twilightwyrm
-
50 -
150 -
100
Offline
What would the best close combat weapon be, for disposing of zombies, as well as being a useful tool?
| Kukri/Machete |    |
15.5% | [ 505 ] |
| Shovel/E-Tool | |
11.6% | [ 377 ] |
| Blunt Instrument | |
9.5% | [ 309 ] |
| Western Swords (Europe and further) | |
6.8% | [ 222 ] |
| Eastern Swords (Asia and further) | |
8.0% | [ 261 ] |
| Katana (Despite the fact that it will need ample polishing, sharpening, and will chip or break in a week) | |
8.2% | [ 265 ] |
| Other (Please specify) | |
11.1% | [ 360 ] |
| POLL WHORE | |
10.6% | [ 343 ] |
| We're no strangers to love. You know the rules and, so do I. | |
12.5% | [ 406 ] |
| A full commitment's what I'm thinking of. You wouldn't get this from any other guy. | |
6.2% | [ 200 ] |
| Total Votes: | [ 3248 ] | ||
uryu ishida
Offline
twilightwyrm
-
50
-
150
-
100
Offline
Fresnel
twilightwyrm
Fresnel
twilightwyrm
Shrantic
First of all, Nova has a history of talking out their a** when it comes to the katana, and using completely biased sources. Secondly, you are not going to be cutting through three bodies in one swing. You just aren't. That's something that would make the Hulk jealous, because the blade is too thin and too light to do anything like that. Also, antique Japanese katanas are priceless- and unavailable. Couple that with the shitty steel they were made with and the high maintenance cost of any katana, and you come up with an extremely shitty yet romanticized weapon unfit for a survival mission. Sure, if this were just any situation where for some reason you can have a sword but not a gun, the katana wouldn't be all that bad. In fact, it'd probably be pretty good. But it's not, and you wouldn't have time to sharpen, polish, and baby your blade lest it be chipped and ruined- which is what the samurai had to do.
EDIT: Oh yeah, also, there are zombies. Zombies don't really care if you have a slashy-stabby weapon, they'll just bite you and move on. It's different for other weapons like the kukri and axe, though- if you hack at their head with a heavy blade, you can actually kill them before they latch on to you and bite.
EDIT: Oh yeah, also, there are zombies. Zombies don't really care if you have a slashy-stabby weapon, they'll just bite you and move on. It's different for other weapons like the kukri and axe, though- if you hack at their head with a heavy blade, you can actually kill them before they latch on to you and bite.
Really? Nova a history of talking out their asses on this subject eh? Alright, show me.
Second, common knowledge tends to disagree with you on this subject. One the best steel from any given batch is ever used to make such blades, leading me to believe that your apparent knowledge about the crappy nature of katana's steel is actually you talking out of your a**.
That's why the stuff was heated to such high temperatures and worked over so much, as otherwise it would no doubt have been quite shitty. But the culture found a way to get around it and adapt. As for the invading China part, mass production of armaments does not lend itself well to long complicated metallurgy processes to work the steel just right, hence the steal (iron actually) you got from China wasn't necessarily better, it was simply more quickly workable.
That is exactly what I was saying. Chinese steel was much less expensive to work into military grade steel suitable for tanks, planes and firearms.
Quote:
Quote:
The Rape of Nanking you say? You mean the one where primary sources document a Japanese officer splitting a man from chin to toe in a single blow from his officer's katana? Yeah, I would be more careful what you reference.
Nice picture. Ever heard ofthe Nanking "Murder Race"? Here is one source for it. Oh right and I got it wrong. He cut the soldier in half, helmet and all.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
As for the cutting power, in case you are not aware katana are known to be some of the sharpest swords in the world for a reason.
Quote:
Their design composition specifically works to overcome the limitations normal blades have on their sharpness and durability.
And that shows how little you understand when it comes to the creation and engineering of the katana. Even wounder why the katana is bent slightly? Than is because the blade is not all the same type of metal. The blade itself is made from harder steel which carries an edge better, while the back, the "spine" if you will, of the blade is made from more durable steel, which in turn absorbs the impact that might otherwise shatter the blade. But because of the different steel compositions, the more durable steel does not expand as much upon cooling, leaving the blade curved, in the same matter perhaps that paper curves, and dries curved, when one side of the paper becomes wet, and the other does not. Oh, and you treat me like I know nothing. You think I've never heard this spiel before? No, the difference is between the hardness and the softness. It's a bimetallic strip. The soft metal can flex to absorb the blow, the hard metal can hold an edge. It's like building a ceramic knife around a plastic core. I know this. You, however, completely failed to refute my argument.
The difference between the hardness and softness of the metals are not so extreme as you perhaps believe. Your only argument comes from baseless exaggeration.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And since the cutting power of the blade is determined by both the sharpness of the blade and the strength of the wielder, being able to cut through three slow moving, partially decomposed bodies with a single blow, especially if you are using two hands like you are supposed to, isn't that unthinkable, especially with some of the better blades.
Yes, if you are fighting an unarmored target, using the blade in one hand. But katana are not generally used in one hand, especially against armored foes. In fact, even against unarmored foes, they are most often used in two hands. If you were merely slicing, and it was light enough that strength did not effect the blow, than there would be no need to use the blade with two hands. But it was used in two hands, and strength does very much effect the blow. (Else, like I said, it would not have been used in two hands) Else it would have been more or less useless against armored opponents, in a similar manner to the rapier, not terribly unlike the armored samurai the blade could expect to be facing on the battlefield.
s**t, who did I know on Gaia that knew all this s**t... was it Dreadghost?
Yes, you are right you do draw and slice. When you are dueling an unarmored opponent. The specific practice it called IaidÅ. That is not, ideally, what you would be using on the battlefield against armored foes. (Especially since you are hopefully armored yourself, which would tend to slow down your movements and reaction time)
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Now, if I was claiming that it could cut through three normal people on one swing, than I might be more inclined to agree with you, since normal people are much more difficult to hit, and even if then do not dodge, still tend to take hits more awkwardly than, again, a slow moving corpse with no concern for its own safety.
Correction: A rotting, slow-moving corpse, with no instincts for survival. People naturally react to blows so even if the blow hits, it tends to hit at an awkward angle doing less damage than in might if the person was, say, a shambling person slowly moving towards you making no attempt (even reflexively) to avoid your blows.
A hint: THEY'RE NOT DEAD.
Okay I think something is getting lost here. We aren't talking about voodoo zombies (brain damaged people) are we? I read the OP and that isn't, as I recall, what it said. (In fact, it implied in multiple places that they WERE dead, and all it actually said was the exact biology was unknown) If they aren't actually dead, than the OP should in some way state specifically that they are NOT DEAD.
[quote[
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
(Also, I'm not sure if you've ever actually handled a katana, but they are heavier and sturdier than I think you assume they are.)
Really? An actual katana, and not one of those decorative ones you buy off eBay? Also, if, as you argued, the steel faces the hardness verses durability problem, why would harder, more brittle, steel simply bend over your leg?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
As for availability and maintenance, I never said they were widely available or easy to maintain. In fact that is why I said ideally you would have a katana.
Assuming it was not in disrepair before you brought it into combat, maintenance tends to become less of a factor when you are using the weapon to fight for your life. But, I believe I did mention that it would be difficult to find and maintain, and also mentioned that the machete would probably work as a more widely available alternative.
Like I said, ideally it had been properly maintained when you got it. Look, I already stated they were difficult to maintain on multiple occasions, even in my first post. Is the fact that you feel something would be hard to maintain really a reason to ban someone?
Quote:
Quote:
And further, like I told the OP, if we are wanting to debate the merits of a particular weapon, as we are right now, that is one thing. But banning someone because you don't initially agree with them is quite another.
She was saying I had "severely overestimated" the power of the katana a a weapon, thus banning me. I detailed on multiple accounts how I had in no way severely overestimated the power of the weapon. She replied, I replied, you replied, which since she has failed to defend her own arguments, and I'm thinking she did not concede them, means you took up the argument for her. Hence you get to now justify how my argument for the katana as a weapon to use against zombies is ban worthy. If you want I can go back and show you where I told her that.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The problems you point out here is why I also mentioned a machete is another, much more common and available, choice. Also note that I placed it under the category of a melee weapon, not a ranged weapon, hence why I was assuming you would be using it in place of a ranged weapon, which would obviously be superior for survival. Apparently you didn't read the rest of my post. But as far as the utility of the actual weapon is concerned, compared to other melee weapons, this has no bearing,
The fact that ranged guns are superior for survival in this situation has no bearing on the utility of hand-to-hand weapons, which are by definition not ranged weapons, no?
Hence why I mentioned the machete. For the katana I was mentioning it in terms of sheer killing power. If the dead ever rise, (stop telling me they re alive, they are not) I'm still probably going to be going with a machete, since given that I live in the Midwest, the kind of katana that would be worth attempting to acquire would be very difficult to find.
[quote
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
and is hence irrelevant to your arbitrary decision to ban me for simply listing a "severely overestimated" weapon. Wishing to debate the merits or lack thereof of the weapon is one thing. Banning someone because you initially disagree with them is quite another.
Was I? Let's recall: "For a melee weapon, if you can maintain it, the Japanese katana is still ideal, as mean of the best katana were classically judged by how many bodies they could cut through in a single swing. Being able to cut in half the three closest zombies to you in a single blow would, I would imagine, be particularly useful. If maintenance would be problematic, than a simple machete would still be useful, as they are sturdy sharp blades, and your targets are slow enough to become much easier to decapitate. You are still screwed if you have a hoard advancing, but short of your being in possession of a minigun or flamethrower, you are still pretty much screwed anyways if you cannot escape" Now correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't seem to be preaching anything like the gospel here. I'm not saying "Katanas are the hands down greatest weapon to kill zombies with! You can slaughter whole swarms with this weapon, so you should always have one with you if possible, as no other weapon even comes close!" That is preaching bullshit like the gospel. What I was doing was not. If you have something against this particular weapon, that's your problem not mine or anyone else's.
I realize you have probably seen your share of novice anime fans coming in here thinking you can send shock waves at people by cutting the air with a katana and believe me they irritate me almost as much as they seem to irritate you. (Albeit for different reasons) But might I suggest looking at the inside cover first. Look at what the person is saying, and if you have your doubts, test them on it first. (Though I realize that can be asking a lot at times) Normally I would just say "it's fine" at this point, but I have my doubt about the sincerity of the "Forgive us for..." part. (Interestingly enough, I would think you would have known I was prone to these long argument from the "Swords are weapons for cowards" topic)
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Response to Edit: Again, I'm thinking you believe katana are a lot lighter than they actually are. Using a katana, especially in two hands, would work for either decapitation or splitting their skull.
Because it is normally a wasted action, when it is much more effective to aim for the body with a weapon as sharp as a katana tend to be. Just because a katana COULD cut someone in half does not mean it SHOULD be used as such, especially when splitting a person's chest open or any number of other feats were just as, if not more, viable.
Explain the Murder Race than. The blade cut through the helmet and the skull. I'm pretty sure that was fatal. Besides, you wouldn't be using it to kill zombies that way anyways. You would probably be using it, whatever it CAN do, for beheading.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
(Or hitting any of their vital organs, which you specified we should assume will kill them) And like you just said, these are zombies. They move inexorability towards you, attacking with no concern for their own safety. They are not going to dodge around, slip past your guard, tackle you, grapple with you than bite your hand when it get's too close. You also seem to severely overestimate the reach of a zombie's bite.
THEY ARE CALLED WEAPONS. THEY INCREASE THE REACH OF OUR ARMS.
Alright, you try slowly walking towards a person with a long blade in their hand, grabbing them and biting them. Tell me how well that goes. Reach of the weapon has all the bearing in the world.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Zombies are not atomically designed for biting, despite the fact that it is their deadliest weapon. They must come within much more than arm's reach of you in order to bite you, at which point you are either running back to get out of that range, or decapitating them with your melee weapon of choice. (Also, a kukri wouldn't actually be that great of a weapon, due to odd nature of the curve in the weapon, and the short reach, the same as a household hammer. There is no way in hell you are going to decapitate a zombie with a kukri, unless it is considerably larger and heavier than a normal kukri, and since it has the odd curve forward, stabbing isn't going to do much good either.
I know how a kukri works, (hence why I compared it with a household hammer, which functions on a similar principal, as well as mentioning splitting the skull with in in the very next part of this quote) and it is still less than ideal, as you are still bringing your hand quite close to the zombie's mouth in the process. (Again, unless you are using a much larger kukri than is standard) Furthermore, since you are using one part of the blade as an axe, you have essentially wasted blade space. Really the only advantage it has over the axe, is that it would be easier to withdraw from a zombie's skull, since there is little chance if one of it's ends catching like a barb inside the skull.
Actually I must admit I didn't, and I apologize. I looked at the description in the OP again, and found out the kukris you guys had in mind are much bigger and heavier versions of the kukris I'm familiar with. (That's actually about the size of a short sword, not the customary length for most longer blades) The ones I was thinking one are a bit shorter, smaller and lighter.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Splitting their skull is an option, but you are bringing your hand dangerously close to their mouth, especially since this is a bladed weapon. You might as well use a machete.)
Short sword. I believe machetes are a bit longer, and a bit less awkward, I'm not sure which machetes you're thinking of. I like the weapon Acora Z3RO mentioned better than both now actually.
twilightwyrm
-
50
-
150
-
100
Offline
uryu ishida
Offline
Shrantic
Offline
Appel Juice
-
100 -
150 -
200
Offline
Shrantic
Offline
uryu ishida
Offline
Shrantic
Offline
I AM R U
Offline
Shrantic
Offline
uryu ishida
Offline
Shrantic
Offline
uryu ishida
Offline
