By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - I don't see how humans can lose to zombies.

bugrimmar on 04 November 2014
Brutalyst said:
bugrimmar said:
arcane_chaos said:
to me it depends on exactly what zombie you are dealing with; is they're like Dawn of the Dead, Last of Us(not zombies but close enough) or Day Z(with no cure) I think we'd personally be fucked, maybe even thrown in the world of "The Walking Dead" because EVERYONE is infected regardless so being bit or scumming to something like a heart attack and you'll turn.

I would say you'd be safe in a resident evil world 1-3 but hunters, lickers, and tyrants would be something I would not want to deal with.


Tell me, how do any of those zombies take down a tank?


Why would they need too? a tank needs fuel, ammo. A Zombie needs nothing and would outlast it.

Even if the Tank had a base to go back to re-fuel/ammo; even that base has only a certain amount, and not only does that base need those items to supply the tank, its needs food, water to supply those at the base who keep the tank running, and those who drive it. Again, a Zombie needs nothing and is self sufficient.

Even in the best case scenario, the Tank has a base with an everlasting supply of all those things, and never runs out, what about the rest of the world? Zombies would attack anything they see so there goes the rest of the world while your tank lasts forever, even if there was a 1000 bases with tanks, they cant protect the whole world, and eventually the self sufficient would outlast those that arent. 

You're forgetting the concept of my original post - I was referring to one tank in this scenario, but how many tanks does the US military have? How many jets? Helicopters? Weapons of mass destruction?

I only wanted to show how 1 tank alone is destructive enough that it can probably wipe out a few thousand zombies by itself before it runs out of juice. Multiply that, then, with the sheer number of weapons that the military has, and how can zombies fight against that?



Around the Network
bugrimmar on 04 November 2014
arcane_chaos said:
bugrimmar said:
arcane_chaos said:
to me it depends on exactly what zombie you are dealing with; is they're like Dawn of the Dead, Last of Us(not zombies but close enough) or Day Z(with no cure) I think we'd personally be fucked, maybe even thrown in the world of "The Walking Dead" because EVERYONE is infected regardless so being bit or scumming to something like a heart attack and you'll turn.

I would say you'd be safe in a resident evil world 1-3 but hunters, lickers, and tyrants would be something I would not want to deal with.


Tell me, how do any of those zombies take down a tank?

No, but I'm alluding to the rate of infection ;  in Day Z you'll turn within 10 sec of being bitten, and on top of that they run at a continuous sprint. In the last of us it only a few hours, and the longer you're infected the deadlier you become, sure a bloater(TLOU) might be able to take down a tank buy a sinlge spore bomb would infect them instantly. And walking dead everyone is infected to some degree, meaning however you die unless you're decapitated/stabbed in the temple or burned you'll turn. And in a resident evil world i think a tyrant could give a tank a run for its money.



 

In The Last of Us, humans can avoid getting infected with simple gas masks, and the military had a certain amount of control over the situation. They simply had better things to worry about than taking on the zombies head on - they had to maintain peace and order for the civilian population. Make no mistake, however, if the military wanted to bomb the hell out of the zombies, they could do so easily.

Tyrant, btw, is a joke. One guy took it down with a rocket launcher. Is that really something the military should be scared of? It's a glorified bear if you ask me.

Anyway, the point of what I was saying is that "assuming a human population continues to exist", meaning some humans won't get turned/infected. In the scenario of humans vs. zombies in a real war, removing the possiblity of "everyone getting infected", the humans can't lose because of weapons technology.



bugrimmar on 04 November 2014
NiKKoM said:
bugrimmar said:


Tell me, how do any of those zombies take down a tank?

How would you resupply a tank , when it runs out of gas and ammo, surrounded by zombies?


The tank would simply return to base, since it can't be stopped. What, even a hundred zombies can't push a tank out of the way. It can go wherever the hell it wants. And even if it does run out of juice in the middle of nowhere, it would probably have taken down a few thousand zombies in the process. Now multiply that with the sheer number of tanks, jets, helicopters, missiles, etc. of the military, and you can do the math.



bugrimmar on 04 November 2014
Brutalyst said:
As someone else said it depends on the Zombie.

