Rathlord Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 This is all ignoring how utterly terrible slashing weapons are against zombies.Stick them with the pointy end. Perfectly valid point, but if I were going to make a weapon for that I'd just make a spear. From a purely combat-centric approach the spear tends to be safer and about as reliable (especially if you're crafting it yourself) as well as vastly easier to make. However, the reason swords were so prevalent is probably largely due to their dual purpose ability to be used as a tool (which a spear really doesn't have going for it at all). This could definitely see it's way into PZ. On the whole, I'm not saying it's impossible to fashion yourself a sword in real life. My main point of contention is that in my personal opinion it doesn't add anything to the game that couldn't be added by a more realistic and common source (machete), and that the sheer amount of items the devs would need to add (and the complexity of the system) would not be worth the effort (again, purely my opinion). This would singlehandedly be exponentially more complicated than any other crafting system in the game for an end result that is, imo, mediocre at best. I will admit I also feel a bit of apprehension when stuff like swords are mentioned; one of the things I find most special about PZ is that it doesn't fall into the trap of chasing "cool." There's nothing inherently wrong with adding cool things into the game, but I love the feeling of gritty realism PZ gives, and to me personally, people running around with swords would just detract from that aesthetic and atmosphere. Only the devs can say how they feel about that, though. I'm curious as to what proponents of the idea think swords would add to the game. It's certainly viable to say "ya, I think having swords would be badass and that's why," but from a purely mechanics/gameplay standpoint are there other reasons that people feel wouldn't be met by a machete? syfy and Kajin 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikhail Reign Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 They are longer. Also because realistically they are something I might find, they might be something that I find before anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rathlord Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 They are longer. Also because realistically they are something I might find, they might be something that I find before anything else. Well a broom is longer than a machete, too o.O Jesting aside, being a bit longer doesn't really give it a niche use or gameplay function imo. The amount of difference it would make in an isometric viewpoint and the way our combat works right now would be marginal at best. I'm not sure what you mean by that second part; the chances of you finding a sword before "anything else" in rural Kentucky are non-existant. There's machete's in almost every home and there might well not be a single sword in the entire town of Muldraugh, KY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikhail Reign Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 And if I found a broom before a found anything else I would use that too. Sharpen the end up and aim for the eye socket. The point I'm trying to make is that the things you can find are meant to be a random cross section of things that you would find. Swords, replicas or battle ready, are things (with different likely hoods) that you would find. The loot is random. Sometimes you find a gun right away, sometimes you don't. Sometimes an axe is your first weapon, sometimes you make do with a spoon until you find something better. If we aren't putting a sword (even replicas) in, simply because they aren't the most optimum and durable weapon, we may as well take out everything except the best one.Also on the likely hood, a quick google tells me there are 71 sword swallowers in Muldraugh, as well as the ability to take Chineese sword dancing classes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rathlord Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 Can't tell if you're being facetious or not. 71 sword swallowers in a population ~1,000 backwater town? I think you'd better check your figures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rathlord Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 My point about the sword is not that non-optimal weapons can't be added to PZ; it's that there's not a reason or niche that swords fill that can't be handled by something that isn't unrealistic and doesn't detract from immersion and the spirit of the game like swords do in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnigmaGrey Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 How does rarity of an item detract from reality, though? Yes, if you're finding dozens of them in random locations and they're of a type that doesn't make sense, then that's certainly valid. But, as with guns, I doubt that'd be the case for PZ's system; all that would be necessary is to tweak the dice roll for item spawn such that it's much rarer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirrus Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 I think a sword would be cool, especially if it's super rare. (1/10 games have a chance of spawning 2 on an entire map, or something similar). I also think slashing and prodding holes in rotting disease-ridden walking dead is a bad idea, especially if you don't want to get infected. There's a reason mortuary techs (the guys who do the most of the autopsy work) wear face shields, gloves, and surgical gowns before cutting open a body, and it's not because it's icky. Humans are walking bacteria and virus incubators, and a virus that turns you into a zombie is NOT something you want to be exposed to if you can at all help it. Sure, cut into your zombie with a machete or sword you don't know how to wield