Z's and their HP

Game Talk The Drawing Board
41

A documentary on TV…some war/police one a few years ago… I just did a google for an exact source and I can’t provide one. Sorry about that.

The explanation was that from an unloaded, holstered, unprepared stand point (aka worst possible situation for the shooter) took 10 seconds approximately. The main time sink was the loading.

I'll have you know it takes 30 seconds to cover 20 feet in my made up, fictitious universe! 20 feet! NOW THAT IS FUCKING FAR!

Fuck you, your childish arguments, your cherry picking AND your sarcasm.

The Tueller Drill...assailant to cover 7 yards.
I am also finding a whole lot on some 21 foot rule. source: First google search for "10 second rule with knives vs guns"[/quote]

Cherry picking? You make groundless assertions based on some “documentary on tv” a “few years ago” and you blame me? You’re totally unbiased, it’s completely my fault! I accept your assertion as I would the word of GOD! Talk about cherry picking, you cherry pick some documentary you watched years ago and can’t even show any proof of it.

How about no. You’re wrong. Until you have ANY evidence to back up your claims, you’re just making bullshit up. Who the hell would concealed carry without a round in the chamber (you say unloaded, and I generously assume you mean “no round in chamber”; if you seriously mean no bullets at all, you’re a fucking moron)? Are you kidding? And this is a ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE we’re talking about here, let alone dangerous streets after nightfall. Considering the population of New England is now, oh, about 12, I don’t think anyone’s going to worry about accidentally discharging and killing someone.

Admit what? Why the hell would I accept 10 or even 5 seconds? Are you deluded? YOU yourself submitted the Tueller Drill as evidence. I accept that as evidence. It does not REMOTELY imply a knife-wielder has an advantage at 7 yards - only that he is a THREAT (this means the one with gun can LEGALLY shoot him and claim self-defense, which is the entire point of the drill). Tueller found that it takes 1.5 seconds for the assailant to cover 7 yards, and 1.5 seconds for a police officer to draw. Those are EVEN chances at best (and that’s generous as fuck), and I’d still MUCH rather be in the cop’s shoes armed with a gun, than the assailant’s, armed with a knife.

Seriously, I’m starting to think you’re all just trolling. Throw out the evidence YOU submitted when you realize it doesn’t support your claims. “Oh, 1.5 seconds is too short, even though that was my number, let’s JUST MULTIPLY BY 6.7, IT’S STILL THE SAME THING.”

I already pointed out why zombies are weak. They don’t have separate health pools for each body part. An NPC can easily take out zombie after zombie because NPCs are instances of the player class, i.e. they have separate health pools. An NPC (or the player) could potentially take 500 damage or more and still be clinging to life with 1 hp torso and 1 hp head. Compare this to, say, The Walking Dead, where zombies are shown to continue “living” even after their heads have been chopped off.

42

Dynamic spawn penalizes noise: all the shooting accelerated/increased the population of additional spawn-waves.

But I still respect zeds quite more than a jumping spider–those are my go-to when I’m wondering where the day’s rations are to come from.

43

Ejseto, please, die. I don’t have to argue with guy like you. All you say in this thread is just bitching. Seriously, I doubt you have ever had to pull a gun on someone. Neither had I, but at least I’m not making a superman from myself. Tueller’s drill had proven what it proven - knife > gun at close range if weapon is holstered and unloaded. It was nothing but a minor example.

There ya go. Read.

44

[quote=“Sonny, post:43, topic:2137”]Ejseto, please, die. I don’t have to argue with guy like you. All you say in this thread is just bitching. Seriously, I doubt you have ever had to pull a gun on someone. Neither had I, but at least I’m not making a superman from myself. Tueller’s drill had proven what it proven - knife > gun at close range if weapon is holstered and unloaded. It was nothing but a minor example.

