World War Z

[Crazydog7]

[quote name='Ser Scot A Ellison' post='1512539' date='Sep 10 2008, 11.45']I haven't read the book yet. I do plan to. I have a question prompted by the Wiki on this book:



Why would armored vehicles not be useful? Button up and shoot zombies from inside, then drive out if you run out of Ammo? Is there something I'm missing here?[/quote]

Yeah there is that also why not just bomb the shit out of infested areas with conventional explosives? This idea that somehow zoombie bodies aren't destroyed because their blood works in a different way is really the only thing I found hard to swallow.

I did like the part where it put you in on the ground floor with the eyewitness accounts however. Not the best book ever but a very entertaining read despite its faults.

[Maltaran]

[quote name='Ser Scot A Ellison' post='1512539' date='Sep 10 2008, 16.45']I haven't read the book yet. I do plan to. I have a question prompted by the Wiki on this book:



Why would armored vehicles not be useful? Button up and shoot zombies from inside, then drive out if you run out of Ammo? Is there something I'm missing here?[/quote]

Fuel.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Malt,

[quote name='Maltaran' post='1512764' date='Sep 10 2008, 14.01']Fuel.[/quote]

We can't get fuel during WWZ or the zombies move so quickly the vehicles run out of fuel before they get away from the zombies? Please elaborate, thanks.

[Slurktan]

Well the Saudis torched their oil for some reason in the timeline. Oil Rigs are incredibly unsafe due to underwater swarms and storms caused by the nuclear war. Can't really transport fuel across land until you establish a safe zone.

The problem with vehicles is simple, you can't be sure to kill them all. You drive out of a swarm and think you are safe and pop the hatch. Then the hangers get in and you are food; every vehicle has blind spots. Never mind the fact that the zombies would just follow you and get to you eventually.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Slurk,

[quote name='Slurktan' post='1512864' date='Sep 10 2008, 14.54']Well the Saudis torched their oil for some reason in the timeline. Oil Rigs are incredibly unsafe due to underwater swarms and storms caused by the nuclear war. Can't really transport fuel across land until you establish a safe zone.[/quote]

Okay. That's rather random (Saudi's torching their oil fields.)

[quote]The problem with vehicles is simple, you can't be sure to kill them all. You drive out of a swarm and think you are safe and pop the hatch. Then the hangers get in and you are food; every vehicle has blind spots. Never mind the fact that the zombies would just follow you and get to you eventually.[/quote]

Drive the vehicle to a location were there are infantry who can shoot the zombies off before you open up the vehicle. There couldn't be [i]that[/i] many on the APC. Why wait for a swarm to attack before you start killing zombies?

[Maltaran]

[quote name='Ser Scot A Ellison' post='1512793' date='Sep 10 2008, 19.15']We can't get fuel during WWZ or the zombies move so quickly the vehicles run out of fuel before they get away from the zombies? Please elaborate, thanks.[/quote]

The infrastructure's all fucked up - it's pretty much impossible to get stuff from where it is to where you need it unless you're in a safe zone, and the US safe zone was west of the Rockies. Not much oil there.

[Slurktan]

[quote name='Ser Scot A Ellison' post='1512932' date='Sep 10 2008, 15.33']Slurk,
Drive the vehicle to a location were there are infantry who can shoot the zombies off before you open up the vehicle. There couldn't be [i]that[/i] many on the APC. Why wait for a swarm to attack before you start killing zombies?[/quote]

Not very practical when you could just get in an infantry square and kill them easily by the thousands when you have the ammo. There may be only one seen hanger-on that your infantry buds kill then as soon as you get out you get attacked by the remains of one stuck to a wheel base. The premise of the book is that the world didn't know or wouldn't accept what is happening to them until it is too late. There was literally swarms of zombies in excess of the millions wandering around, particularly in Asia.

As for waiting.... there is no waiting. Once a zombie sees movement or hears any noise, they start instinctually moaning, this draws another zombie to the noise who immediately starts moaning, so on and so forth until you get swarmed.

[Walter Paisley]

Speaking of the swarms, one of the biggest "chills up my spine" moments was on the space station, when they mentioned watching that "mega swarm" (2 miles, or somesuch, in diameter) move across the american great plains.

[mormont]

[quote name='Slurktan' post='1512465' date='Sep 10 2008, 16.04']I still don't get this I suppose. Yes the author needs a quick stereotype of "britishness" for an American audience,so you have to keep in mind it should be something Americans associate with Britain; would you rather he chose say bad teeth as the focus or Soccer?[/quote]

It just sticks out like a sore thumb, to me. Are the Russian characters constantly slugging back vodka? Does he have the French try to fight the zombies with garlic? No, they get the tunnels under Paris. He's put some thought and research into creating a French scenario that does not resort to cliche but is still unique to the location. He handles all the other non-US locations and characters just as well. The Brazilians, the Chinese, they're all fully realised and three-dimensional and well-written. Then when the Brit comes along, he's a charboard cut-out of deferential respect to the Queen. A bum note in an otherwise great book.

[KAH]

[quote name='Slurktan' post='1513139' date='Sep 11 2008, 00.12']Not very practical when you could just get in an infantry square and kill them easily by the thousands when you have the ammo. There may be only one seen hanger-on that your infantry buds kill then as soon as you get out you get attacked by the remains of one stuck to a wheel base.[/quote]

While armored vehicles might not have been ideal as the main weapon against zombie hordes, I do think they could have served well in a more peripheral role, as support in case things start going unexpectedly very wrong for that infantry square (panic, malfunctioning equipment, whatever). The main role would be slowing the zombies down rather than relying on them for zombie slaughter (just bowling over the first lines would temporarily slow them down a bit, methinks) in case of pressing need to regroup. The fuel problem is real, but even in the face of infrastructure breaking down, there should be possibilities for scavenging enough fuel to make a small group of vehicles operating for a long time.

Of course, the hanger-on problem would still be there, so they would need to build up detailed routines to 'decontaminate' vehicles - even one single bite could f*ck up things in a major way, as long as the bitten is the only one knowing about it.


In any case, like the book quite a lot when I read it some months ago, but I actually liked the 'Manual' better...

[Isis]

[quote name='KAH' post='1516531' date='Sep 13 2008, 11.22']In any case, like the book quite a lot when I read it some months ago, but I actually liked the 'Manual' better...[/quote]It's interesting that you say that because I really liked WWZ when I read it a few months back. When I started on the survival guide recently it took me ages to get into because it didn't seem to be 'as good' as WWZ. Now that I've gotten further into it though, I'm appreciating the humour enormously. And the diagrams are fantastic!

I think both books are going to be keepers, i.e. they won't get sent to the charity shop after I'm done with them.

[Fenryng]

[quote name='mormont' post='1516521' date='Sep 13 2008, 04.31']It just sticks out like a sore thumb, to me. Are the Russian characters constantly slugging back vodka? Does he have the French try to fight the zombies with garlic? No, they get the tunnels under Paris. He's put some thought and research into creating a French scenario that does not resort to cliche but is still unique to the location. He handles all the other non-US locations and characters just as well. The Brazilians, the Chinese, they're all fully realised and three-dimensional and well-written. Then when the Brit comes along, he's a charboard cut-out of deferential respect to the Queen. A bum note in an otherwise great book.[/quote]

Nice argument. Plus, you are reminding me about some of the better part of the book. If it wasn't for the fact that I just read this during the summer, I would already be re-reading it.


[quote name='Isis' post='1516688' date='Sep 13 2008, 12.15']I think both books are going to be keepers, i.e. they won't get sent to the charity shop after I'm done with them.[/quote]

I obviously cannot comment on the survival guide, but I am shocked and consider it blasphemous that you would contemplate getting rid of the other.

[Ser Warpechowski]

Tanks and armored vehicles came into battle due to the need to destroy machinegun nests and trenches. In this war against the zombies you dont need to use armored cars because zombies dont shoot back.

I think the whole idea of the american war effort on zombies is that zombies are simple: they dont have tactics, they dont research technology, they dont adapt. They just are what they are. And the best way to deal with them is a clean bullet to the head. That is it.

Fuel was used on logistics instead (planes, trucks etc), and so was maintanance and factory production. A truck is far more valuable than a tank or apc car, specially because it moves faster, uses less fuel and can carry more people. Considering that the zombies were traveling on packs, using armored cars to ram them was stupid and quite dangerous.

Btw, I agree, the british part was cheesy.

[Aplomb]

I really did like this book very much, but one criticism I have is that several chapters were written I thought awkwardly to set up cheesy and obvious O. Henry style twists. The South African story and the downed pilot in Louisiana story come to mind, it's like they should have ended "[i]dun dun DUNNN!" [/i]and when you read them again knowing the twist you realize no actual non-fiction oral history book would include interviews conducted that way. [i] [/i]The successful parts were more straightforward, just letting the characters say what happened and the "interviewer" asking plausible questions; the stories were good enough on their own without the author seeming to intrude by introducing clever twists, and in large part the book succeeds exactly because most of it seems like an authentic oral history.

[Crazydog7]

[quote name='Aplomb' post='1517190' date='Sep 13 2008, 23.32']I really did like this book very much, but one criticism I have is that several chapters were written I thought awkwardly to set up cheesy and obvious O. Henry style twists. The South African story and the downed pilot in Louisiana story come to mind, it's like they should have ended "[i]dun dun DUNNN!" [/i]and when you read them again knowing the twist you realize no actual non-fiction oral history book would include interviews conducted that way. [i] [/i]The successful parts were more straightforward, just letting the characters say what happened and the "interviewer" asking plausible questions; the stories were good enough on their own without the author seeming to intrude by introducing clever twists, and in large part the book succeeds exactly because most of it seems like an authentic oral history.[/quote]


Yeah don't even get me started on the Hiroshma suvivor

[Slurktan]

[quote name='mormont' post='1516521' date='Sep 13 2008, 04.31']It just sticks out like a sore thumb, to me. Are the Russian characters constantly slugging back vodka? Does he have the French try to fight the zombies with garlic? No, they get the tunnels under Paris. He's put some thought and research into creating a French scenario that does not resort to cliche but is still unique to the location. He handles all the other non-US locations and characters just as well. The Brazilians, the Chinese, they're all fully realised and three-dimensional and well-written. Then when the Brit comes along, he's a charboard cut-out of deferential respect to the Queen. A bum note in an otherwise great book.[/quote]

It doesn't. The Japan section is far, far, [i]far[/i] worse than that. I mean seriously you aren't complaining about the old blind japanese samurai/martial arts teching groundskeeper? And Russia? Are you kidding? All that motherland talk and commissar's killing grunts aren't a Russian staple?

[Tycho]

Well i just finished today, i was about half way through when i found the thread, so i had seen mormont's complaint of the steriotypical brit. but i have to say, when i stumbled upon that particular POV i though, ohh mormont must of missed this one because there is nothing about the queen for six pages of the interview. then in the last two paragraphs we get the nostalgia. and yeah, some of the others, like the japanese POV's were a bit more cliche through-out their sections. though on the whole a very pleasnt zombie read, a personal first i must admit. and i really liked the documentary style.

[mormont]

[quote name='Slurktan' post='1517245' date='Sep 14 2008, 06.55']It doesn't. The Japan section is far, far, [i]far[/i] worse than that.[/quote]

No, it's not. It's nothing like as bad, although to be fair this is probably because there is more space given over to it (allowing more room to develop) and because there are two characters shown. One of the main problems I have is that this is the [i]only[/i] glimpse of the UK. But even allowing for these things... no, still not as bad. There's an element of cliche but it's simply done better.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

I checked WWZ out from the local library yesterday. I'm almost up to "Total War" I can't put it down. I'm pissed I have to come to work today because I'd rather be finishing the book. I liked the downed pilot story, although I agree the twist at the end was out of left field.

NPR interview with Max Brooks:

[url="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6104111"]http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6104111[/url]

[davos]

[quote]Why would armored vehicles not be useful? Button up and shoot zombies from inside, then drive out if you run out of Ammo? Is there something I'm missing here?[/quote]

The first problem with armoured vehicles in the book is that heavy ordance could not be certain to make a kill. To destroy a zombie you have to destroy the brain. You mangle a zombie with high explosives you just have a mangled zombie thats still coming to get you. They mentioned several times that zombies that had been partially dismembered but not destroyed presented a real complication to combat because there were harder to see, harder to hit, and every bit as lethal as a upright, walking zombie. So the heavier armaments that are often carried by armoured vehicles would be of dubious use in zombie warfare.

Resource allocation was another major factor. There is a good length discussion about how the military, at least in the US, had to rethink its ways of working after suffering critical failure initially against the zombies. Because the US and most other nations were forced into much smaller geographic areas (and those areas had suffered siginficant damage to their infrastructure even after being cleared of the walking dead) which obviuosly limited their access to resources such as oil. The military became highly focused on maximizing the number of zombies "killed" per unit of resource expended. Armour, being resource intensive to produce and maintain had a much worse resource to kill ratio compared to a trained infantryman with an accurate rifle in a killing line (or square) with a bunch of other infantryman. So the army designed to fight zombies was primarily infantry with motorized vehicles limited to support functions.