If the Zombies were like those from World War Z the movie, I could see them taking over the world and wiping out mankind. They can run probably faster than any human, never tire or get stitch or need to stop. Feel no pain so would run through glass, barbed wire and anything that they could just force their way through with no regard to self harm.

If it was Zombies like that, I struggle to see how the humans could survive!

But if its more you classic slow shuffling Zombie that can only move at a crawl, then I think it would depend on the worlds reaction when it started. If they saw Zombies and then started killing them straight away, shoot the brain and dead, quarantine and curfews which if broken you get shot, it could be contained. But even that scenario I have my doubts, as no one would think 'zombie' when it began as the idea is implausible. People would assume rabies, or some other more rational idea, and in (most) human nature, we try to help, and cure those suffering ailments. If the outbreak went too long before they acted decisively, then I could see control being lost quickly.

You should read the World War Z book (and dont be mistaken to think the movie resembles the book in ANYWAY except it shares the same name) which was an gripping read and a very viable view of what would happen if a zombie outbreak ever occured.

Fast or slow, it makes no difference. Someone needs to post something here that addresses the fact that humans have so many weapons of mass destruction.



NiKKoM on 04 November 2014
bugrimmar said:
NiKKoM said:
bugrimmar said:


Tell me, how do any of those zombies take down a tank?

How would you resupply a tank , when it runs out of gas and ammo, surrounded by zombies?


The tank would simply return to base, since it can't be stopped. What, even a hundred zombies can't push a tank out of the way. It can go wherever the hell it wants. And even if it does run out of juice in the middle of nowhere, it would probably have taken down a few thousand zombies in the process. Now multiply that with the sheer number of tanks, jets, helicopters, missiles, etc. of the military, and you can do the math.

The operational range of a tank is 500km so that would mean they would have like 250km from base to defend.. You do understand that the US army isn't large enough to spread out through the entire US while the zombies increase in numbers.. With 1.4 million active it wouldn't be able to contain the zombies.. How many fighter pilots are there? How many Tank personel? Its not like driving a car.. Lose a few before they get to their equipement and it pretty screwed.. Zombies on the runway and no plane can go up or land..

- edit - The military would be able only to defend themself, and will be incapable to save the normal people



 

Face the future.. Gamecenter ID: nikkom_nl (oh no he didn't!!) 

Around the Network
Brutalyst on 04 November 2014
bugrimmar said:
Brutalyst said:
bugrimmar said:
arcane_chaos said:
to me it depends on exactly what zombie you are dealing with; is they're like Dawn of the Dead, Last of Us(not zombies but close enough) or Day Z(with no cure) I think we'd personally be fucked, maybe even thrown in the world of "The Walking Dead" because EVERYONE is infected regardless so being bit or scumming to something like a heart attack and you'll turn.

I would say you'd be safe in a resident evil world 1-3 but hunters, lickers, and tyrants would be something I would not want to deal with.


Tell me, how do any of those zombies take down a tank?


Why would they need too? a tank needs fuel, ammo. A Zombie needs nothing and would outlast it.

Even if the Tank had a base to go back to re-fuel/ammo; even that base has only a certain amount, and not only does that base need those items to supply the tank, its needs food, water to supply those at the base who keep the tank running, and those who drive it. Again, a Zombie needs nothing and is self sufficient.

Even in the best case scenario, the Tank has a base with an everlasting supply of all those things, and never runs out, what about the rest of the world? Zombies would attack anything they see so there goes the rest of the world while your tank lasts forever, even if there was a 1000 bases with tanks, they cant protect the whole world, and eventually the self sufficient would outlast those that arent. 

You're forgetting the concept of my original post - I was referring to one tank in this scenario, but how many tanks does the US military have? How many jets? Helicopters? Weapons of mass destruction?

I only wanted to show how 1 tank alone is destructive enough that it can probably wipe out a few thousand zombies by itself before it runs out of juice. Multiply that, then, with the sheer number of weapons that the military has, and how can zombies fight against that?


I think you're over estimating the effectiveness of a tank against a Zombie.

Its guns, only a bullet to the head stops a Zombie (and I dont think gun of that type has that kind of precision), yeah you could remove its limbs, but unlike the living that just makes a crawling zombie which is harder to spot and bites you or others on the foot and creates another Zombie.