There ya go. Read.[/quote]

No, you die. You don’t have to argue? But you are anyway. Making a superman? You’re the one making a superman out of anyone with a knife within 20 feet. “Oh wah wah someone disagreed with me and the evidence I provided doesn’t actually support my assertions! I never learned how to debate but it’s ok because this is the internet and I can just tell anyone who disagrees to die. I sure love ad hominem, it’s so much better than actually learning logic!”

So, this article you linked doesn’t really support what you think it does either. To assume the one armed with the gun wouldn’t take a step back while drawing, or try to put an obstacle between him and the assailant is a pretty big assumption. So is assuming he’s just going to stand there fumbling with his holster while someone knifes him. Might as well assume he’s crippled and blind as well. Hey, while we’re at it, why don’t we take away all his limbs except his pistol hand?

Let me ask you this: do you think you could kill someone who was unarmed with one knife strike, if they were aware and ready for you, 100% of the time? If you really think you can do this, I’m done even reading what you have to say because you’re clearly delusional. And if you are realistic enough to not think that, I fail to see how having an advantage over someone unarmed can put you in a worse position, unless you’re a complete moron, and we’ve already stipulated similar levels of training.

45

:frowning:

[hr]

I’ve never shot a gun myself, but those cowboys from those movies seem to be able to shoot people pretty fast, even if they were extremely close. Aside from fiction, I think there was a mythbuster episode where they featured a quick draw expert. He didn’t seem to have great accuracy at range, but he did seem to have some semblance of it closer in and managed to plink a coin from mid-air after several attempts.
I don’t know much about modern day practices, but all I ever see are people practicing at shooting ranges where they’re standing still with guns already and popping at a moving target a fair ways away. I’m not sure quick drawing is skill many see should be taught widely. Aside from a few dedicated competitors that participate at quick draw tournaments, I rarely see anyone other than military or paramilitary personnel use any other sort of stance or shooting method.
Perhaps there could be something like different martial arts skills that uses firearms. The quick draw martial practice gets to have the advantage players have now where the closer they are the more accurate they can be and be quick about it too, but suffer at hitting things at range. Kinda like a super close-in ranged technique.

46
What the Tueller Drill really teaches is that drawing and shooting alone are not going to save your life in a close-range encounter.

Here is a quote from that article, that is the closest thing to supporting your assertion. Where did I ever say the one with the gun was supposed to just stand there and hope he can draw in time? WHERE DID I SAY IT? What the FUCK kind of assumption is that, that the one with the gun just stands there? Sure, if he’s complete rookie, that might be reasonable. Someone who stands there fumbling in his holster for his gun while someone rushes and knifes him has PANICKED. We have already stipulated NEITHER OF THEM PANICS IN THIS SCENARIO. So really what is the question here is, can someone who is effectively unarmed survive knife attacks long enough to draw his handgun. The fact that you think that article disproves this just shows how little reading comprehension you have, since THE ARTICLE provides tactics on how to survive long enough to do this.

47

Lol whut , having unloaded gun in your holster kind of kills the reason of having a gun with you. Maybe it works as intimidation for the poor guy with knife , but it sure does make you a bad police man/guard if you do that.

48

Alright. I’m the delusional guy. Internet made it all up. SWAT made it all up. On one side, we have number of stabbed officers from situations like these, on the other side, we have Ejseto who says it’s impossible. About my reading comprehension, logic and other shit you pull out at me:

