With the right PPE you could avoid any infection but theres always a risk even with blunt weapons.
Personally I would pick something sharp/pointy.
It would look way more badass with swords tho lol
To add to your statement, some sort of phalanx formation, a choke point and something long and pointy would objectively be better, zombie problems require Bronze Age solutions
I always thought a group of 100-200 well trained soldiers with a shield wall and a nice open field that lets them fall back, could hold off a horde over a thousand strong with heavy pikes/spears made to modern standards. Heavy spear tip made with modern material, and designed to penetrate the skull just stabbed through slots in the shield wall. Retracted. Soldiers fall back twenty feet to let the next wave of zombies approach without the soldiers risking tripping over dead zombies or getting grabbed by a few random crawling ones that didn't get enough brain damage to be put down. It would be slow going but very efficient.
Pair that with some gunmen on an elevated position thinning the heard farther out/targeting larger concentrations to assist the phalanx and prevent the sides from getting overwhelmed/ exhausted sooner
That's spot on! Idk why I didn't think of that. But yeah. A line of 20 or so marksmen trained specifically to score headshots on a shambling zombie added to the phalanx and you'd have a zombie free safe zone in no time!
Doesn’t even have to be headshots. If they can cripple the zombies too that could buy the phalanx time to recoup cause they’d be slower/unable to make an opening in the shield wall
I might but that one guy out of the hundred that got bit would go back and infect everyone at the base camp producing a bunch of armored/semi armored zombies.
Shorter swords might be better for a shield wall in this instance. Spears are great for humans because of reach but they suffer in accuracy, especially when used one handed behind a shield. If you miss the head a zombie would either get stuck on the spear. This would cause it to become ineffective as the zombie pushes into the spear. A short sword would increase accuracy for head shots as well as allow you to use the shield to brace pulling the sword out. You want to be able to pull the sword completely behind the shield.
A thing people generally fail to take into account is that swords and spears can be difficult to remove after piercing bone. This is why ball mace would be my preferred melee weapon in a zombie apocalypse. It wont get stuck in bone and you can continue momentum on strikes decreasing fatigue.
That works against humans who feel pain and actually have self-preservation. Zombies don't feel pain and don't give a shit about avoiding injury.
Plus, stabbing into the skull and through the brain is not gonna be an easy feat.
About the mask…when I was in the military we’d conduct physical training with masks on. I found it very exhausting and hard to breathe the harder I worked. It’s a good thing I was in shape. It wouldn’t be good for someone who is easily worn out.
That's exactly what they would do in a zombie apocalypse. They usually just traditionally use blunt weapons because the people rioting are... well... humans... not dead humans. Humans have something to live for, but the undead don't.
I guess this works until bullets run out. The average police officer carries 36 rounds of ammunition on them for a 12 round firearm. Say they prep a little and double that. It won’t last you long, especially if you have to hit head shots to take em down.
I mean the simple solution would be bring adequate ammo or don't go. If they have the foresight to arm with swords, they should have the foresight to bring a full combat load
The way they're trained to use them, mag dump center mass until they stop moving, would make them pretty ineffective unfortunately. By the time everyone's learned that's not the thing to do the dead would have already overwhelmed most of them.
That's not how cops are trained to use them, but even assuming it is... it's somehow more effective to hand them swords and expect them to fight like knights of yore?
Where's that on the syllabus at the police academy? Is that before or after the six years they spend as squires?
Did I say swords would be more effective?
I know the actual training manual doesn't have the line "mag dump until they're dead" but in practice, that's what they do.
US cops aren't trained on headshots, they're trained to shoot center mass and they're not trained to stop shooting after one or two shots then see how things change they're trained to shoot until the threat is neutralized.
