Combat tactics 101: Melee weapon choice

[Doctorr Fabulous]

... if you aren't going to include melee weapons in your combat tactics, then when your 50+ rounds gets wasted in a hoard of zombies with only a fraction of them being killing shots, then you're on your own.

50+?

15,000+ is more like it. Then I'd go with a dual-use weapon, like a machete or hatchet.

ETA: avoidance helps avoid wasting that ammo.

[ferball]

Do not tell me that war hammers, battle axes, and the like are not suited for close quarters combat with the idea of getting a 1 shot, 1 kill blow on a zed. No only are they designed for multiple choke points and still maintaining the force required for piercing/crushing the human skull, they were designed to be used in BATTLE where you are shoulder to shoulder with your companions and in the face of your foes. The very notion that they aren't show's your lack of actual research into the subject of medieval battles that were fought solely with melee weapons. YOUR idea about what a battleaxe or warhammer is is obviously skewed because you play to many RPG games where they have blades that are 2+ feet across and would weigh 20+ pounds on the light side. I'm talking true period authentic combat grade weapons that are designed for the sole purpose of overcoming an armored foe in as few blows as possible and are designed around crushing the human skull, cleaving through it, or beheading in 1 blow with as little exertion on the user as possible, not to mention taking limbs off. Knights used these weapons as primary weapons in battles that lasted DAYS, they are time tested and their design makes them ideal for getting KILLS against zombies because of their original intention.

Did you see me put a rapier in the list? Did you see me put any fencing weapons in the list? Of course not! Those are showmanship weapons, dueling weapons, not battle weapons. You should have gotten into the armored combat division of the SCA, where your blows don't bend the sword that uses spring steel alloys and accompanying heat treatment, they dent the metal PLATE armor and can break bones easily, and that's with a properly trained master who is cushioning his blows. Fencing was a gentlemens duel, not a battle style.

You'll notice I did not include a rapier or any sort of dueling weapon in my idea as I am aware of its short coming being very familiar with its use. I mentioned a machete, or a framing hammer. An actual authentic war hammer would be fairly close in size and heft to a framing hammer if my memory serves me correctly. As far as a medieval battle I thought we were talking about post apocalyptic zombie hordes, so when I was thinking about weapons one of my criteria is: could I effectively use it in my kitchen,(its a galley kitchen not a huge space but typical room) Because the only way I am going turn and face the horde is if I am trapped inside, if I have a wide open battle field I am going to make a run for it because I am betting on slow zombies.

Hence a machete or hammer/tomahawk, I could use them indoors. a seven foot metal tipped pole would get hung up in a hurry, and the space to wind up with an executioners axe really is not there. I do have a soft spot for old school melee weapons, but the practical side of me thinks a re purposed tool would do just fine.

[Malleolus]

... if you aren't going to include melee weapons in your combat tactics, then when your 50+ rounds gets wasted in a hoard of zombies with only a fraction of them being killing shots, then you're on your own.

50+?

15,000+ is more like it. Then I'd go with a dual-use weapon, like a machete or hatchet.

ETA: avoidance helps avoid wasting that ammo.

Agreed, but can you carry 15000 rounds of ammo on your person? All I'm saying is that it's a good idea to have a devoted melee weapon just in case. They aren't that heavy and can be great when you run outta clips. Plus I doubt many people have 15000 rounds of ammo just sitting around. Most people probably only have one or two boxes of low grain solid tips for their 9mm or .45.

Most ppl can't guarantee that they can avoid confrontation 100% of the time, and if you are bugging out from a heavily populated area your chances are... slim.

I thought eta meant estimated time of arrival?

[Malleolus]

Do not tell me that war hammers, battle axes, and the like are not suited for close quarters combat with the idea of getting a 1 shot, 1 kill blow on a zed. No only are they designed for multiple choke points and still maintaining the force required for piercing/crushing the human skull, they were designed to be used in BATTLE where you are shoulder to shoulder with your companions and in the face of your foes. The very notion that they aren't show's your lack of actual research into the subject of medieval battles that were fought solely with melee weapons. YOUR idea about what a battleaxe or warhammer is is obviously skewed because you play to many RPG games where they have blades that are 2+ feet across and would weigh 20+ pounds on the light side. I'm talking true period authentic combat grade weapons that are designed for the sole purpose of overcoming an armored foe in as few blows as possible and are designed around crushing the human skull, cleaving through it, or beheading in 1 blow with as little exertion on the user as possible, not to mention taking limbs off. Knights used these weapons as primary weapons in battles that lasted DAYS, they are time tested and their design makes them ideal for getting KILLS against zombies because of their original intention.

Did you see me put a rapier in the list? Did you see me put any fencing weapons in the list? Of course not! Those are showmanship weapons, dueling weapons, not battle weapons. You should have gotten into the armored combat division of the SCA, where your blows don't bend the sword that uses spring steel alloys and accompanying heat treatment, they dent the metal PLATE armor and can break bones easily, and that's with a properly trained master who is cushioning his blows. Fencing was a gentlemens duel, not a battle style.

You'll notice I did not include a rapier or any sort of dueling weapon in my idea as I am aware of its short coming being very familiar with its use. I mentioned a machete, or a framing hammer. An actual authentic war hammer would be fairly close in size and heft to a framing hammer if my memory serves me correctly. As far as a medieval battle I thought we were talking about post apocalyptic zombie hordes, so when I was thinking about weapons one of my criteria is: could I effectively use it in my kitchen,(its a galley kitchen not a huge space but typical room) Because the only way I am going turn and face the horde is if I am trapped inside, if I have a wide open battle field I am going to make a run for it because I am betting on slow zombies.

Hence a machete or hammer/tomahawk, I could use them indoors. a seven foot metal tipped pole would get hung up in a hurry, and the space to wind up with an executioners axe really is not there. I do have a soft spot for old school melee weapons, but the practical side of me thinks a re purposed tool would do just fine.

Ehhh... like I said different strokes for different folks. If you can find a tool and repurpose it and use it effectively that's great, but remember that they are not designed to be used for bashing zombies upside the head, so the likelihood that it will hold up well is reduced. War hammers were actually meant to be used as well on mounts as on ground, so they were larger in size than a framing hamemr.

[squinty]

Chime in again for butt strokes and bayonets. The "melee weapons" of riflemen for many years.

[Malleolus]

Chime in again for butt strokes and bayonets. The "melee weapons" of riflemen for many years.

I'm sorry, but what in the heck is a butt stroke? Really bad images pop into my head when I try to figure it out and I'm not about to look up "butt stroke" on a monitored work computer.

[squinty]

Chime in again for butt strokes and bayonets. The "melee weapons" of riflemen for many years.

I'm sorry, but what in the heck is a butt stroke?

It's a stroke to the opponents head delivered with the butt of your weapon. Probably more effective with hardwood stocks than polymer/collapsible stocks.


ETA here ya go:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buttstroke

http://books.google.com/books?id=9SQoAA ... 22&f=false

[Malleolus]

Ah... much better. I still would have been fired for looking up how to beat someone with the stock of a gun, but I feel that is far better than what would have popped up on google...

[squinty]

... if you aren't going to include melee weapons in your combat tactics, then when your 50+ rounds gets wasted in a hoard of zombies with only a fraction of them being killing shots, then you're on your own.

50+?

15,000+ is more like it. Then I'd go with a dual-use weapon, like a machete or hatchet.

ETA: avoidance helps avoid wasting that ammo.

Agreed, but can you carry 15000 rounds of ammo on your person? All I'm saying is that it's a good idea to have a devoted melee weapon just in case. They aren't that heavy and can be great when you run outta clips.

Most ppl can't guarantee that they can avoid confrontation 100% of the time, and if you are bugging out from a heavily populated area your chances are... slim.

I thought eta meant estimated time of arrival?

Or "Edited To Add." Or "Eat That Apple." or "redacted redacted redacted."

And, be prepared for someone to hyperventilate over "clips" vs. "magazines."

[Malleolus]

Oh geez, I forgot about that.... I'm used to people using them interchangeably but I do know the difference between the two. Apologies for the coming storm....

ETA: for ETA's sake

[squinty]

Oh geez, I forgot about that.... I'm used to people using them interchangeably but I do know the difference between the two. Apologies for the coming storm....

I grew up hearing them used interchangeably as well. Also, on my stepdad's side of the family (I have a six sided family) any round of ammunition, of any caliber, was a "shell."

[Malleolus]

Oh geez, I forgot about that.... I'm used to people using them interchangeably but I do know the difference between the two. Apologies for the coming storm....

I grew up hearing them used interchangeably as well. Also, on my stepdad's side of the family (I have a six sided family) any round of ammunition, of any caliber, was a "shell."

Now that is something that would drive me up a wall.

[squinty]

Oh geez, I forgot about that.... I'm used to people using them interchangeably but I do know the difference between the two. Apologies for the coming storm....

I grew up hearing them used interchangeably as well. Also, on my stepdad's side of the family (I have a six sided family) any round of ammunition, of any caliber, was a "shell."

Now that is something that would drive me up a wall.

A rural Pennsylvania thing, I think. Stepdad's not a gun person, but he grew up around hunters and spent a few years in the Army, so he isn't ignorant. Just a quirk that I assume is regional dialect. If that were the most annoying thing my family did there would be comparative harmony.

But, yeah, OT:
I have a couple machetes and sword like objects that I play with, but they are more toys than anything else. I like the shape of bronze age and early iron age swords, for no good reason. No use for a melee weapon in the NAW other than OC and a flashlight (2cr123 size. Makes a good kubotan or fist hardener.)

In ZPAW, bayonet and long framing hammer, for specific Romeroesque threats.

[Malleolus]

Oh geez, I forgot about that.... I'm used to people using them interchangeably but I do know the difference between the two. Apologies for the coming storm....

I grew up hearing them used interchangeably as well. Also, on my stepdad's side of the family (I have a six sided family) any round of ammunition, of any caliber, was a "shell."

Now that is something that would drive me up a wall.

A rural Pennsylvania thing, I think. Stepdad's not a gun person, but he grew up around hunters and spent a few years in the Army, so he isn't ignorant. Just a quirk that I assume is regional dialect. If that were the most annoying thing my family did there would be comparative harmony.

But, yeah, OT:
I have a couple machetes and sword like objects that I play with, but they are more toys than anything else. I like the shape of bronze age and early iron age swords, for no good reason. No use for a melee weapon in the NAW other than OC and a flashlight (2cr123 size. Makes a good kubotan or fist hardener.)

In ZPAW, bayonet and long framing hammer, for specific Romeroesque threats.

Maybe that they hunt primarily with shotguns or he and/or family member was trained in packing shotguns and it just became a generalized term for him...

Well they were typically thicker and designed for use against opponents using laminated armors, so they do have a distinct shape and design.

[Jeriah]

Clearly, the firearm is the preferred tool for personal combat today, and should zombies spontaneously move beyond the hypothetical, would be the premier choice for their disposal as well. If you have a malfunction, you transition to your secondary firearm (you carry a secondary, right?), or if there are no close-in threats, you clear the malfunction. Hopefully you carry enough ammo for the job at hand, but if resupply isn't happening, you can run out. Or, the weapon can experience a malfunction that cannot be cleared. And so, yes, we have a backup plan.

The backup plan is something called "combatives." There's a manual: http://www.selfdefenseresource.com/comb ... 25.150.php

Combatives is about having a plan of action for when your firearm fails. Instead of standing there with your dick in the wind, you do something. Throw your helmet at the guy's face. Kick him in the balls. Whatever lets you take control of the situation and stop the fight before it stops you. So, melee weapon choice is secondary to the mindset: use whatever you have, to take control of the situation, and win the fight. Normally this is your primary firearm (rifle), and if that fails, your secondary firearm (pistol). If that fails, you're down to combatives. The above-linked manual discusses methods for unarmed combat, the use of the empty weapon as a blunt instrument (buttstroking), the bayonet whether mounted to the firearm or used hand-held as a knife, other knives, and improvised weapons including the entrenching tool, a 3' stick, and a 6' pole. Obviously these latter two are archetypes from which it is imagined that in a fight, you would extrapolate to what you have available: a shovel, a rake, a length of pipe, a wrench, whatever.

There is nothing wrong with bringing along a melee weapon to stack the deck in your favor if you find yourself in a combatives situation. But remember that it's just a tool for a job, and other tools can do the job as well. A knife fight is more about the fight, less about the knife: you can still kick, grab a rock with your off hand, whatever. So I wouldn't get hung up on the weapon, it's almost incidental. You should train to fight with a variety of weapons so you're effective with whatever's available at the time.

All that being said, there is also something to be said for style.

[Doctorr Fabulous]

For style, I've always preferred the Han Solo approach to things.

I don't recall if it's been said yet, but E-tools, machetes, and kevlar helmets have made wonderful killing implements in addition to bayonets. I see your Captain and raise you a Major General, USMC, RET. They call him "E-tool" because he scored 4 kills with the 'Nam issue entrenching tool during the Hue Offensive. It's not on the wiki page, but there are several write-ups, and he spoke at my battalion's Ball last year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_L._Smith

[Malleolus]

Clearly, the firearm is the preferred tool for personal combat today, and should zombies spontaneously move beyond the hypothetical, would be the premier choice for their disposal as well. If you have a malfunction, you transition to your secondary firearm (you carry a secondary, right?), or if there are no close-in threats, you clear the malfunction. Hopefully you carry enough ammo for the job at hand, but if resupply isn't happening, you can run out. Or, the weapon can experience a malfunction that cannot be cleared. And so, yes, we have a backup plan.

The backup plan is something called "combatives." There's a manual: http://www.selfdefenseresource.com/comb ... 25.150.php

Combatives is about having a plan of action for when your firearm fails. Instead of standing there with your dick in the wind, you do something. Throw your helmet at the guy's face. Kick him in the balls. Whatever lets you take control of the situation and stop the fight before it stops you. So, melee weapon choice is secondary to the mindset: use whatever you have, to take control of the situation, and win the fight. Normally this is your primary firearm (rifle), and if that fails, your secondary firearm (pistol). If that fails, you're down to combatives. The above-linked manual discusses methods for unarmed combat, the use of the empty weapon as a blunt instrument (buttstroking), the bayonet whether mounted to the firearm or used hand-held as a knife, other knives, and improvised weapons including the entrenching tool, a 3' stick, and a 6' pole. Obviously these latter two are archetypes from which it is imagined that in a fight, you would extrapolate to what you have available: a shovel, a rake, a length of pipe, a wrench, whatever.

There is nothing wrong with bringing along a melee weapon to stack the deck in your favor if you find yourself in a combatives situation. But remember that it's just a tool for a job, and other tools can do the job as well. A knife fight is more about the fight, less about the knife: you can still kick, grab a rock with your off hand, whatever. So I wouldn't get hung up on the weapon, it's almost incidental. You should train to fight with a variety of weapons so you're effective with whatever's available at the time.

All that being said, there is also something to be said for style.

Saving that to the desktop ...
...
...
Anyway, a firearm (without extensive measures taken to suppress it, and a way to replace that suppressor because they wear with each shot, judging from your experience you know this, but others might not, so please don't take offense) would be like a dinner bell, and say you're stuck in an alley with 5-15+ zombies between you and escape. Firing the gun could quickly mean dozens more filling the void. It get's worse as you progress from night of the living dead version of a zombie to a 28 day's later version and the in between.

Other than that, I'll conceit to training with multiple weapons and other things that you can happen upon randomly. But you aren't typically going to pry open a door with a knife without risking shearing the blade off. It's incidental and yes other things can get the job done, but how many times is it going to last compared to a proper weapon is my thing. It's only a few extra pounds for something you know is going to last you through extremely extended confrontations possibly and is designed explicitly for the conditions you see in a zpoc with little maintenance. It's going to maximize your efficiency with the proper training, rather than using something else to get the job done but at the cost of greater exertion and possible ruination of the tool. Even with proper training with a knife, it's still not designed for the conditions of eliminating a zombie, so it will wear faster and you run a risk of loosing something that is invaluable to your survival otherwise. I just really don't see why there's such hostility to it other than a bad rep due to misconceptions induced through various entertainment outlets. It's like art (or smithing or most vocations for that matter), a well trained individual can get a job done with just about anything to a pretty good degree of refinement, but that same individual with the right tools can make the work easier and come out far better, changing an amature piece of work into a masterpiece if you will. The skill is there in both scenario's, but the right tools can make all the difference.

ETA: On an aside, I think it's great to see vet's and current servicemen in the forums and active. Thank you for your services and sacrifices, and I'm honored to see you here with us.

[squinty]

For style, I've always preferred the Han Solo approach to things.

As in this quote?

“Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid.”

Machetes have a bad guy rep right now, thanks to unpleasant association with Rwandan genocides and South American gangs.
Thing about Zombie Combat Tactics is, except perhaps for the endurance required if you get overwhelmed by the horde, Zombie Combat is a lot easier than active, smart, fast human combat. Who wouldn't rather shoot at slow shuffling moaning foes that don't know enough to take cover, as opposed to fast running, quick thinking, organized, human foes who can shoot back?

Likewise for a "melee weapon" - something purpose designed for fighting is a lot more important if you're fighting a sentient foe who can fight back, and might have a few moves of his own. Whereas zombies, again, don't exactly fight. They just keep advancing. An agricultural implement designed to hack or reap might be just fine against foes that are more like mobile stalks of grass than living animate threats.

[mantis]

Agreed, but can you carry 15000 rounds of ammo on your person? All I'm saying is that it's a good idea to have a devoted melee weapon just in case. They aren't that heavy and can be great when you run outta clips. Plus I doubt many people have 15000 rounds of ammo just sitting around. Most people probably only have one or two boxes of low grain solid tips for their 9mm or .45.

Most ppl can't guarantee that they can avoid confrontation 100% of the time, and if you are bugging out from a heavily populated area your chances are... slim.

I thought eta meant estimated time of arrival?

Why would you need or want to carry 15,000 rounds on your person? It's not as if you're going to survive very long anyway if you're running around getting into battles that would require that much ammo at any one given time. For that matter, if you did run into such a situation, no "melee" weapons in the world would help you because the chances are that at least some of the other guys would be armed properly with firearms and would smoke your ass at 100x the range of your Katana.

[squinty]

Fook it. I'm takin' Nun Chucks.

I don't mean two sticks with a little rope or chain between 'em. I mean two Chuck Norrises in Nun's habits.

[Jeriah]

Anyway, a firearm (without extensive measures taken to suppress it, and a way to replace that suppressor because they wear with each shot, judging from your experience you know this, but others might not, so please don't take offense) would be like a dinner bell, and say you're stuck in an alley with 5-15+ zombies between you and escape. Firing the gun could quickly mean dozens more filling the void. It get's worse as you progress from night of the living dead version of a zombie to a 28 day's later version and the in between.

Suppressors are a lot more durable than they used to be. Really, suppressor technology has come a long way since the WWII-era M3 Grease Gun suppressors where you had to change out a roll of window screen or whatever every time you used the damn thing. (I may be exaggerating slightly but not by a lot.) Look at current offerings by Gemtech, AAC, etc., they aren't your grandpa's "silencer." Wipes, packing materials, and wet media all have to be replaced, but most modern suppressors don't need these (with the exception of wet pistol silencers which are more effective when wet with water or grease). I'm no expert but I've talked to a lot of guys who are into suppressors. They're not "Hollywood quiet" but they are both quieter and more durable than the last generation was.

A suppressor would be my first choice for silent dispatching of zombies, but Chicago IL + NFA = FML. Failing that, if you want to pick off a zombie without drawing more, I'd use a crossbow or a compound hunting bow (my wife and I each have one of the latter). No sense in getting up close and risking a bite, injury, and infection. Knives, garrotes, helmet smashes, and other techniques for sentry removal may work well against living human combatants, but would not be desirable against zombies both because of risk and lack of effectiveness. (The Smatchet, however, would probably still be a good weapon against a zombie, especially if you could sneak up on one.)

So: A silent weapon for dispatching zombies quietly is one thing, and a melee weapon as a backup for your firearms is another thing. Best not to confuse them. Silent dispatching, my choices are 1., suppressed firearm, 2., powerful hunting crossbow, 3., a high-quality, powerful bow, and 4., last resort, melee weapons like a smatchet, tomahawk, etc. But I would use #4 only if the first three options were unavailable, and if escape and evade wasn't an option. Which leaves the question of a melee weapon as a backup defense...

Other than that, I'll conceit to training with multiple weapons and other things that you can happen upon randomly. But you aren't typically going to pry open a door with a knife without risking shearing the blade off. It's incidental and yes other things can get the job done, but how many times is it going to last compared to a proper weapon is my thing. It's only a few extra pounds for something you know is going to last you through extremely extended confrontations possibly and is designed explicitly for the conditions you see in a zpoc with little maintenance. It's going to maximize your efficiency with the proper training, rather than using something else to get the job done but at the cost of greater exertion and possible ruination of the tool. Even with proper training with a knife, it's still not designed for the conditions of eliminating a zombie, so it will wear faster and you run a risk of loosing something that is invaluable to your survival otherwise. I just really don't see why there's such hostility to it other than a bad rep due to misconceptions induced through various entertainment outlets. It's like art (or smithing or most vocations for that matter), a well trained individual can get a job done with just about anything to a pretty good degree of refinement, but that same individual with the right tools can make the work easier and come out far better, changing an amature piece of work into a masterpiece if you will. The skill is there in both scenario's, but the right tools can make all the difference.

Yeah, a knife wouldn't be my top choice either. A sturdy rifle with a fixed bayonet is hard to beat (since you've got to carry the rifle anyway). Failing that, there are a lot of tools that can double as good melee weapons. I've got a Gerber Sport Axe in my BOB that would be useful in a pinch, and a Woodman's Pal. The odds of my needing to use a melee weapon are low enough that I'm happy using one (or two) that can double as a tool I need anyway.

At home, sure, I've got machetes, swords, pick handles, baseball bats, spears, all sorts of shit. Just for fun, but hey, if the dead show up, I'm not going to neglect the "stabby rack" I keep in each room of my house. Seriously. My house is full of racks, stacks, and hooks hanging all sorts of melee weapons. I love swords and shit like that. I'm just very realistic about their limitations, and their primary role as toys/fun time.

ETA: On an aside, I think it's great to see vet's and current servicemen in the forums and active. Thank you for your services and sacrifices, and I'm honored to see you here with us.

Yes, thanks from me, too, guys!

[foxx]

I'll be taking my two pistols, a Winkler-Sayoc tomahawk, a big 12" long chopper/knife, and I'm thinking about a 6' spear. If I need a long range rifle, then there's enough space, I could just run. If I need a machine gun, because there's a horde, then I'll just run. Why carry that many rounds, when surgical precision is needed for headshots? Maybe defending a home, yeah give me some big ass guns, but on foot, I'm staying light so I can run faster and further.
I do think that purpose built weapons are usually better than tools, for fighting. As long as the correct weapon is being chosen for the person, situation, and strategy.

[Malleolus]

I have no intentions of facing a horde with a couple axes guys. Thats not my argument in the least! I'm saying that its a good idea to keep one on hand. I think that melee weapons are overlooked now because it's so easy to get a firearm, but remember they were used with extreme effectiveness for thousands of years and don't run the risk of jamming or blowing up in your hand because you drop it in a puddle.

[Malleolus]

Agreed, but can you carry 15000 rounds of ammo on your person? All I'm saying is that it's a good idea to have a devoted melee weapon just in case. They aren't that heavy and can be great when you run outta clips. Plus I doubt many people have 15000 rounds of ammo just sitting around. Most people probably only have one or two boxes of low grain solid tips for their 9mm or .45.

Most ppl can't guarantee that they can avoid confrontation 100% of the time, and if you are bugging out from a heavily populated area your chances are... slim.

I thought eta meant estimated time of arrival?

Why would you need or want to carry 15,000 rounds on your person? It's not as if you're going to survive very long anyway if you're running around getting into battles that would require that much ammo at any one given time. For that matter, if you did run into such a situation, no "melee" weapons in the world would help you because the chances are that at least some of the other guys would be armed properly with firearms and would smoke your ass at 100x the range of your Katana.

My friend, remember that this is in the zombie combat tactics thread, two totally different types of combat.

ETA: I've already established my opinion on katana's and zombies...