I personally can’t imagine anyone surviving long-term around running zombies. Even if fighting them was relatively easy, it’s statistically inevitable that sooner or later you’d get bitten. This applies to walking zombies too, but at least with them, you have the option to avoid physical altercations altogether, at least for the most part. That’s what I think most TV shows get wrong about zombies: even if there’s just one, and you could easily take it down, just don’t. It’s almost never worth the risk. In my view, the best way to survive is to avoid them as much as possible. Fighting is the last resort and should only be done in self-defence.

  • discostjohn@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Whenever anyone in my friend group discusses zombie survival, the default assumption is that we’re discussing slow zombies, because it’s universally understood that there’s no good fast zombies survival situation

  • tty5@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    It’s a balancing factor that is supposed to make escaping to a secure location feasible. If zombies maintained full speed we’d basically have a force that is dumber humans with the ability to exponentially force-recruit and not caring about personal safety. This would be a very short struggle for everyone not physically separated from them at the start. It would be normies vs a growing crowd off their rocker on pcp.

    On the other hand if you want to introduce any degree of realism:

    1. if it’s a disease a vast majority of infected will be dead within a week. Fill your bathtub with water and barricade the door - it’s going to be pretty much over by the time you really have to leave.
    2. If it’s supernatural bs but decomposition still applies see above - you’ll be down to facing skeletons
    3. In both cases extreme climate is your friend if it doesn’t affect you
  • pseudo@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 hours ago

    If they run but are not smarter, they will be more dangerous but not undefeatable. The biggest issue will still be the big crowd. Zombie fear is 80% fear of crowd. People in groups are highly dangerous.

  • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I dunno.

    Even slow movers in bad shape are a problem in numbers.

    So, carefully eliminating individuals before they can turn into a horde should be the default.

    Once you get enough living together, you fortify and get snipers trained up. Set up on the walls first and pick off anything undead that comes close. Slowly set up an expanding circle of raised emplacements with sniper observers to pick off individuals at a longer distance from the settlement, and give warning for any hordes as well as being able to thin out a horde as it gets closer, and continue depleting the horde if they surround the settlement.

    But, for lone travelers, assuming that you have a ranged weapon that’s quiet enough, always take them out. You never, ever leave an enemy behind you if you can take them out without causing a worse problem.

    I think that’s the key to long term zombie survival. You have to take every reasonable opportunity to reduce the spread of the agent that’s causing it. Literal walking dead zombies, they’re all a disease vector. Every one you put down makes future survival easier. So it’s a calculated risk. Measure the risk of your infection in the attempt, measure the risk of attracting any unseen zombies, and if those risks are low to zero, it’s going to be a long term benefit to take one out.

    Obviously, in a WD scenario, firearms increase the risk significantly compared to quieter weapons. But there are other options available, including the old and trusty Pointy Stick™. Even the roughest spear you can make gives you the reach to make a quick finish to slow zombies 1v1 with very low risk of contact, so you only have to worry about being capable of moving faster if the weapon fails.

    Bows can replace firearms at that kind of range, as long as you practice, and it takes the risk down to zero for a single shot, since the noise a miss will make is in a different direction than you.

    You’re right though, don’t fight. Assassinate.

    • brygphilomena@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Ammo might be a pain in the ass. But standing atop a tall wall with a pike stabbing down into skulls would probably work well.

      Plus a good fire pit to burn the bodies so other diseases don’t crop up.

      I’ve kind of wondered if you could make a sustainable fire using only zombie bodies. They could be an interesting source of fuel.

      • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Bodies don’t actually burn well at all. Even dried out bodies more smolder (people used to burn mummies, among other really silly things they did to them) than burn.

        So, you can definitely make a pyre to make sure any flesh is gone, but the zombies won’t make good fuel.

  • pseudo@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    I don’t now about running but I agree with the non-fighting part. If I postulate than Zombie are dumb creatures that slowly rotten, I want to avoid them as much as I can until they are too rotten to move. It doesn’t mean that I can build defense and even traps but I should not confronte them but I will let the zombie population almost rot out of existence, hoping the disease doesn’t pass from the rotting bodies to the environnement.

  • TAYRN@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Which fictional world are you talking about? “Zombies” vary from fiction to fiction: some are fast; some are slow. Which one specifically do you mean?

    • ContrarianTrail@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 hours ago

      In the sidebar:

      Unless stated otherwise, by zombie we’re refering to The Walking Dead -kind of undead creature.

      • TAYRN@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Yup, sorry! I definitely should’ve checked the sidebar. That one’s obviously on me.

  • Letstakealook@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    11 hours ago

    If we’re going to be realistic about it, a zombie apocalypse wouldn’t last too long, given that they are generally depicted with rotting flesh. So, regardless of whether they can run, you’re correct that the best bet is avoidance until the whole thing blows over.

  • Dae@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    13 hours ago

    You should really check out Dying Light then. I think you might find it interesting.

    • ContrarianTrail@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I have it and wasn’t really for me. DayZ is the only zombie game I like, though project zomboid seems interesting as well.