if you like. I'll be the one running far, far away from you, as fast as possible. But hey, it's a game! Learning about this stuff in a safe environment is half the fun of a game like PZ, learning that swords are hard, and that infection is easy is a good thing . There's totally a reason I drunk the bleach almost the first time I found it, even knowing what'd happen. I wanted to see *how* it'd happen. Rathlord, Aenye Deithven, Kajin and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rathlord Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 That's the best reasoning for the sword, really, and the one I can't refute. I don't think it would be cool for my own reasons, but my own gauge of cool isn't all that meaningfull in the wash At the end of the day, that's about as far as the discussion can go; it's up to the devs now if they think it would fit the game or not. Kajin 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaffa Tape Warrior Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Also on the likely hood, a quick google tells me there are 71 sword swallowers in Muldraugh, as well as the ability to take Chineese sword dancing classes.YES!I'm curious as to what proponents of the idea think swords would add to the game. It's certainly viable to say "ya, I think having swords would be badass and that's why," but from a purely mechanics/gameplay standpoint are there other reasons that people feel wouldn't be met by a machete?Swords would be very good against survivors armed with clubs and axes and machetes, and also able to cut through the skulls of zombies.An edged weapon is better than a blunt weapon against unarmoured human beings. A sword that is longer than a machete and has a protective hilt would give the wielder an advantage against someone with a machete if two survivors end up fighting without guns, because of the length and the hand protection, and possibly also because of it being double-edged. There may also be some things to do with weight and balance.A long single/double handed sword I imagine would be a less effective tool than a machete, but I believe it would be more effective against zombies. Being able to split their skulls and even behead them from further away would make it more effective than a machete. If the tip is further away from the hand, then it moves faster at the same rotational speed. A two-handed sword with a long blade (which you would need to find some good carbon steel to make) would be very good in the open against a group of zombies. If you thrust you have to extract it each time, but if you cut then you can keep on cutting left to right and right to left, and be less likely to miss.With an axe, you can hit with the shaft below the head and fail to cut, whereas with a sword if you hit further down the blade, you still cut. A sharp axe is better than a blunt axe, and both are better than the blunt back of the axe and a mace and a club. Sharp things are good for killing. One-handed axes and maces are usually shorter than one-handed swords. A sword is convienient; you can wear it on your belt and have both hands free for climbing and carrying and working. Two-handed swords and polearms would be great outdoors against zombies (better than a machete), but would have course make some tasks difficult. You can be carrying a glaive or a shotgun and have a sword ready to draw quickly if you need to.I also think slashing and prodding holes in rotting disease-ridden walking dead is a bad idea, especially if you don't want to get infected. There's a reason mortuary techs (the guys who do the most of the autopsy work) wear face shields, gloves, and surgical gowns before cutting open a body, and it's not because it's icky. Humans are walking bacteria and virus incubators, and a virus that turns you into a zombie is NOT something you want to be exposed to if you can at all help it. Sure, cut into your zombie with a machete or sword you don't know how to wield if you like. I'll be the one running far, far away from you, as fast as possible. But hey, it's a game! Learning about this stuff in a safe environment is half the fun of a game like PZ, learning that swords are hard, and that infection is easy is a good thing . There's totally a reason I drunk the bleach almost the first time I found it, even knowing what'd happen. I wanted to see *how* it'd happen.That's a good point about there being a risk of infection, and although I do not know how bodily fluids splatter on destruction of the skull of a body whose heart may or may not still be beating, I can speculate that the problem would be present in not just swords and knives and axes and spears, but also in clubs and maces (which are less effective), although I have no first hand or second hand or even third hand knowledge of splattering brains.At the end of the day, that's about as far as the discussion can go; it's up to the devs now if they think it would fit the game or not.NOOOOoooooo...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnigmaGrey Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Also on the likely hood, a quick google tells me there are 71 sword swallowers in Muldraugh, as well as the ability to take Chineese sword dancing classes.YES! Google, you just can't trust it: http://www.gigmasters.com/Search/Sword-Swallower-Muldraugh-KY.html Note how the nearest one is 100 miles away. http://www.ihirehelp.com/40155_Muldraugh_ChinseSwordDance_Tutors_Jobs.aspx Note how none of these are, well, anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dRelix Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 have you guys thought of old Calvary swords? Spears, and swords i can see there place in the Zombie apocalypse but to be honest blunt weapons i think would be the most realistic as slashing weapons just woundt kill the brain... But in the end though this is a video game and swords could be interesting.. EnigmaGrey 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rathlord Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Gaffa, there's a lot of that post that's just not accurate. Swords make good weapons because human beings bleed out from slashing damage incredibly easily, not because of their destructive power against organs; both piercing and blunt weapons are better for that. I've been studying weapons for all my life... I don't know what else to say. The information is out there. Just going to have to disagree with you all around, there's so many of your statements about combat I find inaccurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dRelix Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Swords would be very good against survivors armed with clubs and axes and machetes, and also able to cut through the skulls of zombies.An edged weapon is better than a blunt weapon against unarmoured human beings. A sword that is longer than a machete and has a protective hilt would give the wielder an advantage against someone with a machete if two survivors end up fighting without guns, because of the length and the hand protection, and possibly also because of it being double-edged. There may also be some things to do with weight and balance.A long single/double handed sword I imagine would be a less effective tool than a machete, but I believe it would be more effective against zombies. Being able to split their skulls and even behead them from further away would make it more effective than a machete. If the tip is further away from the hand, then it moves faster at the same rotational speed. A two-handed sword with a long blade (which you would need to find some good carbon steel to make) would be very good in the open against a group of zombies. If you thrust you have to extract it each time, but if you cut then you can keep on cutting left to right and right to left, and be less likely to miss.With an axe, you can hit with the shaft below the head and fail to cut, whereas with a sword if you hit further down the blade, you still cut. A sharp axe is better than a blunt axe, and both are better than the blunt back of the axe and a mace and a club. Sharp things are good for killing. One-handed axes and maces are usually shorter than one-handed swords. A sword is convienient; you can wear it on your belt and have both hands free for climbing and carrying and working. Two-handed swords and polearms would be great outdoors against zombies (better than a machete), but would have course make some tasks difficult. You can be carrying a glaive or a shotgun and have a sword ready to draw quickly if you need to. Blunt will be 100% better.. if we were to go off of zombie lore. cutting weapons wouldn't destroy enough of the brain, decapitation would leave a biting landmine. a gun is only effective cause of the shock wave and fragmentation of the skull and bone. but going into the uses of a bladed weapon. it would be to slow.. there are more chances of the blade getting stuck in the zombie. or person. a blunt object crushes the skull and has no chances of getting stuck.. and swords if you were to stick a sword into a person it would acually get stuck cause the skin and everything else would stick to it.that's why they have grooves in them (bleeders) like say when your cutting a piece of cheese and the cheese sticks to the blade. thats what would happen essentially. even axes arnt the greatest... a hammer imo would be better.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikhail Reign Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Once again, if it's not included simply because it's not THE most optimum weapon, let's take out the forks, spoons, butterknives etc etc etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rathlord Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Once again, if it's not included simply because it's not THE most optimum weapon, let's take out the forks, spoons, butterknives etc etc etc. Again, the point isn't that it can't be added because it's not the best weapon in the game, it's that it shouldn't be added because it's unrealistic and doesn't fill any niche. You're the one who keeps bringing up its effectiveness as a reason for it to be in the game, mate. Replying with that every time someone counters your point is a bit vexing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dRelix Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Once again, if it's not included simply because it's not THE most optimum weapon, let's take out the forks, spoons, butterknives etc etc etc.well thats going a little far dont ya think? honestly despite what i said.. it could be a fun weapon. and personally they probably are more common then being None there.. as they are a decorative piece that can easily be found in a knife store. Once again, if it's not included simply because it's not THE most optimum weapon, let's take out the forks, spoons, butterknives etc etc etc. Again, the point isn't that it can't be added because it's not the best weapon in the game, it's that it shouldn't be added because it's unrealistic and doesn't fill any niche. You're the one who keeps bringing up its effectiveness as a reason for it to be in the game, mate. Replying with that every time someone counters your point is a bit vexing. rath... to be honest... despite what i said earlier... in all reality it is a game...realism isnt a true 100% thing in them especially if its a fantasy thing (zombies in this case) so in all reality they could be found and used... i still stand by that they are as infective as hitting a zombie with a any cutting weapon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnigmaGrey Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 To stave off everyone repeating themselves, this thread will now be locked. Rathlord, Kirrus and Troblin 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts