Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
I personally wouldn't choose akimbo MP5Ks as a zombie-slaying small arms package, but I suppose that's a subject for another thread.

She is super-human so she doesn't have to worry about them flying out of her hands or bonking her on the nose.

Posted

It's not so much that, it's more of the under-powered 9mm pistol ammunition.

 

You'd want something with a high cyclic rate of fire and a chunky 7.62mm round for tearing through undead flesh. I suggest the FN-FAL rifle on automatic backed up with the 7.62mm General Purpose Machine Gun, basically a 1980's UK infantry section. Finish it off with a Mossberg jungle gun for close work, and of course an aluminium baseball bat with a few nails hammered through the end.

sonsofgygax.JPG

Posted

But it's zombies! You don't really need to mow them down with a wall of lead. The 9mm SMG should be fine for head shots required to kill the things.

 

Btw has anyone seen Survival of the Dead? I heard it came out but I haven't seen it playing anywhere.

Free games updated 3/4/21

Posted

Guys, you really aren't considering zombie anatomy.

 

Zombies have no brains, right? You literally have to blow them away, like power-hosing caked mud off of your car. A .22 is fine and dandy to nut a normal human in the swede, I'll grant you. But a zombie? You want a meaty 7.62 Lapua Magnum round, or for complete peace of mind a .50 Cal anti-materiel rifle / Browning vehicle mounted MG.

 

An attractive Czech model with two small sub-compact submachine-pistols isn't going to cut the mustard come the day The Dead Walk The Earth.

sonsofgygax.JPG

Posted

You are clearly assuming that their is consistency around zombie anatomy within the ouevre.

 

If we consider, for a moment, the Dawn of The Dead & 28 Days Later versions of undeath, I'd argue that a small calibre round to the nut is not the way forward.

 

Flamethrowers would be good too, I'd imagine.

sonsofgygax.JPG

Posted
Flamethrowers would be good too, I'd imagine.

 

"If you

"Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."

Posted
You are clearly assuming that their is consistency around zombie anatomy within the ouevre.

 

If we consider, for a moment, the Dawn of The Dead & 28 Days Later versions of undeath, I'd argue that a small calibre round to the nut is not the way forward.

 

Flamethrowers would be good too, I'd imagine.

 

Technically 28 Days later... were Rage infected living humans, not zombies. :)

 

Technically a baseball bat to the head busting the skull and brain could work - but zombies big thing is numbers. The question really isn't what you can kill them with but the best way to kill them without risking infection/overbearing.

 

An attractive Czech model with two small sub-compact submachine-pistols isn't going to cut the mustard come the day The Dead Walk The Earth.

 

Although there are merits there, regardless. I mean if push comes to shove *I* certainly wouldn't say no to an attractive Czech model with two small sub-compact submachine-pistols from joining my zombie survival group come the day The Dead Walk The Earth... :brows:

I cannot - yet I must. How do you calculate that? At what point on the graph do "must" and "cannot" meet? Yet I must - but I cannot! ~ Ro-Man

Posted
Flamethrowers would be good too, I'd imagine.
Not against running zombies or when you need to kill the regular ones "Like ****ing right now!"

 

I'm not sure flamethrowers and zombies are ever a good idea. I mean zombies aren't going to care they're burning, and it'll take a bit to boil the brain/destroy the brain (if it happens at all), so essentially you've created a mobile fireball that wants to eat your brains.

I cannot - yet I must. How do you calculate that? At what point on the graph do "must" and "cannot" meet? Yet I must - but I cannot! ~ Ro-Man

Posted
Flamethrowers would be good too, I'd imagine.
Not against running zombies or when you need to kill the regular ones "Like ****ing right now!"

I'm not sure flamethrowers and zombies are ever a good idea. I mean zombies aren't going to care they're burning, and it'll take a bit to boil the brain/destroy the brain (if it happens at all), so essentially you've created a mobile fireball that wants to eat your brains.

My point exactly.
Posted

I saw the G.I. Joe movie yesterday. It was not that good, and the only thing that could have saved the movie did not happen: Paris was not eaten by a swarm of nano-termites.

The ending of the words is ALMSIVI.

Posted
Flamethrowers would be good too, I'd imagine.
Not against running zombies or when you need to kill the regular ones "Like ****ing right now!"

I'm not sure flamethrowers and zombies are ever a good idea. I mean zombies aren't going to care they're burning, and it'll take a bit to boil the brain/destroy the brain (if it happens at all), so essentially you've created a mobile fireball that wants to eat your brains.

My point exactly.

 

I concur with your assessment of the situation. :lol:

I cannot - yet I must. How do you calculate that? At what point on the graph do "must" and "cannot" meet? Yet I must - but I cannot! ~ Ro-Man

Posted
I concur with your assessment of the situation. :lol:
As do I with yours. :thumbsup:

 

Well, to go with the quote from Armageddon : The Musical.. "What we really need is one of those neat, rotary machine guns like Blaine had in Predator..."

 

Not that you can actually carry one by yourself.. but that's got to be good for zombie-chopping fun...

"Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."

Posted

in a zombie investation I think flames would be best for massive groups, but other than that I'd probably stick with a shotgun/

Victor of the 5 year fan fic competition!

 

Kevin Butler will awesome your face off.

Posted

I'd say one of these might be effective.

In 7th grade, I teach the students how Chuck Norris took down the Roman Empire, so it is good that you are starting early on this curriculum.

 

R.I.P. KOTOR 2003-2008 KILLED BY THOSE GREEDY MONEY-HOARDING ************* AND THEIR *****-*** MMOS

Posted
Get him to the greek. Now that was a funny movie.

 

I saw that tonight. My lowered expectations might have helped, but my friends and I really enjoyed it.

"My house is going to look like a werewolf"

Lollercoasters!

bnwdancer9ma7pk.gif

Jaguars4ever is still alive.  No word of a lie.

Posted

Snakes on a Plane.

 

It's so awful it's good. Now I have to wonder if it's a post modern attempt to make a movie so awful-it's-good.

sonsofgygax.JPG

Posted

Has anyone seen The Last Airbender?

 

I'm a big fan of the show (it's a family friendly affair that still manages to be really epic and smart most of the time and occasionally reaches heights that no one but Miyazaki himself can climb to), but the reviews do not fill me with confidence.

Guest Accept
Posted
Has anyone seen The Last Airbender?

 

I'm a big fan of the show (it's a family friendly affair that still manages to be really epic and smart most of the time and occasionally reaches heights that no one but Miyazaki himself can climb to), but the reviews do not fill me with confidence.

I haven't seen it, but you shouldn't get your hopes up high since Shyamalan seems to have embarked on a weird mission to make every new movie worse than his last one. Don't get me wrong, I loved Sixth Sense, Unbreakable and even Signs - but after Signs he has taken a strange - and negative - turn in his filmmaking.

Posted

Yeah, the reviews I've read have been horrible. It's got, like, a 10% rotten rating on Rotten Tomatoes. That's one of the lowest I've ever seen. And even the positive reviews go like "it's slightly entertaining despite it's many shortcomings".

 

It's weird to see how M Night has self destructed, although I have to admit I never liked The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable was fantastic and Signs had it's moments of brilliance.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...