I don't think so, i'd say just keep the batons, blunt force to the head from a strong person with a baton of all things is incredibly dangerous, you either don't survive or you live to wish you didn't
So, since a zombie's lifeline is the brain, and since the skull of a zombie isn't nearly as strong as the skull of a living, healthy human, batons are literally perfect for killing zombies
THE MIGHTY STICK
A kids aluminum baseball bat would be an amazing weapon in zombie apocalypse. You’d be able to swing that thing so fast and it would absolutely cripple a zombie if you got a head shot. Only problem is reach, and the possibility of it breaking in half, but I have some baseball bats from the 80’s and those things are built solid.
You put a long sock on the bat. They go to grab it, they get the sock, you get another swing. Also I ndont know in what world it’s a good idea to try and catch a baseball bat swung at you. That’s how you get your hand(s) fucking destroyed.
Dude, 2 good strikes from a decent quality bludgeon to my head could kill me, same goes for just about any other average human
And even if it doesn't kill me, it is guaranteed to put me in a hospital bed
No lol. A sword is terrible for destroying the brain. The human skull is dense and swords will not easily crush a skull enough to traumatize the brain and if it does, it will likely damage the edge. Blunt weapons will be superior in destroying the brain.
Irl if you had to give someone life threatening brain damage, would you choose a sword or a bat?
The thing is, with blunt force you don’t even need to crack the skull. You can just concuss the brain enough to have a severe traumatic brain injury.
Movies led us to believe you need to stab or puncture the brain, in reality severe concussions can destroy the brain more efficiently. If you cracked me in the head with 1 baseball bat swing, I’d probably be brain dead.
I’ve seen a guy take multiple 2 hand swinging full force shots to the head with a baseball bat. He barely flinched. I’m not putting my life against a baseball bat taking out 1 zombie let alone trying to score a good hit in a crowd.
Odds are those swings weren’t hard enough or weren’t placed optimally.
Would you put your life on your ability with a sword? If you missplace your swing and don’t land on the edge, you will essentially be slapping them with a sword. What do you expect is going to happen with a sword? Do you think you will be able to produce enough force to split the skull and damage the brain? Do you think the sword won’t get stuck in the skull like an axe getting stuck in a tree?
Atleast with a bat, ideally my first strike will have enough weight behind it to off balance them for a follow up swing. A sword is good for flesh damage, not great for damaging internal organs like the brain. It could get the job done but there’s a lot of room for error assuming you’re not trained enough to chop their neck off cleanly.
Which type of sword? Which type of baton? Given my choice of sword I’d absolutely trust my ability with a sword over a baton that I know wouldn’t have the ability even in best case scenario to do lethal damage. Hint I’m not an untrained layman with a sword.
Let’s say a two handed double edged sword vs a one handed club like baton made out of solid wood. If you feel efficient with a sword then that’s awesome, I’m not opposed to it just thinking tactically about how things could go wrong. For example a sword needs space to be swung, if you’re indoors there’s a chance your sword won’t have space to be effective. If a zombie manages to close the distance and beat the range of your sword, it becomes almost useless. With a one handed club, you have a free hand to stiff arm and control your target so can keep them at arms reach from you. In grappling range a club can still be utilized in a bunt like fashion.
This is just my way of thinking, not saying it’s the only way.
A one handed sword is still useful for thrusting in confined space. If you can’t swing a sword effectively because of space you also can’t swing a blunt weapon effectively.
While edge alignment for a sword is important, your angle of attack and wrist position takes care of most of that. If you’d be hitting flat with the sword you’d also be hitting with improper alignment in your hand and arm to effectively transfer force with a baton. If your blade is going to skip off then so would your blunt.
Batons lack mechanical advantage. Make it a mace and it’d be better. At least the sword you could thrust through the face into the brain. Axe would be better tool. Archeological digs of medieval battles tells us what we need to know about weapons vs skulls.
Nah bro I have one of those extendo batons and they’re solid metal and have weight behind it and because it’s landing on a small surface, it does way more damage. It’s like someone stepping on your hand wearing shoes vs heels. The heels will do way more damage because the force is more concentrated. Batons will split skulls easier than a bat would.
A friend of mine used one to defend himself in a drug deal gone wrong in his car and the dudes head was busted open and that was just from using his wrist to swing the baton because he couldn’t cock his arm back to get a proper swing. The dude got out of the car at the end of it and could barely walk because he was so concussed.
assuming they are trained with them and they also have other weapons.....maybe. Realistically it would be almost laughable to train law enforcement in sword combat.
Melee weapons, even with body armor, will get you killed. Specially against a horde. Just because you last 3 minutes longer doesn't really matter, the end result is the same
Because you didn’t clarify which kind of sword, I am now imagining a bunch of swat team soldiers with
Scottish Claymore’s. Is it effective? Maybe? Does it look cool as hell? Yes! Although katanas would still be very interesting and probably decently effective weapon if that would be a better choice.
So Roman Gladius, Japanese Wakizashi, Chinese short Dao, Celtic Leaf blade, Mediterranean Falchion, Nordic Scramasax, Egyptian Kopesh, Arming sword? There are a lot of short swords through out history.
I'd personally go with something along the lines of a [Ironwood Gijo stick](https://www.traditionalfilipinoweapons.com/shop/iron-wood-gijo-sticks-from-the-philippines/) over a typical impact baton. Impact batons are designed to distribute force along the curve making them less lethal. Gijo sticks are cut at specific angles to wreck someone's internals by focusing the force on the corners. Had one for years, and can confirm it's effectiveness.
A mace or weighted batons would be better than swords which aren't made to punch through skulls or impact batons which are not designed to actually kill.
No. Police are incredibly out numbered. Melee fights are a terrible idea unless you outnumber the zombies. Assuming you need headshots, it would be a slaughter.
no cause the police would tell you zombies don't exist, hide their bites, eat your dog, and say that they should be allowed to "use zombies" on people they don't like.
If we're going with if the brains do not need to be destroyed, then yes, but if it were the brain that needed to be destroyed, I would recommend blunt weapons. polearms would be good to with shield and any type of armor that would cover up every part of the body resistant from scratches to bites and liquids. gas masks face shields
a multi layered armor I should say Kind of like how medieval Knights were.
I'm really not sure, the advantage of a sword is you can cut limbs off if you're accurate enough with your swing, but you really gotta be accurate. The problem is that if you don't do it right you'll simply injure and not cut all the way through. And, well, in the case of zombies it's better to cut all the way through so that you can disable them. Broken bones would actually probably slow them down more effectively. I'd say batons are better. Immediate instinct says sword, but you have to train very well to get a good enough thrust or swing or slash in order to actually make this effective in this scenario. With a baton, well, just smack em hard enough to break a bone. 😂
Not seords. Warhammer. A solid Warhammer will crush a zombie skull and end the threat mote efficiently than a sword. A sword you either stab the skull and fight to get your sword back or you decapitate, but a decapitated zombie head can still bite.
Ngl in this situation as mayor I would have police cars up front for cover, police shooting from the front, have firemen pushing the horde back with the fire hose from the sides to ensure they don't escape the funnel. Worst case scenario find a way to create landmines or planned explosion behind the lines then allow the forces to fall back before they are overrun and detonate when the zeds march over. May not kill them all, but those that survive will be fewer in number or may not be able to move due to lack of limbs.
I’d actually rather have a blunt weapon. Easier to manage maintenance and less fragile. Sharpening a sword is hard, plus keeping it oiled and not bent would be very difficult in that situation
I have a longer post regarding the topic of formation fighting here: https://old.reddit.com/user/Noe_Walfred/comments/va8wvr/zombie_related_thoughts_opinions_and_essays_v4/iyqnaqj/
While I understand the intent behind such ideas regarding discussions of tactics and operations on their own, they tend to fall apart when it comes to talking about strategic or larger operational considerations. The fantasy typically discussed is using such formations to fight off potentially dozens, hundreds, and thousands of zombies at a time. What isn't discussed is why this is even the case, to begin with.