Even the main cannon wouldnt be that effective as again you need to destroy the brain, the explosion causing shrapnel, burns and loss of limbs isnt going to hurt a Zombie.

Jets, what will they do to a Zombie? same above really, but even spotting them when they dont produce heat would prove difficult.

Like in World War Z (book) the MOST effect weapon for killing them is something aching to a shovel with a crack to the head. Makes alot less sound than a gun (not attracting more) doesnt need reloading and you'll know its dead if you hit it in the head.



The best way to find out if you can trust somebody is to trust them.

Ernest Hemmingway

kitler53 on 04 November 2014

when i think about zombies i can't help but think about ebola.

you'd think we'd be able to beat that but the outbreak still happened. the problem is when you get someone like the nurse that is bitching about being quarantined for 3 days. ...people start thinking about themselves and not about what's smart. once "infected" people stop acting rationally then the outbreak can spread.



mysteryman on 04 November 2014
bugrimmar said:

Anyway, the point of what I was saying is that "assuming a human population continues to exist", meaning some humans won't get turned/infected. In the scenario of humans vs. zombies in a real war, removing the possiblity of "everyone getting infected", the humans can't lose because of weapons technology.

If you assume that all humans can't get infected then it's pretty unbalanced.

It's like saying that zombies are the clear winners, as long as we assume that they are never fully eradicated.



bugrimmar on 05 November 2014
Brutalyst said:

I think you're over estimating the effectiveness of a tank against a Zombie.

Its guns, only a bullet to the head stops a Zombie (and I dont think gun of that type has that kind of precision), yeah you could remove its limbs, but unlike the living that just makes a crawling zombie which is harder to spot and bites you or others on the foot and creates another Zombie.

Even the main cannon wouldnt be that effective as again you need to destroy the brain, the explosion causing shrapnel, burns and loss of limbs isnt going to hurt a Zombie.

Jets, what will they do to a Zombie? same above really, but even spotting them when they dont produce heat would prove difficult.

Like in World War Z (book) the MOST effect weapon for killing them is something aching to a shovel with a crack to the head. Makes alot less sound than a gun (not attracting more) doesnt need reloading and you'll know its dead if you hit it in the head.

I think you're underestimating the firepower that our weapons can do.

A tank shell won't just pop a limb or two. It will completely destroy a body and send its parts in 50 different places. Have you seen how big a tank shell is? A jet with a 100 ton payload will not just cause shrapnel. It will freaking disintegrate whole populations with a carpet bomb. Have you not seen how much devastation that can cause?

It's like you're thinking about toys.. I don't understand your logic. A shell from a battleship will level a freaking building, and it can't kill a zombie? Jesus, that's just crazy thinking. A stealth bomber would reduce a stadium into rubble that is barely recognizable.

Tell me you aren't serious about what you're saying. I can't even find enough words to say how ridiculous your statement is.



NiKKoM on 05 November 2014
bugrimmar said:

I think you're underestimating the firepower that our weapons can do.

A tank shell won't just pop a limb or two. It will completely destroy a body and send its parts in 50 different places. Have you seen how big a tank shell is? A jet with a 100 ton payload will not just cause shrapnel. It will freaking disintegrate whole populations with a carpet bomb. Have you not seen how much devastation that can cause?

It's like you're thinking about toys.. I don't understand your logic. A shell from a battleship will level a freaking building, and it can't kill a zombie? Jesus, that's just crazy thinking. A stealth bomber would reduce a stadium into rubble that is barely recognizable.

Tell me you aren't serious about what you're saying. I can't even find enough words to say how ridiculous your statement is.


A tank shell doesn't detonate on impact with a human.. Tank shells aren't anti personel weapons..  it rips through a crowd of zombies who will still be functional with a hole through their bodies..  There are shotgun like shells, Flechette shells, but they are banned, only Israel still uses them..

Still the best the army could do is defend themself and not save the entire world, there is just not enough military personel to do that. Sure a Battleship can clear the first wave but then it would be dead on the water cause their supply base would be overcrowded by too many ships who are trying to resupply and too many zombies who are attacking.. then what? The Military supply isn't endless while the zombies pretty much are.



 

Face the future.. Gamecenter ID: nikkom_nl (oh no he didn't!!)