
| Pages: [1] 2 |
|
AchillesHeel »
Posted 2/3/07 10:04:00AM Me and some nerd friends, anticipating the premiere of AMC's "The Walking Dead", were debating the merits of different sorts of firearms in the following circumstances: - You're entering a building, facing an unknown number of adversaries at close quarters. - Head shots are of vital importance; a body or limb hit is only useful insofar as it knocks the target off his feet or renders the limb mechanically useless. - Your targets are implacable: They don't feel pain or fear, or suffer shock or blood loss. - You could find yourself outnumbered, swarmed by targets. - On the bright side, your targets aren't armed; they're trying to grapple with you and bite you. They don't even have knives or clubs. - They're also pretty stupid and predictable, employing neither tactics nor teamwork other than the aforementioned swarm attack. Most people were debating between a shotgun, for its stopping power and destructiveness, and an SMG, for better odds of a head shot and for engaging multiple targets in quick order. I was the only advocate for having a good pistol instead. Being able to keep my gun level with one hand while I use my other hand for something else (opening a door, holding a flashlight, checking a person for a pulse) sounds useful. I've fired a long gun a handful of times (a hunting rifle, not a shotgun), and I don't know if I'd want to take one into tight quarters. Maybe there are short shotguns I'm not aware of. I also can't imagine firing one with one hand and, y'know, hitting anything besides the floor. I've never fired an SMG of any kind, but I'm not convinced that the rate of fire actually makes it easier for an inexpert shooter to score a head-shot. I'd be more worried about running out of ammo and firing half of my burst into the ceiling. Assume that availability isn't a concern. If you could get your mitts on whatever you wanted, as well as sufficient ammunition, what would you choose? |
|
PABLOMAFIOSO »
Posted 6/24/07 12:50:00PM I would have to go with the AA12. An automatic shotgun which is devastating at close range and also useful from a distance. It is on C.O.D Modern Warfare 2 but is way better in real life (or fake zombie scenario). Check out this vid to see some cool modifications which have vastly improved it. Note the green shells near the end. I would definitely be packin' those. The AA12 |
|
Jackelope »
Posted 1/30/07 10:59:00AM Definitely a shotgun. Preferably with a flashlight attachment. Although I will say that the number one thing I'd be worried about with a shotgun is reload speed. |
|
Wand_is_GOD »
Posted 1/28/10 6:13:00AM C7A2 :D |
Rush »
Posted 1/31/07 10:42:00PM
Given the circumstances I would go with the shotgun too. I figure, a pump action shotgun holds enough shots to a reasonably sized room with zombies. If I didn't have enough shots to clear a room of zombies I would be seriously rethinking going in there (or the building for that matter). |
|
BlueSkiesBurn »
Posted 6/1/08 3:18:00PM Mossberg 590 w/ the 16 inch barrel. The short barrel is ideal for clearing out always and moving around corners. Plus it holds 8 shells (though most can be modded anyhow) and it has sites. |
|
AchillesHeel »
Posted 2/3/07 10:04:00AM Yeah, I was thinking one of the pistol-grip shotguns. I'd still need to use two hands, but it would be maneuverable, and the sheer power of a shotgun at close range means you could knock something down or back with a hit to the body. |
Jackelope »
Posted 1/30/07 10:59:00AM
I'd want a collapsible/foldable butt stock that way if I needed to I could extend it and throw a couple butt stroke attacks at the zombies |
|
gartface »
Posted 7/29/07 7:00:00PM Two Skorpions :) But yeah, probably a shotgun. |
|
mkiv9secsupra »
Posted 1/30/07 1:49:00AM shotguns?!?! never UMP .45 is the beast ![]() edit or maybe an AK-74 |
|
Svartorm »
Posted 1/24/07 8:41:00PM If we're taking zombies, I'd go with a Springfield XD in 9mm and get some really low-power rounds. It hold hold 17 rounds per magazine, and with a low-presssure round, you could make head shots all day with little recoil. _______________________________________ |
AchillesHeel »
Posted 2/3/07 10:04:00AM
Yeah, that sounds good. After watching the second episode of "The Walking Dead", I'm also thinking that something with a sound suppressor might be in order too. For one, you don't want to attract every bad guy for miles around. Second, if you're in tight quarters, you might not want to blow your own eardrums through either side of your head (during the scene where they scout out the sewer I was thinking, "crap, don't go shooting anything while you're in there"). You wouldn't want to wear ear protection, for obvious reasons. |
AchillesHeel »
Posted 2/3/07 10:04:00AM
Yeah, see, aren't these in the "really friggin' loud" category? Like whatsername said, 'you just rang the dinner bell.'
|
|
AchillesHeel »
Posted 2/3/07 10:04:00AM Ah, here's 15 or 16 rounds from a Springfield XD 9mm with a suppressor. It's loud, but if you were inside, you might not be heard from too far away. And some Chow Yun Fat action! (I wonder if she hit anything..?)
|
BlueSkiesBurn »
Posted 6/1/08 3:18:00PM
At a certain point suppressors won't be effective in some place like a sewer. It's only gonna lower it to around 80 decibels or so, which in a confined space, will resonate rather loudly. This is just my understanding of suppressors. I've never had the need to purchase one and I hear that unless you intend on keeping it for life it has a horrible resale value. So, I've only really seen people fire suppressed weapons and I can't really say that I believe it would be all THAT helpful in a closed quarter environment like a sewer. |
| Pages: [1] 2 |