  1. I didn’t proposed 10 seconds. It was Tenman. I proposed 1/2, then 1/4 time of whole take-out-the-gun-reload-aim-fire, just for your happiness, because 10 seconds are too much, according to you.
  2. You act like you’re made of steel, able to spot everything, dodge every blow and survive every situation, kill guy rushing at you without blinking an eye. That’s why I even started with this. It wasn’t me who sounded like watching too much action movies, it was you in fact. “I can dodge few knife hits”, meh, dude… Knives are fast. And if you plan to back away few steps, plant an obstacle between you and assailant, then say it.
  3. I’m not the only guy who posts regarding to this on this thread, but you see me instead of everyone. There are more guys here who agree with me. And… articles, cops themselves, documentaries… they all support it. Logic that I lack, according to you, dictates me that if it’s proven from many sources that you can get killed in such situation, then it’s true. And if you can’t understand it, then there’s nothing wrong with me.
  4. “I never learned to debate.” You’re the best. You so much love internet, because you can play grumpy tough bastard, “Hey everyone, look at me, I know everything and fuck you all because I like I’m badass.” I try to respect others, and certainly didn’t came in blasting that “you live in fictional universe”. Internet does wonders with character - geeks instantly grow 12 feet high, men turn into women, little kids into FBI and such.
    And answer to your question:
    Killing someone who’s unarmed with knife with one hit is certainly possible, definitely not possible in 100% of cases, and when you’re the one with gun, then it’s definitely not 100% chance that you’ll get out without injury/alive, which you’re telling us all the time, or at least, it looks like it.

Edit: I have to. ehehe
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9igSoJHEdUo#at=87

Yay, wolfspider, unloaded is not meant like having a clip (magazine) without ammo, you have to pull the slide, in case of semi-auto. If someone has a gun without ammo, then he deserves to be fucked :smiley:

Anyhow, I seem to know where is the buried dog. It’s the spawns. Before, with dynamic spawn, pulling a trigger on gun without silencer in middle of a city equaled to suicide. Zeds started to swarm out of nowhere, and shooting them, thus causing even more ruckus, spawned even more of them, so you ended up flooded with zombies, cornered and taking hits from all sides. These zeds were weak, designed to swarm the player. Nothing wrong with that.
But now, we have static spawns. I rarely fought more than 5,6 of them at once. Nothing wrong with that either, except that we still have zombies from dynamic spawn, who are designed to swarm and defeat player with their sheer numbers. So… Back to starting line.

Zombies are weak.

49

Christ, this topic has gotten so off-topic. I still can’t figure out the relevance of the Tenman drill, considering that in this game, it’s 99% probable that you have your gun wielded and loaded if you intend to use it, that zombies (which was the point of this topic I thought?) don’t wield weapons, and the fact that zombies are 30% slower than the player on average. If we were at all posing the Tenman drill for consideration in regards to the use of firearms in Cata, I think these all need to be factored into your argument if you wanna continue to make it.

Also, Sonny, you’re calling the kettle black by pointing out that ejseto said he never learned to debate, considering you’re the one who was the tangential aggressor, considering your lovely claim of ‘please, die’. And since you’re the OP, as well as that lovely, ludicrous suggestion, I think I can make a few assumptions as to why he’s focusing down on you.

50

:smiley: IT’S TUELLER DRILL, NOT TENMAN’S :smiley: Tenman’s the dude who has the same look on the thing as me.

Also, I know there’s a lot of shit here to read, but… I wasn’t the aggressor. My lovely claim ‘please, die’ was an exclamation of frustration. I tried to respect ejseto, but if you skim through this thread, you’ll see that I never tried to be super soldier, and whole shit started just because I wanted to point out that gun at close range doesn’t mean instakill, while ejseto jumped out on me with his arrogant approach.

Yeah, it has gone off topic and ended up in arguing about something marginal. I’ll leave it at everyone’s discretion if I’m the bad guy or not. So… Back to starting line:

Zombies are weak.

51

Well I feel like an idiot now. Saw a ‘T’ name in a comment and didn’t verify.

Also, I have been following the thread since the first post. Again, you’re OP, and also the one who brought up the Tueller drill initially. That’s probably why you’re the one getting the brunt of the fire. Either way, my point stands that ‘please, die’ was a little excessive. Probably should’ve just walked away.

But yes, I do agree. We should get back to the starting line. With that, I’d pose that it makes sense for zombies to be a bit weak, considering that they are meant to come in hoardes. So I’m quite fine with them being a bit ‘one and done’.