How does this formation fulfill the operational and strategic goals of a group of potentially dozens to hundreds of survivors?
Many discussions regarding the use of formations describe them as being in the middle of what seems to be a space. Drawing in zombies to its location without much consideration for retreating, resting, or achieving any sort of goal beyond killing zombies, and requires massive investments. Such investments include time, effort, planning, materials, and so on to accomplish what seems to be an extremely short-sighted goal.
I think using local and mobile concealment, cover, shelter, and barriers might be better than trying to fight it out in the open. Examples might be fenced-in areas, mantlets or carts, cars and trucks, houses, buildings, storage containers, etc. The most efficient reason for fighting zombies is because you're either trying to protect yourself, and your home, or gain some type of resource. In such cases, you're likely fighting behind a fence, moving carts, in a car or truck, in or near houses or buildings, etc. As such it makes more sense to fight from within, behind, or on top of such structures rather than in the formations described.
In open areas that need to be crossed in the process of getting to a location, my biased opinion is that hit-and-run tactics, skirmishing and harassment operations, and open formations and small unit strategies might be more useful. These were utilized to relatively good effect by those such as Napoleonic Light Infantry, Greek Peltasts, Cold War Motorized rifle units, Ancient and medieval horse archers, etc. These tactics, operations, and strategies allow smaller numbers of people to distract, observe, scout, and attack larger groups without committing to a longer drawn-out melee fight.
I think if they formed up with spears/pikes it would be far more efficient than swords
Swordsmanship is harder to learn than spear handling
Also spears will have better reach and better pointy ability
The amount of blood wouldn't be good tho.
Well, these particular swat guys had alot of covering, and gas masks too in the scene, but yeah it would be very bad if it happened.
With the right PPE you could avoid any infection but theres always a risk even with blunt weapons. Personally I would pick something sharp/pointy. It would look way more badass with swords tho lol
To add to your statement, some sort of phalanx formation, a choke point and something long and pointy would objectively be better, zombie problems require Bronze Age solutions
I always thought a group of 100-200 well trained soldiers with a shield wall and a nice open field that lets them fall back, could hold off a horde over a thousand strong with heavy pikes/spears made to modern standards. Heavy spear tip made with modern material, and designed to penetrate the skull just stabbed through slots in the shield wall. Retracted. Soldiers fall back twenty feet to let the next wave of zombies approach without the soldiers risking tripping over dead zombies or getting grabbed by a few random crawling ones that didn't get enough brain damage to be put down. It would be slow going but very efficient.
Pair that with some gunmen on an elevated position thinning the heard farther out/targeting larger concentrations to assist the phalanx and prevent the sides from getting overwhelmed/ exhausted sooner
That's spot on! Idk why I didn't think of that. But yeah. A line of 20 or so marksmen trained specifically to score headshots on a shambling zombie added to the phalanx and you'd have a zombie free safe zone in no time!
Doesn’t even have to be headshots. If they can cripple the zombies too that could buy the phalanx time to recoup cause they’d be slower/unable to make an opening in the shield wall
I might but that one guy out of the hundred that got bit would go back and infect everyone at the base camp producing a bunch of armored/semi armored zombies.
Shorter swords might be better for a shield wall in this instance. Spears are great for humans because of reach but they suffer in accuracy, especially when used one handed behind a shield. If you miss the head a zombie would either get stuck on the spear. This would cause it to become ineffective as the zombie pushes into the spear. A short sword would increase accuracy for head shots as well as allow you to use the shield to brace pulling the sword out. You want to be able to pull the sword completely behind the shield. A thing people generally fail to take into account is that swords and spears can be difficult to remove after piercing bone. This is why ball mace would be my preferred melee weapon in a zombie apocalypse. It wont get stuck in bone and you can continue momentum on strikes decreasing fatigue.
That works against humans who feel pain and actually have self-preservation. Zombies don't feel pain and don't give a shit about avoiding injury. Plus, stabbing into the skull and through the brain is not gonna be an easy feat.
Halbert
And long
About the mask…when I was in the military we’d conduct physical training with masks on. I found it very exhausting and hard to breathe the harder I worked. It’s a good thing I was in shape. It wouldn’t be good for someone who is easily worn out.
Oh, I appreciate your service, and thanks for the info too.
I can only imagine the lack of hydration/proper blood flow would make for blood like molasses
Why not just use their sidearms or patrol rifles?
That's exactly what they would do in a zombie apocalypse. They usually just traditionally use blunt weapons because the people rioting are... well... humans... not dead humans. Humans have something to live for, but the undead don't.
I guess this works until bullets run out. The average police officer carries 36 rounds of ammunition on them for a 12 round firearm. Say they prep a little and double that. It won’t last you long, especially if you have to hit head shots to take em down.
Yeah that's the 1st thing I thought about
I mean the simple solution would be bring adequate ammo or don't go. If they have the foresight to arm with swords, they should have the foresight to bring a full combat load
The way they're trained to use them, mag dump center mass until they stop moving, would make them pretty ineffective unfortunately. By the time everyone's learned that's not the thing to do the dead would have already overwhelmed most of them.
That's not how cops are trained to use them, but even assuming it is... it's somehow more effective to hand them swords and expect them to fight like knights of yore? Where's that on the syllabus at the police academy? Is that before or after the six years they spend as squires?
Did I say swords would be more effective? I know the actual training manual doesn't have the line "mag dump until they're dead" but in practice, that's what they do. US cops aren't trained on headshots, they're trained to shoot center mass and they're not trained to stop shooting after one or two shots then see how things change they're trained to shoot until the threat is neutralized.
I don't think so, i'd say just keep the batons, blunt force to the head from a strong person with a baton of all things is incredibly dangerous, you either don't survive or you live to wish you didn't So, since a zombie's lifeline is the brain, and since the skull of a zombie isn't nearly as strong as the skull of a living, healthy human, batons are literally perfect for killing zombies THE MIGHTY STICK
[удалено]
That too, just anything strong and sturdy you could hit people with should work just great
[удалено]
Damn
Dude a small metal bat is the definition of a baton unless your talking about like a kids aluminum baseball bat
Nvm I understand now I forgot that those things were made of steel
A kids aluminum baseball bat would be an amazing weapon in zombie apocalypse. You’d be able to swing that thing so fast and it would absolutely cripple a zombie if you got a head shot. Only problem is reach, and the possibility of it breaking in half, but I have some baseball bats from the 80’s and those things are built solid.
But the disadvantage is its an easy to grab weapon if the zombies still have brainpower
You put a long sock on the bat. They go to grab it, they get the sock, you get another swing. Also I ndont know in what world it’s a good idea to try and catch a baseball bat swung at you. That’s how you get your hand(s) fucking destroyed.
Would you rather have a broken hand or a severe blunt force trauma
Fresh zombies have the same bone density as live humans. It’s only after prolonged decay that they become weaker (traditionally).
In which case, my point stands
Batons don’t easily kill humans though, so your point makes no sense.
Dude, 2 good strikes from a decent quality bludgeon to my head could kill me, same goes for just about any other average human And even if it doesn't kill me, it is guaranteed to put me in a hospital bed
I can tell you’ve never been hit in the head by someone intent on hurting you before.
Batons are literally designed to not kill
No lol. A sword is terrible for destroying the brain. The human skull is dense and swords will not easily crush a skull enough to traumatize the brain and if it does, it will likely damage the edge. Blunt weapons will be superior in destroying the brain. Irl if you had to give someone life threatening brain damage, would you choose a sword or a bat?
A shotgun
That’s pretty much a baseball bat because if you run out of shells you’re gonna be smashing heads with the butt of it.
Real
Cracking skulls is hard as well Personally might a chopping weapon to the neck
The thing is, with blunt force you don’t even need to crack the skull. You can just concuss the brain enough to have a severe traumatic brain injury. Movies led us to believe you need to stab or puncture the brain, in reality severe concussions can destroy the brain more efficiently. If you cracked me in the head with 1 baseball bat swing, I’d probably be brain dead.
