Zombie Outbreak - where to hide?

[TwinBahamut]

Because it doesn't fit what you think, but does fit a typical scenario?

A typical scenerio for certain genres (the super-epidemic genre), but not typical for the zombie genre.

Uh? That's called public outcry, laws, Congress...the military isn't just going to go and bomb an American city, man. Just evacuating Manhattan would take a Herculean effort, and likely expose the survivors to the outbreak. Thus your conclusion breaks down. Not to mention that, again, these tactics work against living beings. You vastly over estimate the destruction even a nuke could unleash. These weapons don't vaporize, leaving a neat little lot.

Please make an attempt to understand my argument for a moment... This isn't the case of "10% of Manhatten is full of zombies", but rather "100% of Manhatten is full of zombies". In that case, evacuation is a moot point, and I would think the outcray would be worse if the military held back for the sake of a dead city, rather than contain an dangerous and hostile force that might spread outwards. In the case that it is "10% of Manhattan is zombies", then the problem can probably be controlled with minimal military presence.

Argh, I am getting sick of this. I don't even like zombie movies or anything. Why am I here arguing about this?

 

[Jim Hague]

A typical scenerio for certain genres (the super-epidemic genre), but not typical for the zombie genre.

So the archetypal outbreak - Night of the Living Dead isn't 'typical'? Please.

Please make an attempt to understand my argument for a moment... This isn't the case of "10% of Manhatten is full of zombies", but rather "100% of Manhatten is full of zombies". In that case, evacuation is a moot point, and I would think the outcray would be worse if the military held back for the sake of a dead city, rather than contain an dangerous and hostile force that might spread outwards. In the case that it is "10% of Manhattan is zombies", then the problem can probably be controlled with minimal military presence.

I beg to differ. And please stop moving the goalposts - you said a portion of the population. And even with a 100% infection scenario (unlikely at best), you're far more likely to see a major city (unsuccessfully) sealed off. Even sealed, like Manhattan, the zombies simply walk into the water and emerge on the other side. Sealing a city off doesn't put it in a hermetic dome; there is no 100% effective cordon, sorry.

Argh, I am getting sick of this. I don't even like zombie movies or anything. Why am I here arguing about this?

Plenty of other threads to post in, if you feel you're not contributing here.

 

[TheYeti1775]

*snip*
Argh, I am getting sick of this. I don't even like zombie movies or anything. Why am I here arguing about this?

Cause like the rest of us, you secretly enjoy it.
That and it fills the boredom.

 

[TwinBahamut]

Alright, one more post.

Zombies don't feel shock, don't worry about bleeding or organ failure - they're dead. As for logistics, or your supposition that the military would be able, let alone willing, to turn WMDs on civilian populations...ah, no. You've got a very, very skewed view of how modern militaries are deployed and act, and we'll leave it at that.

There are two problems with your logic.

1) Zombies are physical beings. Dead != immortal. If their legs are gone, they can't walk. They need energy to fuel their movement (conservation of energy, anyone?). Unless you are talking about supernatural magic zombies (which won't have a spreadable contagion with an incubation period), they need a working metabolism. Any attempt to rationalize a zombie scientifically will expose a creature that is just as killable as anything else.

2) In terms of fiction, zombies can be beaten. Everyone knows that if you shoot a zombie's head off with a shotgun, it will be down for good. Common effective weapons include crossbows, pistols, and chainsaws. Fire is commonly an instant kill in many kinds of fiction.

As a whole, I have no idea where you are arguing from...

If you don't want to familiarize yourself with the literature and tropes, please don't act as if you've got some sort of objective answer.

I am familiar enough. If anything, I would recommend you take a look at a wider array of tropes regarding the different genres of "super-epidemic" and "zombies". Or do I really need to tell you about Raccoon City, the Umbrella Corporation, and a nucelar bomb?

 

[TwinBahamut]

Cause like the rest of us, you secretly enjoy it.
That and it fills the boredom.

Heh, so true. I love debating random stuff like this. It is just that this debate is far less fun than I prefer.

 

[Rabelais]

I've come to the determination that if zombies happen, I should proably just kill myself and get it over with. There's no way I'd survive.

--I'm not the hero or the badass. I have no skill with weapons and am not athletic, so I won't be able to kill them off in droves before I get chewed up. And I won't look cool, either.
--I'm not the love interest. I'm not a svelte beauty or the girl next door. Ladies with poor complextions do not survive zombie attacks.
--I don't really do well in emotionally stressful situations. I don['t like being scared, and when I get very upset, my chest, head and ears feel funny. I'd probably freeze up in terror if a zombie was coming at me.

All in all, I have nothing going for me. I won't make it to the end of the movie, so why bother fighting to stay alive through the first wave? It just prolongs the experience and makes my last few days full of fear and discomfort. Even for the people that make it, there's usually nothing good waiting for them after the credits roll. Eking out a perilous existance in a post-zombie society doesn't sound like my cup of tea. I think I'd be better off having a friend take me out fast and clean.


On the other hand, if we're talking survival in a post apocolyptic world after most of the population has been wiped out by a mysterious illness (chicken flu, anyone?), I have all kinds of plans ready for that.

c'mon MD... That's not the sprit that's gonna get you through the Necropolypse.

1st of all... if you can manage to survive the first couple of weeks. The sheer amount of body removal and zombie melee is going to turn you into a hardened badass faster than you can say "Training Montage"

2nd of all.. the Jonathan Taylor Thomasae might just find themselves the victims of "Tragic Zombie Combat Incidents" insuring that you're the sexiest battlehardened zombie fighter around... So you'll be hotter to the type of person you want to be hot to.

3rdly... You don't have to be faster than the zombies... you just have to be faster than the guy next to you.

 

[TheYeti1775]

Heh, so true. I love debating random stuff like this. It is just that this debate is far less fun than I prefer.

See you already broke your ok one more post.

I actually love the scenario planning stuff. For me there are plenty of real life scenarios to pull on for it, and think about.

 

[TheYeti1775]

*snip*
3rdly... You don't have to be faster than the zombies... you just have to be faster than the guy next to you.

No truer statement than that in all of Zombieland.

 

[TwinBahamut]

So the archetypal outbreak - Night of the Living Dead isn't 'typical'? Please.

Not familiar with that example. I'm not certain I would call it "archetypical" these days. Either way, I say it is a problematic genre-crossing, and should be treated as such, rather than the norm.

I beg to differ. And please stop moving the goalposts - you said a portion of the population. And even with a 100% infection scenario (unlikely at best), you're far more likely to see a major city (unsuccessfully) sealed off. Even sealed, like Manhattan, the zombies simply walk into the water and emerge on the other side. Sealing a city off doesn't put it in a hermetic dome; there is no 100% effective cordon, sorry.

I never moved my goalpost, you just misunderstood me. When I said "overrun by half a million zombies", I wasn't talking about a halfway infection that left survivors. I am talkng about the classic "the whole city is full of zombies, and only a single hero/special ops military team is left to escape/stop the root of the problem" plot. In other words, 99% of zombie plots.

Plenty of other threads to post in, if you feel you're not contributing here.

This kind of statement is poor form. No, you are not winning this argument. I am just not enjoying this debate with you, that is all. Goodbye.

 

[Jim Hague]

Not familiar with that example. I'm not certain I would call it "archetypical" these days. Either way, I say it is a problematic genre-crossing, and should be treated as such, rather than the norm.

Wait...you don't know anything about Night of the Living Dead in either incarnation? Then I submit that you're really not going to be grounded in the tropes of the subgenre we're talking about here.

I never moved my goalpost, you just misunderstood me. When I said "overrun by half a million zombies", I wasn't talking about a halfway infection that left survivors. I am talkng about the classic "the whole city is full of zombies, and only a single hero/special ops military team is left to escape/stop the root of the problem" plot. In other words, 99% of zombie plots.

Excepting that the vast majority of zombie-oriented plots, including the Dead films and Italian knockoffs like Zombie have no plot even resembling that. Most of the time, it's ordinary people in extraordinary circumstances that's at the heart of the genre.

This kind of statement is poor form. No, you are not winning this argument. I am just not enjoying this debate with you, that is all. Goodbye.

Like I said - it's obvious you're not enjoying the genre discussion or the thread. I hope you find one suiting your tastes and knowledge more fully.