52

Well, there are two solutions, either we

  1. leave them weak, but they’ll spawn in large numbers
    or
  2. they’ll spawn as they do now, but will be stronger.

Dunno which is better. But in all cases, strolling into town in broad daylight was a suicide before, now it’s a walk in the park - not fun.

53

I would actually disagree with this statement from my personal experience. Granted, I’ve been playing for less than a week, but I’ve found dynamic spawn to be a hell of a lot easier to play than static. I also find looting by day to be easier than looting by night.

In essence, I am the anti-thesis to every person I’ve met on these forums. I do the exact opposite of what everyone is telling me to do, and I seem to be having a cake walk. >_>

54

Don’t strawman me. I made no claim that it’s impossible for a knife-wielder to kill a gunman at 21 feet. I refute YOUR claim that the gunman is at a disadvantage (pretty sure you claimed it was way worse than that, but I’d hate to make a hypocrite of myself if I’m wrong) under the stipulations that NEITHER PANICS. But hey, what do I know, you got your evidence (by the way, presenting a link and not making an actual argument based on that evidence proves nothing unless the article actually word-for-word argues the exact same thing, which it DID NOT) from the all-knowing internet, and who could possibly dispute the accuracy of the INTERNET? And I know you didn’t propose 10 seconds. But you did try to adopt it, should I find your post to show it to you? And am I wrong about your reading comprehension? Because you certainly didn’t understand the article you linked. So either you didn’t understand what you read, or you didn’t read it at all. You certainly made no argument of your own to try to prove that you did actually read it, so maybe I was hasty in saying that. Able to spot everything? We have ALREADY STIPULATED that the gunman knows he is being attacked by a knife-wielder 21 feet away. If he doesn’t spot him, then the knife-wielder will be able to get considerably CLOSER THAN 21 FEET. Like, oh, I don’t know, knife-at-throat distance. Seriously, quit backtracking on your own premises just because you can’t win the debate under those premises. And I’m responding to both you and that other dude who thinks it’s normal to walk around with a holstered but UNLOADED (it sure as hell doesn’t take 10 seconds to chamber a round, so must have really meant UNLOADED) gun. You just happen to be talking more. If you can’t handle denigration, keep a civil tongue and you won’t get any. You’ve gotten from me less than you deserve based on your own speech. I don’t need to start shit on the internet, but I can’t help responding in kind if someone else does. Seriously, quit straw-manning me. I never once claimed it was impossible for a knife-wielder to win. I think it’s even at best, assuming the gunman hasn’t read about the Tueller Drill. If he has, the knife-wielder’s chances drop considerably, since the gunman (STIPULATING THAT HE DOES NOT PANIC HERE, i.e. he knows what to do and has the nerves to do it) now knows how to counter a knife-wielding assailant.

55

That video from youtube was probably older than internet itself :slight_smile: You sounded like a guy that can’t be ambushed and can win in every situation, including 5 feet or less, and that set me off. Dude, your way of discussing stuff is arrogant, so don’t tell me about civil tongue.

And it’s a basic firearm safety to walk around WITHOUT a round in chamber, same as pointing the thing only where you plan to shoot. Dunno about you, but I wouldn’t risk blowing piece of my butt away because I’m walking around with cocked gun.

56

[quote=“Sonny, post:55, topic:2137”]That video from youtube was probably older than internet itself :slight_smile: You sounded like a guy that can’t be ambushed and can win in every situation, including 5 feet or less, and that set me off. Dude, your way of discussing stuff is arrogant, so don’t tell me about civil tongue.

And it’s a basic firearm safety to walk around WITHOUT a round in chamber, same as pointing the thing only where you plan to shoot. Dunno about you, but I wouldn’t risk blowing piece of my butt away because I’m walking around with cocked gun.[/quote]

My way is arrogant? Funny, I was thinking the same thing about you. Why is ambushing even being considered when it was stipulated from the very beginning that both are aware of each other at 21 feet? I could just as easily turn around and say if the knife-man isn’t aware and gets ambushed, he’ll get shot in the face before he knows what’s going on. Basic firearm safety? Are you kidding? We’re talking about CONCEALED-CARRY, at the very least (no need for licenses or rules in an apocalypse). The people who do that either know what they’re doing (presumably they should know, in order to get the license), or don’t care. Might as well say the gun isn’t in a holster, it’s in the trunk of his car. Gee, I wonder if he can open the trunk of his car before he gets knifed hurr durr. Pretty sure it’s common practice for those who concealed-carry to have a round in the chamber of a dual-action pistol (i.e. it wouldn’t be cocked). What use is getting a license to carry a gun if it’s not ready to shoot at a moment’s notice?

57

I imagine modern day guns have safety features that protect the firing pin from striking the round that older firearms don’t have. The safety should be enough to keep the gun from discharging.

At least according to forums like this: http://www.usacarry.com/forums/concealed-carry-discussion/16501-1-round-chamber-not.html

Almost everyone concedes to carrying the concealed handgun with a round already in the chamber.

58

That might be possible in USA, and I’m out of gun knowledge for quite a while, so if there are improvements which prevent accidental discharge of loaded firearm, it shouldn’t be too much of a hassle to carry loaded gun. Everyone told me to carry gun without round in chamber, since you never know, it’s a mechanical device after all.

You know Ejseto, funny thing is we both argued about shit and we both were right. Depends on angle of look. You seen me as bullshitting you with knife supremacy, I seen you as bullshitting me with gun supremacy. Each weapon has its own pro’s and con’s, be it gun, knife, baton, bare bear hands, combat is chaotic, with lots of variables… I never seen firearm as ultimate weapon, since two of my friends who work as bouncers went against gun barehanded (both are pretty fast and skilled in muay thai, but it was a lot of luck and some alcohol in one case, too) and beaten their assailant. I see guns simply as a weapon, and even though they’re powerful and you stand much better chance with them than against them, they aren’t good for everything. After all, you seen Dan Inosanto in that clip I posted, little dude is like lightning and could’ve slashed these cops easily.

Simply put, we both argue about nonsense, while none of us disagrees with other guy in basic facts like distance. I kinda caught on that “knife on throat” sense, since 5 feet aren’t knife on throat distance and still, you have to either bail or take knife, with no chance to pull the trigger.

I’m touchy since I sleep 4 hours a day lately, so I’m kind of misreading everything and mistake people’s approach, and internet writing lacks some subtle things that are present in verbal communication - so, be cool mate if I’ve been rough on you.

59

You would think that, but there is a huge industry around firearms-discharge barrels based on the simple premise that “negligent discharges are a fact of handling firearms” (from a website that sells the things). Unlike the movies, guns do go off sometimes when they’re not supposed to, even when (you think) the safety is engaged.

60

You would think that, but there is a huge industry around firearms-discharge barrels based on the simple premise that “negligent discharges are a fact of handling firearms” (from a website that sells the things). Unlike the movies, guns do go off sometimes when they’re not supposed to, even when (you think) the safety is engaged.[/quote]

Exactly. If there are enough tolerances in house locks that one can pick them by holding the cylinder and pushing pins which get stuck thanks to these tiny differences, then there are tolerances in guns, which may result in accidental discharge. Both are made with same machines, and even best machines aren’t 100% accurate, there are always tolerances, though small, but still present. It may seem little, 0,08mm and such, but it makes a difference, I should know, I work in industry sector few years now :slight_smile: It might sound strange, but steel and other metals are quite soft, and together with ambient temperature (very important part), metal either expands or shrinks, and it may not even be noticeable, but may result in trouble in case of loaded firearm. There are lots of other factors - spring which pushes the hammer, number of shots ie condition of internal parts, effects of material fatigue, all together with stuff above can contribute to edge moment where weapon suffers small vibration, like stepping down from bigger stair, and BLAM! One ankle-less guy.