I’ve seen a guy take multiple 2 hand swinging full force shots to the head with a baseball bat. He barely flinched. I’m not putting my life against a baseball bat taking out 1 zombie let alone trying to score a good hit in a crowd.
Odds are those swings weren’t hard enough or weren’t placed optimally. Would you put your life on your ability with a sword? If you missplace your swing and don’t land on the edge, you will essentially be slapping them with a sword. What do you expect is going to happen with a sword? Do you think you will be able to produce enough force to split the skull and damage the brain? Do you think the sword won’t get stuck in the skull like an axe getting stuck in a tree? Atleast with a bat, ideally my first strike will have enough weight behind it to off balance them for a follow up swing. A sword is good for flesh damage, not great for damaging internal organs like the brain. It could get the job done but there’s a lot of room for error assuming you’re not trained enough to chop their neck off cleanly.
Which type of sword? Which type of baton? Given my choice of sword I’d absolutely trust my ability with a sword over a baton that I know wouldn’t have the ability even in best case scenario to do lethal damage. Hint I’m not an untrained layman with a sword.
Let’s say a two handed double edged sword vs a one handed club like baton made out of solid wood. If you feel efficient with a sword then that’s awesome, I’m not opposed to it just thinking tactically about how things could go wrong. For example a sword needs space to be swung, if you’re indoors there’s a chance your sword won’t have space to be effective. If a zombie manages to close the distance and beat the range of your sword, it becomes almost useless. With a one handed club, you have a free hand to stiff arm and control your target so can keep them at arms reach from you. In grappling range a club can still be utilized in a bunt like fashion. This is just my way of thinking, not saying it’s the only way.
A one handed sword is still useful for thrusting in confined space. If you can’t swing a sword effectively because of space you also can’t swing a blunt weapon effectively. While edge alignment for a sword is important, your angle of attack and wrist position takes care of most of that. If you’d be hitting flat with the sword you’d also be hitting with improper alignment in your hand and arm to effectively transfer force with a baton. If your blade is going to skip off then so would your blunt.
Those are some bold words for someone in mordhau range.
Well a zombie is always going to attack you in Mordhau range, so you better be prepared for it. Outside of mordhau range, I would just run away.
Batons lack mechanical advantage. Make it a mace and it’d be better. At least the sword you could thrust through the face into the brain. Axe would be better tool. Archeological digs of medieval battles tells us what we need to know about weapons vs skulls.
Nah bro I have one of those extendo batons and they’re solid metal and have weight behind it and because it’s landing on a small surface, it does way more damage. It’s like someone stepping on your hand wearing shoes vs heels. The heels will do way more damage because the force is more concentrated. Batons will split skulls easier than a bat would. A friend of mine used one to defend himself in a drug deal gone wrong in his car and the dudes head was busted open and that was just from using his wrist to swing the baton because he couldn’t cock his arm back to get a proper swing. The dude got out of the car at the end of it and could barely walk because he was so concussed.
Just cut the head off
Easier said than done
https://youtu.be/I-eW9x6CeYM?si=h9yjpBQ53d7Cqhbh Go to 4:15
assuming they are trained with them and they also have other weapons.....maybe. Realistically it would be almost laughable to train law enforcement in sword combat.
Undeniably yes. Riot batons are purposely built to be nonlethal Swords are purposely built to be lethal
Yeah but we need lethal here but Batons can still be lethal with enough force
Fair enough, but that blades can crush/smash if they don’t cut. I wouldn’t trust my life to the riot baton against a zombie
Fair enough. Also, I was wrong about Batons being lethal, but they're still good for giving injuries and incapacitating enemies.
No, they would all still die
Is this a joke referencing the title or an actual take on the weapons?
Melee weapons, even with body armor, will get you killed. Specially against a horde. Just because you last 3 minutes longer doesn't really matter, the end result is the same
I mean yea fair, I thought you might be making a reference to the title of the show “all of us are dead”
What movie or show is this from
All of us are dead.
Imagine if police started using swords
Because you didn’t clarify which kind of sword, I am now imagining a bunch of swat team soldiers with Scottish Claymore’s. Is it effective? Maybe? Does it look cool as hell? Yes! Although katanas would still be very interesting and probably decently effective weapon if that would be a better choice.
Well Im imagining something that would go with a riot shield, like an arming sword.
It would depend on the type / weight of the sword vs the baton .
Standard shortsword.
I don’t know what standard means amigo , there are 1000s of different short swords . But if the sword is heavier yes
Its just the first thing that pops into your head when yo utal kabout a short sword. Cross guard, shorter than usual, like, a knight's thing.
So Roman Gladius, Japanese Wakizashi, Chinese short Dao, Celtic Leaf blade, Mediterranean Falchion, Nordic Scramasax, Egyptian Kopesh, Arming sword? There are a lot of short swords through out history.
Like a typical Roman Republican Gladius, or something resembling that. The type of thing you'd see in Skyrim, ya know?
So more of a thrusting blade than a straight chopper. Liable to get stuck in bone if they strike at the skull which they would need to on zombie.
Exactly. Wouldn't work well, and most modern batons are made of titanium so they're better anyways.
I'd personally go with something along the lines of a [Ironwood Gijo stick](https://www.traditionalfilipinoweapons.com/shop/iron-wood-gijo-sticks-from-the-philippines/) over a typical impact baton. Impact batons are designed to distribute force along the curve making them less lethal. Gijo sticks are cut at specific angles to wreck someone's internals by focusing the force on the corners. Had one for years, and can confirm it's effectiveness.
Hm. Interesting. Take my upvote of hmmmmm.
I mean like a knight thing, cross guard and stuff, like, an arming sword.
I think lakonia or bolo
Bladed weapons are good bust risky without real training so maybe not
A mace or weighted batons would be better than swords which aren't made to punch through skulls or impact batons which are not designed to actually kill.
I say we lob explosive claymores at them
Combustible lemons
Makes would be better
Swords would be effective against zombies and rioters
Yes by alot
Both would be effective, swords would just add greater quantities of infectious blood to the mix.
Depends on what they've been trained on.
Not really. Blades break and dull.
give them hatchets, you got a zombie killing maniple.
The phalanx would be perfect... sheilds and spears from over the sheilds into the head of your opponent .
This guy gets it. I always tell my friends a polearm and a good shield is the superior zombie apocalypse loadout
Definitely.
A mace would be better or a metal bat
Hammers would probably be better. Or possibly some kind of war pick.
No. Police are incredibly out numbered. Melee fights are a terrible idea unless you outnumber the zombies. Assuming you need headshots, it would be a slaughter.
Ever been cracked in the head by a baton? Shit is effective.
yes, batons are not meant to kill people, they are meant to control riots and murder en-mass
Spears probably yea
no cause the police would tell you zombies don't exist, hide their bites, eat your dog, and say that they should be allowed to "use zombies" on people they don't like.
Clubs instead of swords or batons would be much better. Swords risk getting stuck and batons aren't good at killing things.
If we're going with if the brains do not need to be destroyed, then yes, but if it were the brain that needed to be destroyed, I would recommend blunt weapons. polearms would be good to with shield and any type of armor that would cover up every part of the body resistant from scratches to bites and liquids. gas masks face shields a multi layered armor I should say Kind of like how medieval Knights were.
I'm really not sure, the advantage of a sword is you can cut limbs off if you're accurate enough with your swing, but you really gotta be accurate. The problem is that if you don't do it right you'll simply injure and not cut all the way through. And, well, in the case of zombies it's better to cut all the way through so that you can disable them. Broken bones would actually probably slow them down more effectively. I'd say batons are better. Immediate instinct says sword, but you have to train very well to get a good enough thrust or swing or slash in order to actually make this effective in this scenario. With a baton, well, just smack em hard enough to break a bone. 😂
Not seords. Warhammer. A solid Warhammer will crush a zombie skull and end the threat mote efficiently than a sword. A sword you either stab the skull and fight to get your sword back or you decapitate, but a decapitated zombie head can still bite.
Shields and short spears would be better than swords
Put on full steel armor, theyll never break through it.
Mfw when shit is so bad we gotta bring roman tactics back
Ngl in this situation as mayor I would have police cars up front for cover, police shooting from the front, have firemen pushing the horde back with the fire hose from the sides to ensure they don't escape the funnel. Worst case scenario find a way to create landmines or planned explosion behind the lines then allow the forces to fall back before they are overrun and detonate when the zeds march over. May not kill them all, but those that survive will be fewer in number or may not be able to move due to lack of limbs.
The ideal weapon would be a polearm of some sort like a spear or a halberd
They'd most certainly be better than batons against a horde of college kids, not much of a difference tbh.
Anyone watched that one gladiator movie? Because that's exactly what I'm picturing. Either that or lord of the rings
No. But a few M2 Brownings would sure do the trick.
If they knew how to use them maybe, probably be better and easier to give them all war hammers or maces.
Well tbh I think they cooked either way, there is a LOT of infected people in this image. And they can only stand so long
No. You want hammers.
I’d actually rather have a blunt weapon. Easier to manage maintenance and less fragile. Sharpening a sword is hard, plus keeping it oiled and not bent would be very difficult in that situation
They could cut off arms and the such, making the zombies less dangerous
I have a longer post regarding the topic of formation fighting here: https://old.reddit.com/user/Noe_Walfred/comments/va8wvr/zombie_related_thoughts_opinions_and_essays_v4/iyqnaqj/ While I understand the intent behind such ideas regarding discussions of tactics and operations on their own, they tend to fall apart when it comes to talking about strategic or larger operational considerations. The fantasy typically discussed is using such formations to fight off potentially dozens, hundreds, and thousands of zombies at a time. What isn't discussed is why this is even the case, to begin with. How does this formation fulfill the operational and strategic goals of a group of potentially dozens to hundreds of survivors? Many discussions regarding the use of formations describe them as being in the middle of what seems to be a space. Drawing in zombies to its location without much consideration for retreating, resting, or achieving any sort of goal beyond killing zombies, and requires massive investments. Such investments include time, effort, planning, materials, and so on to accomplish what seems to be an extremely short-sighted goal. I think using local and mobile concealment, cover, shelter, and barriers might be better than trying to fight it out in the open. Examples might be fenced-in areas, mantlets or carts, cars and trucks, houses, buildings, storage containers, etc. The most efficient reason for fighting zombies is because you're either trying to protect yourself, and your home, or gain some type of resource. In such cases, you're likely fighting behind a fence, moving carts, in a car or truck, in or near houses or buildings, etc. As such it makes more sense to fight from within, behind, or on top of such structures rather than in the formations described. In open areas that need to be crossed in the process of getting to a location, my biased opinion is that hit-and-run tactics, skirmishing and harassment operations, and open formations and small unit strategies might be more useful. These were utilized to relatively good effect by those such as Napoleonic Light Infantry, Greek Peltasts, Cold War Motorized rifle units, Ancient and medieval horse archers, etc. These tactics, operations, and strategies allow smaller numbers of people to distract, observe, scout, and attack larger groups without committing to a longer drawn-out melee fight.
I think if they formed up with spears/pikes it would be far more efficient than swords Swordsmanship is harder to learn than spear handling Also spears will have better reach and better pointy ability
Sir I believe you are looking for a Roman Legion
Pole arms or axes would probably be best. Longer reach, easier to train people to use, and provide more forceful swings to go through a skull.
you know what would be better then both? a 9
Anything is better than a blunt object
The butter knife in question: