SilentLight

To give the players something back, I think they should be allowed to dig vertical holes with a shovel, which zombies (and maybe players?) can fall into, allowing them to intentionally set up booby traps that aren't overkill. Understanding these zombies have to be really, really dumb will make the whole 'hiding on the second floor of a floaty rope tower' difficult to counteract. I was going to alternatively suggest having them having a chance of intentionally destroying the rope, even when the player isn't present, however I feel that's incredibly harsh, where-as a climber would be a manageable but persistent threat and nuisance. Limited Durability Sheet Ropes? Alternatively, it could be made so sheet ropes have limited durability. I get their purpose is to be used for escape (per Brooks' survival guide), but in reality cloth would not make for a durable climbing unit and it would rip (the more weight being carried up, the more it will tear). So maybe it should only be viable for a couple of uses - enough to make an impromptu escape with, but not so durable it becomes a de facto climbing ladder. A rope might be more durable, but a single nail is going to struggle to withstand the repeated climbing/weight shifts, and either the rope is going to fray or the nail will dislodge (maybe a rope gives 10 uses compared to a sheet rope's 2?). If accessibility is intended, then perhaps a dedicated, more durable rope ladder could become an option, requiring multiple ropes (not sheet!) and multiple nails. This would actually give an incentive to upgrade from a makeshift 'rope' made out of clothes to a properly made rope. You could then make a highly durable metal ladder as the 'final form'. I am curious though - how mindless are these zombies? Is there any flexibility to this rule, E.G. they can (somehow) open doors or open windows? Or any particular non-mindless task they're allowed to perform that doesn't violate the restriction?

Really cool animation system and more in-line with naturalistic corpse carrying. Are there any plans to introduce a "fireman's carry" for E.G. injured survivors being carried by uninjured survivors?

I shall.

As said before, I am not in the habit of decompiling and nabbing other people's code, normally I compile my own code, or compile code that has been intentionally made public (E.G. open source). And I have been busy over the last few weeks. I recently posted a thread where I had uploaded 53 AI generated sound files and the software did not write itself (this is coupled with another project for SQLite data management I was also working on). Of course I will try the front door by asking (after doing searches, which I have done), rather than forcefully smashing in the backdoor. One usually does it the hard way after exhausting more appropriate options. I'm sorry if my mentioning my prior experience seemed rude or arrogant. I only thought I was bringing up relevant aspects. I do not think I asked you to do the work for me. I think I asked for a guide? There's a difference between passively looking at individual class files via decompilation (which is what I was doing earlier), and actually getting a working executable. Usually one compiles the unaltered code first to make sure the base code runs (I.E. compilation works fine) before one tries to implement tweaks. And Intellij did not successfully compile the code (it unhelpfully pretends the builds have succeeded but doesn't actually produce anything), and does not a bulk export for the decompiled code (meaning I can't try to use something other than Intellij to compile it). And I'm not trying to create a fork of Project Zomboid where I implement a hacky workaround for compilation. What I'm trying to do is keep the code as close to original as possible, so if I end up improving something, I can offer the appropriate code segment. Yes, I could write some Python code to scour the entire folder structure using a lightning strike search (or a glob, I guess, but would still need filtering), and then run each filename through a piped command to a single-file decompiler, recreating the entire structure but decompiled, but I feel like there ought to be an easier way, I.E. one that already exists. The last time I decompiled a Java project was a single small jar 6 years ago and it was purely to extract the very limited list of API calls in a discontinued prototype that had no documentation - and the documentation was searched for first. The scope isn't the same, and I wasn't required to recompile it. The 'zombie' folder alone has a reported '3,122 files', and it is daft of me to try to implement my own decompilation/recompilation approach if documentation for the right approach already exists. Nearly all the examples online presume a single jar. If there are no pre-existing solutions, then it is fine for me to implement my hacky approach. The folks who are interested, if they have the knowledge, did not make it public. Most report symbol errors, and none mention the fixes. And, maybe it is the text, but I'm genuinely not trying to argue with you, I am trying to ask questions, learn whilst offering my viewpoint. I am supportive of PZ, though I do feel criticised and maybe that is impacting my tone. A trial by fire, very well. I will go find my proverbial fire axe and go smash in the proverbial backdoor.

That's okay, it's why they're suggestions. We can always adjust the ideas or ignore them. I'm not suggesting visually distinctive zombies, but behaviourally different, and they're intended to address what I think is player cheese, they're not meant to be specialised classes. So the climber zombie is still a standard zombie - it's just one capable of climbing ropes. In theory, you could give a climbing trait to all zombies, but I feel like it would result in swarmed ropes. Does that include Brook's work in World War Z, which follows on from his survival guide? Perhaps I have misremembered, but weren't zombies capable of 'stack-climbing' (they could climb on each other unintentionally to scale even tall walls)? I don't know the proper term for it. Perhaps my rope climbing suggestion is maybe too sophisticated for a mindless zombie, although I tried to keep the suggestion functionally simple from a coding standpoint. You could have the zombies mindlessly stack up on each other, which would be Brooks consistent? But I imagine that would be coding hell to implement. I'll rethink the fire suggestions if it is pure mindlessness zombies. Perhaps the zombies could extinguish the campfire flames as they walk over it instead? It would still mean the cheese is partially viable, but if you had a low ignition rate, it would be more likely the campfire would get extinguished (by treading/disruption/oxygen removal from sheer quantities of zombies). I like this suggestion as a variant to the 50/50 mechanic, and it is what I thought would have happened if I had my back turned to an open window with a zombie behind it when I first started playing. Also seen in Resident Evil (whilst yes, I know they're a games series, it was also turned into movies).

I have not encountered such documents. To be clear, I understand how to write Lua code, but this isn't what is meant by code documentation - I would like to learn what API calls are possible. Successful decompilation does not always mean successful recompilation, and is dependent on the decompiler successfully interpreting the Java bytecode (which it may not do). I have exhausted the Wiki's links (assuming you mean the ones found on https://pzwiki.net/wiki/Modding). Yes, these guides include the Github one I mentioned, however they are not typically complete, and besides the very basics (E.G. item additions) often don't have working examples. To be clear, I'm not looking to simply copy-paste another mod and then drop in replacements, I would like to try to write custom code from scratch. Respected, but I am confused - you did suggest I mod, and aired support for the modding community - do I not count? I suggest changing the base game and you disapprove. I adjust to modding the game and you disapprove. Why?

I would be curious what aspects you feel are incompatible. I admit I am using a game design approach and highlighting how some games design themselves to avoid players making things unfun for themselves, I feel like I didn't make any concrete suggestions. I know I gave examples, but those apply to other games (PZ is not HL2 or BotW, which are radically different games). I fully respect disagreement, it's how new ideas emerge. Realistically for me, the best way would be to try to showcase my ideas, however I'm still in a beta-testing phase (I did write up some zombie AI proposals elsewhere but I'd prefer to test those by some means to see how they affect gameplay). This is actually the approach I wanted to take first, but I will confess I am struggling. Documentation for Lua modding is quite patchy, maybe it exists somewhere but I've been struggling to find it - there's a few barebone details on Github that vaguely mention folder structure, and one very slow paced 18 minute long YT video on how to add an item, however I was hoping to find something that documents/lists all the things the Lua scripting is able to access, and the appropriate function documentation that goes with it. I've also attempted to decompile and recompile Build 41. Whilst Intellij IDEA allows me to examine the files, it does not seem to have an option to bulk export them as .java files so I can edit them in the tool of my choice (I wanted to copy it into a separate clone directory for tweaking without destroying my own copy of the game). In-fact it seems most decompilers lack a bulk-export as a feature. I've not been able to successfully compile a cloned copy as a result, and I've got a sneaking suspicion the .so library files (as I'm on Ubuntu) called by pzexe.jar are generated by a C makefile or similar, and I don't have the original copy of the code for the .so Currently, what I would like to be able to do is: Create a decompiled copy that I can then recompile to test code optimisation tweaks and/or show-case gameplay adjustments, and/or Use Lua to tweak gameplay mechanics (zombie AI behaviour, collision detection, speed, etc), with a lower priority eye towards a UI redesign I recognise I'm biting off more than I can chew, but I would really prefer it if I could work in the original Java, or decompiled Java I can recompile (I prefer modifying code directly). I'm just not in the habit of decompiling and nabbing folks code. I wouldn't propose a removal of weight limits. The Breath of the Wild mechanic was simply an example of what I meant by 'protecting the player from themselves' (I.E. preventing them turning into min-max micro-management Excel spreadsheet user doing anally retentive floating point checks). I didn't mean to suggest it as a specific mechanic for PZ to adopt. PZ kinda has a mechanic that already goes some way to solving the micro-management problem - foraging. The fact the picked up food goes stale so quickly forces the player to eat it relatively quickly (sans a freezer) which reduces food hoarding, keeping the inventory space clear. You also have subtle penalties (unhappiness) on items that should be used elsewhere (E.G. maggots for fishing) which subtly encourages players to not 'waste' maggots by eating them. I think zombies having a chance to be carrying food (given there will be those who were shopping or survivalists) would also reduce excess carrying dependency. Player behaviour mechanics don't have to be contrary to the design of the game. In-fact, they're usually tailored specific to the game itself (usually based on playtesting and player behaviours that are undesirable or are unfun). One thing I think PZ could benefit from are objectives. These aren't objectives that 'complete the game', but ones that make the player's life "easier" when completed (fetch quests, lore exploration, item exchange, etc), giving players something to do ('busywork tasks'). I suspect your NPC update might introduce something akin to this. I think the character should be allowed to adapt (unless the player specifically disables it via a negative trait, E.G. cowardice), however I would o.f.f.s.e.t [why does this word change to 'havefset'?] this by suggesting maybe the zombies ought to evolve too. Weaker ones dying out, being replaced by stronger and faster ones as time goes on. After all, the player and the environment will kill off the weaker ones over time, until you get 28 Days Later sprinter zombies. - I really, really want to get into the PZ code so I can start tweaking things - I recognise it might be a bit pointless given I'm on B41 and B42 is in the pipeworks - but I need to start somewhere. A step-by-step guide on getting decompiled B41 code, and then recompiling it to run for Linux would be good. Can DM me if it isn't supposed to be public knowledge.

Having observed zombie behaviours, as well as the various combat tactics which seem... un-movie-like, I have a partial list of AI tweaks which I think might work to address gameplay mechanics, and introduce interesting dimensions of risk to gameplay. Zombies Avoid Fire I recognise PZ follows the trope of 'all zombies are braindead dumb', but I think it leads to behaviour that's too easy to cheese if they're too stupid, and they should have some 'basic survival instincts' to make them more challenging. Having zombies avoid fire would mitigate tactics such as leading them into campfires, as well as going near other, already on-fire zombies, meaning a zombie horde won't naturally spread fire to other zombies. It has the added benefit of preventing a single zombie from stumbling through a fire and burning a player base down, and it mitigates campfire cheese as it would mean the zombies would path around the campfire, and not cluster around on-fire zombies. On-fire Zombies "Panic" This would simply be a random "drunken walk" (nothing too CPU intensive). So instead of constantly chasing the player, on fire zombies become confused and 'panic' (I mean, if their eyes have melted, their nose is full of soot and their ears are burnt to a crisp how can they navigate to the player anyway?). This would mean the on-fire zombies will "break away" from the zombie horde (thus reducing the odds of setting the other zombies on fire), and there's a real chance they could run off into forests and buildings to set them on fire during this "panic" state. Accelerating Zombies Zombies who have been pursuing a player for a while, instead of having a static, constant speed, will start to accelerate as their zombie adrenaline starts pumping. This means if a player tries to simply do a "brisk walk" to outwalk zombies in a straight line, it won't work and eventually the zombies will go from a shamble, to a walk, to a jog, to an all-out sprint. The acceleration decreases whenever zombies lose line-of-sight of the player, and resets back to zero if they get hit or shoved. Injured zombies cannot accelerate. Climbers Periodically, a spawned zombie will have the trait that they "like" to climb things (basically: if there's any sheet rope or rope it can climb in range, it will climb up it; this takes priority over everything except chasing the player). This is to make it so sheet ropes become a liability if left out as an "easy" way to avoid zombies. 50/50 Fence Mechanic Zombies have a 50/50 chance to not cross a fence. Currently tactics for killing zombies involve back-and-forth vaulting over a (short) fence endlessly. In reality, zombies would not perfectly cross a fence every single time, and some zombies would get stuck on the other side. This would not only aid player escape (meaning every fence you cross is a 50/50 chance of losing zombies), but also would avoid this abnormal fighting tactic (as the end result would be zombies on both sides of the fence meaning you can't easily one shot crossing zombies). Disabled Zombies Some zombies will spawn with disabilities. Specifically, either a lack of hearing or a lack of vision (mutually exclusive). Lack of hearing means players cannot guarantee shouting or making noise will clear an area. Lack of vision means using line-of-sight to draw aggro won't work. Noisy/Screamer Zombies Some zombies on spawn will have the trait of being noisy/screamer zombies. They make noise the moment they spot the player, drawing other zombies in an area to the screamer zombie. This prevents players from easily 'picking off' zombies one-by-one. Bite-less Zombies Some zombies have the trait they cannot bite under any circumstances (implied: missing bottom jaw, missing teeth, broken neck, etc). This is to reduce the prevalence of bite events whilst still presenting threats (they can still lacerate or scratch), to make up for the introduction of smarter zombies. Zombies also have a probability of being turned into a biteless zombie via player attack with specific weapons (E.G. hammer), meaning the better you are at fighting (and not merely armour!), the lower your overall risk of being bitten. Stealth Zombies These zombies spawn in trees and other ideal hiding spots, however unlike normal zombies, they don't redistribute or form rally groups, so they're always in hiding, waiting to surprise a player. May also optionally ignore 'loud' sounds like shouting or idling cars and only attack the player when they're in range (so they can "ambush" players). Dozy Zombie Mechanic If a player opens a door in a house to a room that contains a zombie (indoor zombies only!), and that zombie was not alerted to the player's presence before hand, the zombie will be in a dozy state and will not 'instantly' chase. This both rewards stealth and gives noobs a chance to react (E.G. by shutting the door again if unarmed) to their first zombie encounter.

I think perhaps my views seemed more critical than intended (it sort follows on from the context of the vanilla server discussion earlier). So earlier in that original discussion, I mentioned I didn't mind other players using mods, I however feel some mods are compensating for unintended gameplay mechanics. I "embrace the suck", as you say, because for me, I'm approaching this game from a beta-test angle. In gameplay design, there's a view towards protecting a player 'from themselves'. For example, players in video games will often hoard and not use health items, fearing some upcoming boss battle. What ends up happening is not only do they not use the items during the course of the game (which is what they're supposed to be for), they also don't use it during the boss battle. The end result is the player engages in hoarding and micro-management of the inventory in what should be a fast-paced game. Half-life 2 solved this by making medkits instant use. Other games solve this by making stationary healing areas, or by limiting the health item slot to one, encouraging the player to use up spares. Some games lean into the hoarding factor and encourage it, by making it more pleasant by removing inventory micro-management (for example, Link in BotW can hold basically an infinite number of meals. Don't ask where he stores it all). It strikes me currently that players are so singly afraid of that one-bite-run-ender (especially if one has been squirrelling away a lot of resources), they either play extremely safe, in a way that's arguably not fun and defeats the point of having zombies (go to a remote enough wood area and you're basically in sandbox Minecraft), or upon the tiniest unfair mistake - and they do happen - they fire up debug mode and remove the infection via god mode. The other way being, they invent a mod that mitigates that risk; cures, super-thick body armour, a crap ton of guns. Essentially it strikes me the players are trying to avoid the key feature of Zomboid, which are the zombies. What you end up with is a sort of... remote wood hoarding simulator. Which suggests to me the gameplay mechanics need an adjustment. I've not yet sussed what the adjustment needs to be as I'm testing the 'hide in a remote house' strategy. For me, I had the most fun when I was periodically sneaking from house to house, staying for a period of time in each one, trying to conservatively use canned supplies, whilst killing zombies in backgardens, as I didn't have to worry about trying to ferry goods everywhere. At one point, I thought the zombies stopped pursuing you the moment you went indoors. It's not how they actually behave, but I found the idea of zombies losing interest if you go indoors interesting because it invites a stealthy strategy. I'm having the 'least' fun with the remote house setup. It's safe, but it is... also boring. However, the game hard punishes any exciting playstyles. I tried a run where I was aggressive with a dedicated strength build, and despite capping 100+ zombies (pure melee), it was over by day 3 because of an errant bite. Essentially, the more zombie engagements you have, the higher the probability of a bite, so the game encourages zero zombie engagements. I suspect this might be because killing zombies themselves does not carry any direct rewards (besides maybe better clothing and a bag). I think zombies ought to be carrying food supplies more frequently, as well as maybe other types of more frequent rewards. That way, the risk has a reward as trade-off. I also tried the hobo foraging approach, which sort-of works but because foraging does not find food regularly enough, and most of that foraged food goes stale very quickly (sometimes, such as mushrooms, even immediately!), you end up still setting up a collection point, which then turns into a remote wood base. I'm not sure what the 'right' style of play is, or what the gameplay mechanics should be tweaked to... but I'm not a fan of OCD hoarding where I spend all day inventory sorting, and I'm also not a fan of suicide missions. Still, I think mods are trying to patch the symptoms, and not the cause.

As our discussion is about Vanilla/Mods, I've written a reply for you in a separate thread: I don't want to derail these nice folks thread about their server.

This is a forked thread from a discussion about someone's offer for a free server. I've forked it on the basis the discussion is less about the server offer and more about views on the differences between vanilla and mod experiences. I don't want to derail the other person's thread. Original post I'm replying to. The issue I have with modded play, especially in YouTube videos, is they actually change what the outside perception is of the base experience of Project Zomboid. I was drawn in because of a YouTube video, but I was very confused when I noticed certain features were absent in the game. Many of these videos don't carry disclaimers upfront that they're modded - often just mentioned offhand late into the video - and some them can even give advice that is incorrect for unmodded gameplay. And many of these mods can be contradictory (a 'realistic' weapons mod that introduces a lethal rapid fire BB gun), or contrary to the difficult spirit of Project Zomboid gameplay, for example, rapid fire machine guns, an overabundance of easily accessible guns, easy-to-move doors, overpowered armour that is 'relatively' easy to access, negation of slower-walking-whilst-aiming (without the nimblefooted skill), the introduction of careers that make things easier (E.G. soldier), a bow and arrow that offers stealth and no drawbacks. To me, that effectively feels like I'm cheating the underlying mechanic, or rather, not respecting the underlying intention that things be difficult. I also think it distorts the outside perception of what Project Zomboid actually entails. As an outsider, to me, it looked like a game where you endlessly gun down large hordes of zombies, with maybe some Minecraft-esque base building and survival. A sort of, tower-defence type feel. But when I started playing it, and saw how slow reading for a skill was, and the manual fridge food cooking washing and mood aspect, I said 'this is like the Sims [the classic early 2000s version] with zombies'. And that's probably the more accurate portrayal. The Sims with zombies. Not 'Doom run and gun large hordes'. For me, the jury is still out on my opinion of Project Zomboid. I like the intention, I can see what they're going for - what a Zombie movie would look like if you took away the glamour and showed what happened inbetween. But I also feel like certain elements of the gameplay... don't lend themselves to fun. And I don't mean 'Doom shooty shooty' fun, but the kind of general fun you're meant to have in a game. The skill tree feels grindy and inconsistent - somehow a guy who spends days studying a book knows less than a guy who watched a one hour cooking show(???) and gameplay kinda feels like it swings between two extremes - high intensity all-on zombie fleeing action or household chore simulator. There is something there, I can feel this game has greatness, but, it feels a bit... sloggy. I feel like the mods are an attempt to compensate for the uneven vanilla gameplay, but they're introducing other people's visions of what they think a zombie game should be and nearly all of those views involve 'gunning down large quantities of the undead'. The problem is those ideas aren't novel. I think Project Zomboid is onto something with the Sims angle, but it feels like the zombie combat experience and the time spent hiding like a coward in your house doing household chores in vanilla gameplay are disjointed affairs.

I share a similar sort of viewpoint (less about 'cheating' and more about 'changes the experience'), however it is worth bearing in mind the devs intended for modding to be part of the game, otherwise they wouldn't have added LUA scripting. I'm also not a fan of the idea of having my own installation modded by a third party server, because if the server scene were to grow, there's a risk this could be exploited by bad faith actors, or alternatively, novice modders who simply accidentally implement code poorly. I know some might say the mods are limited in what they could do, but if you're able to perform a while loop and if statements, fork-bombs and perpetual resource loading traps are already a possibility. I don't exactly have the cunning of mind to 'break out of the sandbox', but just because most folks can't, doesn't mean smart folks can't. One merely only has to look at the Minecraft hacking scene to see the talent in programming some of them have. I already know Project Zomboid has people with 'sort of hacks', such as tools that automate experience grinding, and whilst I get those are out of frustration with the slow-grind mechanics, they're already entering that territory. This means mods have a two-way risk: A) Bad faith servers attempting to download mods that engage in some sort of foul play, and B) Bad faith users with installed mods that give unfair advantages over other players I personally think for servers, certified mods or some sort of vetting process/signature ought to be used. If a mod turns out to be bad faith, it is then very easy to revoke the certification if it turns out the mod is bad (bad actor bad, not bad quality bad). Client side hacking is harder to address as the client can spoof their file contents, any sort of hashes etc, and it requires server-side resources to 'keep tabs' for anomalies (I used to build a custom mod to detect hackers in Zombie Panic Source a very long time ago). I personally believe hacking originates from two things - either frustration with gameplay mechanics, which is fixable with tweaks to how the gameplay works (automation best works if a task is extremely repetitive, boring, or non-novel; so don't do this as a gameplay mechanic), or because there's some ulterior motive, such as profit (bot farming, E.G. Runescape), personal validation (E.G. cheating to win). Observant people will notice that highly competitive games will nearly always have far more hacks than cooperative or low-competition games, and games where you can translate items into money (whether legally or illegally) will nearly always be rife with bot farms.

On the topic of alarms, maybe I'm a bit mad, but it has always struck me alarmed buildings appear to have some sort of white vertical... thing on them. At first I used to think they were lights (the right-click menu even seems to treat them as such), but when observing other unalarmed houses, they always seemed to have orb lights on their exterior, not this singular, white stripe 'thing'. And I'm wondering if the developers actually mark alarmed houses with burglar alarm devices and no-one has yet noticed? I find if I check the perimeter of the building for the exterior 'white stripe thing' (which I presume is the burglar alarm), I can determine if a building is alarmed or not before I enter. Maybe it's a total fluke, but since adopting this strategy I don't seem to have ever tripped a building alarm. If I am going mad and just imagining it by pure chance, it should definitely become a feature, and would actually address the 'unfairness' you perceive, by allowing the player some way to offset alarms. I also think it should be possible to risk hotwiring the alarm, with the electrical/mechanic skills essentially acting as a roll-check (a 10/10 in both skills means you never fail, a 0/0 guarantees you always fail), with burglars having an advantage (50% odds of success by default). That way, an alarmed building is never off-limits, just risky to get into.

[I'm purely writing this to blow off steam. It is a technical analysis on how a hypothetical zombie disease could spread, and I will loosely tie it into Project Zomboid lore. It is framed as a narrative device.] Ah, so you fancy yourself a research scientist, do you? Sit down, sit down. Let us examine you, and the wider situation. As you all know, at this Top Secret Research Laboratory in Knoxville, we have animals kennels in our research and development rooms. The kennels, as you've correctly guessed, cannot house much bigger than a dog. Or a monkey. But this isn't 28 days later, there are no rage infected chimpanzees here! Or copyright infringement - this top secret lab is above board. Now, as you may know, when you get infected, you start to experience the symptoms of panic. That is normal, you did get bitten by a dog after all, and sorry, but Beagle #4227 had to be put down. Of course, there is also the confusion and the fever. What is the disease, you say? Is it rabies? Whilst yes, rabies does induce panic and fear, and fever, and it does affect the central nervous system of both dogs and humans alike, and does cause the infected to turn extremely aggressive and to bite others, spreading the infection via saliva, through bites and scratches, it is patently absurd, because as you know, rabies hasn't caused any sort of mass populace of rabidly aggressive bite-spreaders! That's why the antibiotics don't work, those only treat bacteria (although I must profess to confusion about how the general public of Knoxville are under the distinct impression antibiotics can treat colds - those are mostly caused by viruses). But what if, say, we, at the top secret biowarfare research lab in Knoxville that shall not be named, decided to pair the rabies virus, with, say... a prion disease? What then? Yes, yes, I am fully aware of BSE and the implications of beef - although don't tell Spiffos, we've been importing from Europe for years! Anyway, did you know prions cannot be destroyed by cooking? Those prions are a resilient, nasty bunch. They can even be spread via surgery between infected and uninfected individuals. As you know, that implies blood-to-blood transmission of prions could be possible. After all, if the contaminated meat contains the prions and that can spread, blood-to-blood isn't all that absurd, especially given the surgery. Anyway, where were we? Oh yes, giving rabies virus prion disease. Now I know, you studied biology and medicine, 'those are two completely different bio-mechanical approaches John!', and you'd be right. Except you're not. See, prions are just really proteins. Misfolded proteins, but proteins nevertheless, and viruses can replicate proteins! Don't look at me with disgust, you knew what you were getting yourself into. So, what if - purely hypothetical, mind - we genetically engineered the rabies virus to express a pre-misfolded protein, ready to misfold at a moments notice! Why would we do that? Well, we can't let the enemies of democracy win, can we? What if another country invents it first... say, Russia, or Iran. You wouldn't want the Ruskies having the jump on ol' Uncle Sam would you? Of course not. Now, of course, mind, we have to verify this even works. We also tweaked the virus a bit, gave it a few other features from other neurological viruses - it removes things like pain receptors, it disables sense of smell, impairs memory, it even impedes the part of your brain responsible for self-control! So, if you ever have an urge to eat, you won't be able to resist, you will just pack on those pounds! You might have a bit of trouble coordinating your steps though, or moving your arms properly... Why? It's a weapon of war, that's why. America is a great nation. Well, the US government is - they pay my bills. How do we know it'll work? What, are you stupid? We've been running tests, our boys down in the Navy have sprayed the heck out of San Francisco a while back, the English have been doing it too - London, such a lovely place - we've even been trying the aerosolized form, seeing if we can make it work from planes. One of the pipes got clogged and I'm sure our boys are working out the calculations, but we don't expect the rabies virus to actually survive the extreme weather here in Knoxville. West Point have been screaming at us for months to 'get 'er done' and we have been working off our backsides, maybe cut one or two corners we shouldn't, but all in the name of progress. And it'll be for the greater good too, think how many people will thank us when we stop a future pandemic with all the data we have! Heck, might even develop a vaccine or two outta this for our boys back in the Army. So, where was I? Right, so tweaked neurological bioweapon based on the rabies virus and prion disease, which, surprise... doesn't have a cure. No point beating those Ruskies at their own game if they just hella grab the cure and slap it on down. So, what I'm trying to say is, well... you don't have long. And we can't really risk this getting outside. If the public heard of this, we'd have... non-stop hearings from those damn Republicans and Congressional investigations! We might even get our funding cut. General McGrew is well aware of what's happened, and as we've told him, it's contained. It is contained. We run a BSL-3 lab here, and ain't nothing getting out. I'm glad you came to us when you did, if you coughed or sneezed on anybody outside of the facility before the symptoms shown themselves... well, we'd be in deep heck. No good shouting at me. I didn't make the disease. Just wanted to inform you- please, stop shouting. ...Anyway, one of the army boys is coming back to talk to you about the problem. He says he has a solution for it. Rest up.

Can I still try to convince you to use it to generate AI audio? Here's what my potato laptop managed to generate: https://theindiestone.com/forums/index.php?/topic/71009-peace-offering-generated-audio/ But it took easily several days, with about a 40% discard rate, for about 53 files, and that's using it in the small models format.