Types of zombies that should, or could be added into PZ

[willow512]

hmmm... getting body armor off a re-dead zombie... think about that... if you got it off him, how well did it protect him? it's useless and would just slow you down

Well designed armor hardly slows you down, that's a video game myth. A knight in full plate can easily run and even do acrobatics. Metal armor that's wrapped tightly around the body is much easier to handle than if you were to put your armor in a backpack and carry it around on your back.

 

There is a reason knights in the old days wore armor. Armor gave them an extreme benefit and they were often fighting hordes of peasants. So they used the best protection money could buy and the art was perfected with centuries of experience. They basically did what we do in PZ, fight masses of poorly armed opponents. Basically near the end a fully trained knight was an invulnerable fighting machine. (And then they invented crossbows :/ )

 

You know what would suck? Zombies with crossbows...

 

I wouldn't go for swat armor. But full riot gear, heck yeah, and every police station has a few sets lying around if only for practice reasons. Combine that with two small block splitter axes and and your grandmother would become dangerous.

 

If I could not find that, I'd try to get an american footegg armor.

 

Of course armor helps!

[RegularX]

Wow. Play dead zombies. Seriously? Zombies aren't that smart.

 

Sure, but of all tricks this is one they know well enough.

[Geddoe202]

 

hmmm... getting body armor off a re-dead zombie... think about that... if you got it off him, how well did it protect him? it's useless and would just slow you down

Well designed armor hardly slows you down, that's a video game myth. A knight in full plate can easily run and even do acrobatics. Metal armor that's wrapped tightly around the body is much easier to handle than if you were to put your armor in a backpack and carry it around on your back.

 

There is a reason knights in the old days wore armor. Armor gave them an extreme benefit and they were often fighting hordes of peasants. So they used the best protection money could buy and the art was perfected with centuries of experience. They basically did what we do in PZ, fight masses of poorly armed opponents. Basically near the end a fully trained knight was an invulnerable fighting machine. (And then they invented crossbows :/ )

 

You know what would suck? Zombies with crossbows...

 

I wouldn't go for swat armor. But full riot gear, heck yeah, and every police station has a few sets lying around if only for practice reasons. Combine that with two small block splitter axes and and your grandmother would become dangerous.

 

If I could not find that, I'd try to get an american footegg armor.

 

Of course armor helps!

 

you've probably never worn a bulletproof vest,have you. they weigh between 8-20 pounds depending on the brand. and as far as knights go, think about this. in order to mount a horse, the knight's squire would be required to help him onto it. you really need to do your research before giving such incorrect information

 

also, i agree with you on riot gear. most riot gears are made of a plastic composite specifically made to take strikes from blunt objects like bats and bricks. however, i would suggest you try a set on before getting behind that idea 100% because it's still slightly encumbering, hot as all hell, and is hard to move in.

[Burianu]

I say zombie children...  I get the whole "we don't want you killing children NPC's as it would be controversial", but even Dead Space had you killing mutant babies; and I for one would be more willing to suspend my disbelief of the lack of children NPCs in the universe if I could make the presumption all of them succumbed to the infection early on.  

[TinnedEpic]

Zombie children I could go for, especially in the school. It's not a new topic either it's been used in movies and games alike for the last decade. My earliest memory was resident evil 2.

 

oh and I do feel this is the most appropriate place to post this:

 

(totally did not just contribute to this topic purely to post this image)

[Rathlord]

Zombie children (and children in general) are a confirmed no for PZ. You can talk about it if you want, but just know it won't happen.

[Burianu]

Zombie children (and children in general) are a confirmed no for PZ. You can talk about it if you want, but just know it won't happen.

Every argument I've heard against children have been towards NPC's, and that I can completely understand; but could I get an explanation for no zombified children when other games have done it? 

 

IIRC, the reason is that NPC children won't be in because people would be killing innocent children and it would be bad press as few games have allowed such atrocities, but zombie children is relatively well-tread (I mean, look at the dead-island trailer, and that is far more emotional), and would go far (for me at least) in terms of immersion.  

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind if TIS holds firm to certain aspects of the game to stay true to their creative vision, but I mean really... for a game with this much atmosphere and intensity, it seems only fitting to at least include this less controversial, yet void-filling solution to a strange hole in the Project Zomboid universe, especially if many players would prefer it to be included.

 

But something tells me, in this community, my argument will be disregarded by the moderators, chalked up as immature and I will be told that it "simply won't happen".  

 

P.S. or "leave it to modders"

[TinnedEpic]

 

Zombie children (and children in general) are a confirmed no for PZ. You can talk about it if you want, but just know it won't happen.

Every argument I've heard against children have been towards NPC's, and that I can completely understand; but could I get an explanation for no zombified children when other games have done it? 

 

IIRC, the reason is that NPC children won't be in because people would be killing innocent children and it would be bad press as few games have allowed such atrocities, but zombie children is relatively well-tread (I mean, look at the dead-island trailer, and that is far more emotional), and would go far (for me at least) in terms of immersion.  

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind if TIS holds firm to certain aspects of the game to stay true to their creative vision, but I mean really... for a game with this much atmosphere and intensity, it seems only fitting to at least include this less controversial, yet void-filling solution to a strange hole in the Project Zomboid universe, especially if many players would prefer it to be included.

 

But something tells me, in this community, my argument will be disregarded by the moderators, chalked up as immature and I will be told that it "simply won't happen".  

 

P.S. or "leave it to modders"

 

Actually the mods are just upholding what they know to have been confirmed or denied by the devs. The mods don't disregard posts, but they can't say yes to something that the devs say no too. Mods will moderate, if the dev's change their minds then the mods will adjust to this. While mods are entitle to their own perspectives they won't let it start controversy that will disrupt the peace of the forum and hinder or by means cause distress to the developers while they work.

 

Fundamentally moderators are giving us the facts, it can be discussed but the developers have said no thus the moderators must enforce this fact. They mean no disrespect I assure you.

[Burianu]

 

 

Zombie children (and children in general) are a confirmed no for PZ. You can talk about it if you want, but just know it won't happen.

Every argument I've heard against children have been towards NPC's, and that I can completely understand; but could I get an explanation for no zombified children when other games have done it? 

 

IIRC, the reason is that NPC children won't be in because people would be killing innocent children and it would be bad press as few games have allowed such atrocities, but zombie children is relatively well-tread (I mean, look at the dead-island trailer, and that is far more emotional), and would go far (for me at least) in terms of immersion.  

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind if TIS holds firm to certain aspects of the game to stay true to their creative vision, but I mean really... for a game with this much atmosphere and intensity, it seems only fitting to at least include this less controversial, yet void-filling solution to a strange hole in the Project Zomboid universe, especially if many players would prefer it to be included.

 

But something tells me, in this community, my argument will be disregarded by the moderators, chalked up as immature and I will be told that it "simply won't happen".  

 

P.S. or "leave it to modders"

 

Actually the mods are just upholding what they know to have been confirmed or denied by the devs. The mods don't disregard posts, but they can't say yes to something that the devs say no too. Mods will moderate, if the dev's change their minds then the mods will adjust to this. While mods are entitle to their own perspectives they won't let it start controversy that will disrupt the peace of the forum and hinder or by means cause distress to the developers while they work.

 

Fundamentally moderators are giving us the facts, it can be discussed but the developers have said no thus the moderators must enforce this fact. They mean no disrespect I assure you.

 

Fair enough.  

[Rathlord]

I think the main thing is they just don't want any kind of negative press. Right now the indie scene is very different than the triple A scene. We're just getting started in the era of indie development and the spotlight is on us big time. That's why in my opinion.

I'd like to agree with the above poster- I try not to make a habit of calling our members immature or any of the rest for expressing their opinions. If you feel we've failed in our jobs feel free to contact one of TIS's team members.

[willow512]

you've probably never worn a bulletproof vest,have you. they weigh between 8-20 pounds depending on the brand. and as far as knights go, think about this. in order to mount a horse, the knight's squire would be required to help him onto it. you really need to do your research before giving such incorrect information

 

No I haven't worn a bullet proof vest, I had one in my hands once and you're right they're heavy, but I have worn chain mail on several occasions. Borrowed from an acquaintance, one of those re-enactors that trek around europe wearing full plate at medieval fairs for a living, yes, with horses. I imagine bullet proof vests are designed with completely different goals in mind. A knights armor would stop every bite and scratch a zombie could throw at it, it would stop almost al knives and sword thrusts too, it wouldn't have any effect on bullets though.

 

As for research. I tend to speak about the things I know about... Let me give you some feel for what it's really like to wear full plate 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm11yAXeegg

 

Full metal armor is about 25 kilos of weight, less than a fully loaden modern soldier or firefighter in full kit. And the armored guy has this weight distributed evenly around his body! So he has no balance issues like the soldier or firefighter. These guys were obviously trained to use their armor. The belief that they cannot get themselves unto a horse or up from the floor once they've fallen over is a misconception. They were probably more agile in their armor than most peasants they met in battle without.

 

And really.. think about it for a moment. The way to disable a fully battle dressed knight would be to push him over so he can't get up? No, that's not how it works at all. These guys run jump and roll like the best of us.

 

Armor gives a tremendous benefit in combat and it has very few drawbacks. It's really as simple as that. Everyone who thinks otherwise should do the research, it's not obscure, just google it.

[Rathlord]

Just as a side note,many of the people who travel around with renaissance fairs and shows actually wear armor made of lighter metals than the suits were actually made of.

As far as mobility, I think Willow may be overestimated it a bit, and others underestimate it. Google "Medieval Times." It's a show put on in the southern US (by professionals, not volunteers or hobbyists). Some amazing feats of athletics can be performed, but to say they don't limit you is ignorant. They limit the range of your arms pretty heavily above the shoulders, the legs somewhat less, but torso movement is the most limited. I've watched those guys jump onto a moving horse, but keep in mind these guys are the best in the world with years of training. The first few times I tried to get on a horse, I couldn't even do it alone in normal clothes.

[doomblood66]

Before I even read this, I'm strongly against variants/types of infected :/ I want it classic, I guess you could have it as a

Sandbox option tho...

[willow512]

Just as a side note,many of the people who travel around with renaissance fairs and shows actually wear armor made of lighter metals than the suits were actually made of.

Certainly some. But the point of those professional re-enactors is to achieve realism. The armors I have seen were about the same weight as the armor in the olden days (15-25 kilos), It is however different though, stronger because the steel used is mostly from modern foundries basically this means the armors are stronger than the old ones and won't rust as easily. But the weight is similar.

 

As far as mobility, I think Willow may be overestimated it a bit, and others underestimate it. Google "Medieval Times." It's a show put on in the southern US (by professionals, not volunteers or hobbyists). Some amazing feats of athletics can be performed, but to say they don't limit you is ignorant. They limit the range of your arms pretty heavily above the shoulders, the legs somewhat less, but torso movement is the most limited. I've watched those guys jump onto a moving horse, but keep in mind these guys are the best in the world with years of training. The first few times I tried to get on a horse, I couldn't even do it alone in normal clothes.

I'm speaking of high middle ages armor. Not sure what armor the guys you speak of wore. But those high middle ages guys were hardly restricted by their armor. Yes you carry 20 kilos of weight and that's going to have some effect, but nothing that isn't fixed by proper training. I never saw or heard anything about trouble with raising your arms. Maybe it's an issue with the type of armor your friends are wearing. But it's not an issue for the high middle age armor. 

 

If you can't lift your arms over your head, you're dead when someone approaches on horse. And since most armor was still worn by people fighting on foot. Raising their weapons above their heads was simply a matter of surivival. I'm not sure where you got the idea.

 

Maybe you're thinking jousting armor? That was thicker heavier and not designed for mobility but to withstand massive blows. I can easily understand that people wearing jousting armor are less mobile in the torso and shoulders but less affected in their legs as you describe.

[Rathlord]

The people there wore a mix of jousting armor and actual plate mail, depending on the scene. There were obviously as many different kinds of armor as there are clothes today. Speaking in general, though, I'm not suggesting that the mobility is limited by weight. The problem with most armors (and especially back then, again nowadays modern engineering has had somewhat more success) the limitations came because the movement of joints was highly limited. Again, very dependent on the individual suit of armor (some simply left joints unprotected save for a bit of leather or chain), but the mechanically jointed ones had a very limited range of motion before they locked up. For armor (again, assuming it's the style with mechanical jointing which most of the more expensive suits were) almost every joint suffers at least a little bit when compared to the real range of motion the body can achieve. As for the torso, the only join is at the waist, and it's still not a good one. Bend down too much, and the chestplate stabs into your gut. Try and bend back too much, and it's stabbing your arse. Twisting could work some, but people flex their upper body more than you think and most of this movement range is impossible in a chestplate.

[EnigmaGrey]

Hey, I figure if mom's tack vest restricts her movement, a set of plate armor would certainly have the same effect . . .

[earlack]

Heck, even a football shoulderpad can restrict a bit your arm movements (I did play football for a year), and it's probably more flexible and better articulated than other protections. So I'm pretty sure knights armor did restricts somewhat movements. Doesn't mean you can't do those moves, means it's harder and/or slower.

 

Anyway, I think maybe we shouldn't get too fired up right now about armors ; PZ shouldn't be about being an invincible knight downing zombies. Or it would need some serious rebalancing to not be too easy ; even without armor, with correct technique you can get a medium horde down with a melee weapon. That said, maybe for when the map expands in a more dangerous area, or if the number of Zeds skyrockets ?

[willow512]

The problem with most armors (and especially back then, again nowadays modern engineering has had somewhat more success) the limitations came because the movement of joints was highly limited. 

This is the big difference, you say highly limited, I say highly articulated. None of us is saying there is no effect, but the effect as far as I have seen heard and know from the pro's is minimal. Someof those guys would include judo moves in their practices. Not very authentic, however it clearly demonstrates the flexibility left to them.

 

If you compare to jousting armor, then yes I can imagine you consider that armor restrictive. The point I was making when I chimed in is that full plate armor is hardly as restrictive as everyone always seems to think. If you compare it to the armor of an american football player then that's fine with me. Those guys run jump and roll without much problems. Armored soldiers in the middle ages could pretty much do the same, quite opposite to the common belief.

 

Consider the logic, if you don't get to fully move your arms while your enemy can still move his. You give them an enormous advantage that will be cashed in the first chance they get. If your shoulders would be locked to certain angles so you can't easily hold your weapon up high, then a good downward swing with a morningstar or pick would have a decent chance to ruin your life. Guess where  the enemy would focus his attacks if he knew you had a weakness there?

 

So if that were the case a fighter would dispense with the shoulders alltogether and just make sure he'd protect them better. Same goes for the torso, I'm sure you get some effect from the plate if you try to do yoga. But if the plate would hinder the fighter it would have been designed differently. Judo rolls and other acrobatics are not a problem in armor.  In the practice of the battle field, armor simply cannot be a hindrance.

 

These guys were pro's. If a piece of armor did not improve their ability to fight, then they simply would not wear it. Take for example the great helm, the buckets with airholes(if you were lucky). They would severely restrict your vision, restrict your breathing and attempt to cook you if the weather was anything warmer than a little nippy. So what would haveten happen is that after the arrows and the lances had done their work, as soon as the warriors would get into swinging melee range they'd just take them off! Relying on a flimsy chain mail coif  instead! My guess is they would not have worn the buckets at all if they could not easily remove them at the appropriate time.

 

Think about the logic here, they exposed their vulnerable melons because not to do so would guarantee their defeat. This doubly goes for shoulders, a hit on the shoulder sucks but is trivial in comparason to a hit on the melon. Yet if you don't have total control over your arms when fighting with swords, you're going to get your ass royally spanked. I've trained with short swords and shields in a re-enactment setting myself (As a hobbyist, but that's how I got to know the pro's). I guarantee that you need all the arm range whilst fighting with swords. As an example it quickly degrades to chest to chest hugging where the only thing left to do is extend around your opponent and stab them in the back. Do that if you have difficulty lifting the sword over your head.

 

Again all this isn't the case if youre jousting. So jousting armor would have very different qualities. I'm not saying you're wrong, but we're just speaking about different sets of armor. 

 

Regarding the Judo rolls: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kKLgSTkCEo 

 

Also, please don't interpret this to mean that I think full plate should be included in zomboid. A rain poncho would be all the armor I'd really wish for. Other than that I don't have any real wishes. This is just an academic discussion as far as I am concerned.