not be drinkable after a certain point) And think about how much your survivor group would need - 8 cups a day is 3.5 gallons per week per person - flush toilets are an unacceptable luxury at 5 gallons a flush.
GENERATION 99: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and subtract 1 from the generation. Social experiment.
Random832
 
Posts: 2462
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:38 pm UTC

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Lolsaur » Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:04 pm UTC

Ah, the ZSG says that when you get wind of zombie invasion, start filling everything you can with water. The bathtub, all cups, tuperware...every container, really.

Should be alright for a while if you do that.
Worst Fight Scene Ever

This cosy, special made for this Teapot

Spoiler:
You've never looked better than you did that night
And your eyes have never looked so blue
And when we kissed it was like nothing else existed
As time stood still for me and you
User avatar
Lolsaur
 
Posts: 630
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 2:40 pm UTC
Location: Stonehaven, Scotland

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby wst » Wed Nov 19, 2008 9:08 pm UTC

Should we organise a few RDV points if a zombie invasion does occur, say, one for each state/country that has visitors to xkcd...
I'll bring friends and guns to the UK one. Who's bringing food?
"If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on our hands." - Douglas Adams
User avatar
wst
 
Posts: 2582
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:06 am UTC

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Flesh_Of_The_Fallen_Angel » Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:18 pm UTC

wst wrote:Should we organise a few RDV points if a zombie invasion does occur, say, one for each state/country that has visitors to xkcd...
I'll bring friends and guns to the UK one. Who's bringing food?

What I will be doing, it whenever I find a cell phone, I will send a mass txt to (to all the numbers on the phone) telling them to come to the town I'm in. Telling them that there are safe houses and other stuff but to bring everything useful. Just think about it, zombies (usually) cant use cellphones well enough to read a txt (even assuming they can read) so it would be most likely safe. Also, it would help with the clearing out of houses. Just think of how meny cell phones there are and how meny numbers there are in those phones.

Another thing I would do is make barricades out of cars. Just block up one end of a street and then shoot all the zombies in that street.
User avatar
Flesh_Of_The_Fallen_Angel
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 4:20 am UTC
Location: I am a child of the city of destruction . . . So, my location is the city of dectruction!

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Nifar » Thu Nov 20, 2008 12:35 am UTC

Has anybody here read the comic "Walking Dead"? The way the survivors live in that comic is about how I plan to survive, only with the addition of marking a place as a safehouse after I move on.

Also, now that I think about it, there's not much reason to carry more than three or four changes of clothes on you if you plan to stay on the move. You can simply grab new clothes from houses and stores that you loot, and leave your old clothes behind. This also lets you adjust for the inevitable size reductions that will happen due to having to ration food without trying to take in the clothes yourself.
Out of context quote of the week: "Practice static safety: Hack naked."
User avatar
Nifar
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 7:47 pm UTC
Location: The internet.

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby AKAnotu » Thu Nov 20, 2008 3:28 am UTC

Nifar wrote:Has anybody here read the comic "Walking Dead"? The way the survivors live in that comic is about how I plan to survive, only with the addition of marking a place as a safehouse after I move on.

Also, now that I think about it, there's not much reason to carry more than three or four changes of clothes on you if you plan to stay on the move. You can simply grab new clothes from houses and stores that you loot, and leave your old clothes behind. This also lets you adjust for the inevitable size reductions that will happen due to having to ration food without trying to take in the clothes yourself.

I don't think clothes are very high on my list of priorities. A few changes, but I'm going to be wearing the same set for weeks straight until they tear.

Also, It's not worth the risk to try to survive in a zombie infested mall for a change of clothes. The only time I'd go into a mall/strip mall (where all the clothing stores are located in my area) is if there was no other choice, and it was go through the mall or die.
Abraham Lincoln wrote:If you are racist, I will attack you with the north.
User avatar
AKAnotu
 
Posts: 225
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 12:20 am UTC
Location: Hurricane-torn Illinois

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Flesh_Of_The_Fallen_Angel » Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:10 am UTC

AKAnotu wrote:
Nifar wrote:Has anybody here read the comic "Walking Dead"? The way the survivors live in that comic is about how I plan to survive, only with the addition of marking a place as a safehouse after I move on.

Also, now that I think about it, there's not much reason to carry more than three or four changes of clothes on you if you plan to stay on the move. You can simply grab new clothes from houses and stores that you loot, and leave your old clothes behind. This also lets you adjust for the inevitable size reductions that will happen due to having to ration food without trying to take in the clothes yourself.

I don't think clothes are very high on my list of priorities. A few changes, but I'm going to be wearing the same set for weeks straight until they tear.

Also, It's not worth the risk to try to survive in a zombie infested mall for a change of clothes. The only time I'd go into a mall/strip mall (where all the clothing stores are located in my area) is if there was no other choice, and it was go through the mall or die.

I like the way you think. I would wear my clothes for a couple days strait, then find a stream or something to wash them in (while putting on my other clothes) . . . Although, I would be wearing SWAT gear (that I would take from the police station, along with other things like guns and tranquillizer darts to test on the zombies) . . . and we all know that SWAT gear is built to last! :twisted:
User avatar
Flesh_Of_The_Fallen_Angel
 
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 4:20 am UTC
Location: I am a child of the city of destruction . . . So, my location is the city of dectruction!

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby King of Frogs » Thu Nov 20, 2008 1:02 pm UTC

Yeah, but SWAT gear will also get you sweaty and hot, making you sluggish, and all the guns could slow you down further.

Another problem could also be, what if someone in your group (assuming we are travelling in a small-ish group) gets ill with something relatively serious? I mean with all the death and destruction going on, disease is going to spread, so I think one of the main priorities should be to grab some medical equipment above the level of a First Aid Kit.

Of course, with a viral/parasitic zombiepocalypse, the first places affected will be the hospitals, which would make getting the medicines much more dangerous. What do other people think?
The first one to fall asleep when the revolution comes.
Cheese wrote:We should never talk ever again. Ever.

michaelandjimi wrote:"No, cease your sexual activities! The communists will invade!"
User avatar
King of Frogs
 
Posts: 422
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 10:14 am UTC
Location: Scotland, The Matrix

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Hentzau » Thu Nov 20, 2008 2:15 pm UTC

I'd loot the drugs direct from a parmaceutical company, there's no reason to believe they would be particularly dangerous places come the brain- eatings. Or my local dispensary/pharmacy, nobody would take emergencies there (at least I hope not) and I'd say zombificaion is quite some emergency.

To be sure, I'd go into my loft and get down (plus clean and sharpen) my ancestor's sabre, and a cricket bat from my garage. Medicine, canned food, bottled water, camping supplies, and my fishing tackle are next.
Hentzau
 
Posts: 85
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 3:45 pm UTC

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Gunfingers » Thu Nov 20, 2008 2:28 pm UTC

I'm not sure it'd be a good idea to just loot a pharmacy and give drugs to whoever is sick. Doctors go through all that training for a reason. Unless they're actually on the verge of death you're only likely to make things worse, and finding the actual correct treatment would pretty much be a roll of the dice. Except this dice has about a million sides.
User avatar
Gunfingers
 
Posts: 2401
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 7:15 pm UTC

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Random832 » Thu Nov 20, 2008 2:45 pm UTC

Gunfingers wrote:I'm not sure it'd be a good idea to just loot a pharmacy and give drugs to whoever is sick. Doctors go through all that training for a reason. Unless they're actually on the verge of death you're only likely to make things worse, and finding the actual correct treatment would pretty much be a roll of the dice. Except this dice has about a million sides.


I think the assumption is you have a doctor but there are supply chain problems with medications and such.
GENERATION 99: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and subtract 1 from the generation. Social experiment.
Random832
 
Posts: 2462
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:38 pm UTC

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Jebobek » Thu Nov 20, 2008 2:59 pm UTC

Even if there are no doctors, people are panicking and falling over and hurting themselves. Painkillers are painkillers.
Image
User avatar
Jebobek
 
Posts: 2213
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:19 pm UTC
Location: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Geohash graticule

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Gunfingers » Thu Nov 20, 2008 3:04 pm UTC

Over the counter painkillers are painkillers. Oxycontin, vicodin, and any number of similar drugs run serious risks of complications, allergic reactions, poor reactions with other medications, altered states of consciousness, and dependency. If you're talking aspirin and motrin, go to town, but be careful with the hard stuff.
User avatar
Gunfingers
 
Posts: 2401
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 7:15 pm UTC

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby SecondTalon » Thu Nov 20, 2008 4:58 pm UTC

Flesh_Of_The_Fallen_Angel wrote:Although, I would be wearing SWAT gear (that I would take from the police station, along with other things like guns and tranquillizer darts to test on the zombies) . . . and we all know that SWAT gear is built to last! :twisted:

Alright, so I'm just going to ignore how you're not getting your hands on SWAT gear and pretend that somehow, someway, you manage to get a suit of armor and some of the other gear.

Are you a SWAT cop? Have you trained in running around in that armor? This page advertises "very, very light" armor weighing in at less than 2kg (less than 4.4 pounds).. doesn't say how much less, so let's just assume it weighs 1.75kg/3.8 pounds.

That's a best case scenario. Looking at A&E's show on Dallas SWAT, their gear looks to weigh substantially more than 4 pounds. This page has Ballistic Shields clocking in at 7.6kg/16.9 pounds.

You're going to be heavier than normal, so you're going to tire faster. You'll be overconfident, especially because you keep mentioning getting SWAT gear, I'm led to believe you think SWAT stuff will give you some kind of magical protection. It won't. You have no idea how to use it, how to move in it, what it protects and what it doesn't.

And it'll be wonderful to have that stuff when you're fighting off human raiders. Against something that merely has to bite your hand to doom you to a walking death? I'm not saying it's worthless, I'm just saying it'll help me run faster than you. And that's all I have to do.
"When Archie is too progressive for you, that's how science identifies you as an earlier species" - Luke McKinney, Cracked.com

Honestly, if you're talking BBQ and 'a guy in a parking lot' isn't part of the conversation, something's wrong."
User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
 
Posts: 21552
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby ArchangelShrike » Thu Nov 20, 2008 5:07 pm UTC

Which is why I'm raiding an sports store first. You gellin' like a felon?

Local Sports Authority has:
-shoes/inserts
-guns/compound bows
-camping supplies
-ammunition

Good shoes go a long way towards keeping your feet happy while on the run.
User avatar
ArchangelShrike
Rodan's Title
 
Posts: 1533
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 8:39 am UTC
Location: Waikiki

Re: Taking it seriously: The zombie problem

Postby Lolsaur » Thu Nov 20, 2008 5:08 pm UTC

If anything, I would have thought a shark suit, worn by divers, would be the way to go. It's basically a chain mail suit.

It might not give protection against bullets or the like, but it will protect you against bites and scratches, which will probably be a zombies greatest weapon.

Ah, upon doing more research, these suits weigh in at 40 pounds or so and are cumbersome to wear outside of the water.
Worst Fight Scene Ever

This cosy, special made for this Teapot

Spoiler:
You've never looked better than you did that night
And your eyes have never looked so blue
And when we kissed it was like nothing else existed
As time stood still for me and you
User avatar
Lolsaur
 
Posts: 630
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 2:40 pm UTC
Location: Stonehaven, Scotland

PreviousNext

Return to Gaming

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests