What if WA was set in a place with pre-established groups fueled by ideologies?

[HorrorHiro]

Odd title, I know, but I think it hits the nail on the head pretty good...

What if WA was set somewhere where (prior to the zombie apocalypse) there were already groups of armed people, united by ideologies?

A large country like Columbia is a great example. For decades now the people of Columbia have been witnesses, partakers, and victims in the ongoing bloody civil war(s) between various groups of Left-wing Guerrillas and Right-wing Paramilitaries. India is another good example, The Naxalites (Maoist/Communist Insurgents) are still strong in certain parts of India.

Say something like WA happened in Columbia, I have no doubt in my mind that some of the larger armed groups would quickly realize the situation and take the necessary steps to adapt and well...survive, much they like they do now.

Take the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia (the FARC) for example. A once large non-state army of over 20,000 personnel. Constant fighting against the Columbian government and the Right-wing paramilitaries have roughly halfed those numbers, but the FARC is still actively growing in numbers.

One of the main opposing Right to far-right wing paramilitaries is the Black Eagles. They are thought to have organized for the sole purpose of opposing the revolutionary left-wing groups such as the FARC and the ELN (National Liberation Army of Columbia.)

Does anyone else think that a WA set in Columbia with these two (and other) groups would be...interesting to say the least?

[nikvoodoo]

If it's We're Alive related, it does not belong in Everything else. The chance for spoilers is too great. This is getting moved.

[HorrorHiro]

Understandable

[Osiris]

I honestly wouldn't mind WA set in Russia, anywhere in South America, or any other place where the environment would play a larger factor in survival either by way of extreme cold or heat. It would be interesting to see a WA style horror/drama play out in Egypt! Or even Ireland! I'll grant that it isn't exactly along the lines of your question, but it did spark the idea of different settings. Hmm... perhaps I should check out iTunes...

[reaper239]

I honestly wouldn't mind WA set in Russia, anywhere in South America, or any other place where the environment would play a larger factor in survival either by way of extreme cold or heat. It would be interesting to see a WA style horror/drama play out in Egypt! Or even Ireland! I'll grant that it isn't exactly along the lines of your question, but it did spark the idea of different settings. Hmm... perhaps I should check out iTunes...

are you kidding man? a big city would be one of the hardest places to survive imo. sure, for the short term scavenging supplies would be easy, but there are like no natural resources in the middle of a city, plus in the panic to get out all exits would be gridlocked, meaning that any life you did build in the city would have to stay there once you'd been fored out. plus you have to look at with no one to keep the buildings up and maintained, structural integrity becomes an issue after a while. plus with the population of big cities you have to compete for resources with other survivors. urban environments are damn hard to keep alive in when the infrastructure falls through. that said, i do agree 1,000% that it would be wesome to see WA set up in some place that is culturally and environmentally different from America.

[reaper239]

Odd title, I know, but I think it hits the nail on the head pretty good...

What if WA was set somewhere where (prior to the zombie apocalypse) there were already groups of armed people, united by ideologies?

A large country like Columbia is a great example. For decades now the people of Columbia have been witnesses, partakers, and victims in the ongoing bloody civil war(s) between various groups of Left-wing Guerrillas and Right-wing Paramilitaries. India is another good example, The Naxalites (Maoist/Communist Insurgents) are still strong in certain parts of India.

Say something like WA happened in Columbia, I have no doubt in my mind that some of the larger armed groups would quickly realize the situation and take the necessary steps to adapt and well...survive, much they like they do now.

Take the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia (the FARC) for example. A once large non-state army of over 20,000 personnel. Constant fighting against the Columbian government and the Right-wing paramilitaries have roughly halfed those numbers, but the FARC is still actively growing in numbers.

One of the main opposing Right to far-right wing paramilitaries is the Black Eagles. They are thought to have organized for the sole purpose of opposing the revolutionary left-wing groups such as the FARC and the ELN (National Liberation Army of Columbia.)

Does anyone else think that a WA set in Columbia with these two (and other) groups would be...interesting to say the least?

true, the criminal organizations would have a fighting chance, but the average citizens wouldn't. the US is one of the few places in the world where people are able to arm themselves easily (relatively speaking). baring handgun and "assault rifle" regulations, anyone 18 and older can go pick up a shotgun or long rifle in most walmarts. for the average citizens in most countries, self defense is very difficult, if not impossible, in the face of an imminent lethal threat.

[Cabbage Patch]

Another twist would be to tell the WA story in a place like Switzerland, where there is a large military reserve systems and members keep their weapons and ammo at home.

I imagine that Swiss cities might hold out better than their French, German or Italian neighbors, since every adult male has an assault rifle or a machinegun at home, there are neighborhood-based military units, there is a network of supply bunkers in the cities and throughout the surrounding mountains, and all of the key passes and tunnels are fortified and rigged for easy closure.

Humans would have a fighting chance during the early stages, places that were overrun could be contained and places that weren't could be defended. Then they'd have to hold the borders in the face of massive attacks from the overrun European continent.

[Osiris]

are you kidding man? a big city would be one of the hardest places to survive imo. sure, for the short term scavenging supplies would be easy, but there are like no natural resources in the middle of a city, plus in the panic to get out all exits would be gridlocked, meaning that any life you did build in the city would have to stay there once you'd been fored out. plus you have to look at with no one to keep the buildings up and maintained, structural integrity becomes an issue after a while. plus with the population of big cities you have to compete for resources with other survivors. urban environments are damn hard to keep alive in when the infrastructure falls through. that said, i do agree 1,000% that it would be wesome to see WA set up in some place that is culturally and environmentally different from America.

While those points are true, there is still creature comforts available in cities. Soft, warm beds, electricity (if you can get it), shelter with relative security, scavengable resources, etc. I'm talking about surviving in a wasteland--literally. Some place where the closest house is a hundred miles away across a frozen tundra. All you have is a tent and a box of matches. Tell me how that would be easier to survive in than a relatively empty L.A. or Florida?

[yarri]

are you kidding man? a big city would be one of the hardest places to survive imo. sure, for the short term scavenging supplies would be easy, but there are like no natural resources in the middle of a city, plus in the panic to get out all exits would be gridlocked, meaning that any life you did build in the city would have to stay there once you'd been fored out. plus you have to look at with no one to keep the buildings up and maintained, structural integrity becomes an issue after a while. plus with the population of big cities you have to compete for resources with other survivors. urban environments are damn hard to keep alive in when the infrastructure falls through. that said, i do agree 1,000% that it would be wesome to see WA set up in some place that is culturally and environmentally different from America.

You and I are in agreement in this. As soon as you can get out get out of the city.


While those points are true, there is still creature comforts available in cities. Soft, warm beds, electricity (if you can get it), shelter with relative security, scavengable resources, etc. I'm talking about surviving in a wasteland--literally. Some place where the closest house is a hundred miles away across a frozen tundra. All you have is a tent and a box of matches. Tell me how that would be easier to survive in than a relatively empty L.A. or Florida?

Rotting bodies (and there are going to be dead things alot of dead things) = all sorts of funky diseases. Yes finding supplies would be easier but then again those supplies have a shelf life. My idea use the city as a supermarket, get gear together, a host of starter seeds for a nice garden and head to the country. Clean air, a nice bit of ground and go rural. Also wouldn't you say that a rural location would have fewer of the infected to deal with?

[reaper239]

While those points are true, there is still creature comforts available in cities. Soft, warm beds, electricity (if you can get it), shelter with relative security, scavengable resources, etc. I'm talking about surviving in a wasteland--literally. Some place where the closest house is a hundred miles away across a frozen tundra. All you have is a tent and a box of matches. Tell me how that would be easier to survive in than a relatively empty L.A. or Florida?

it also depends on seasons, russia can be quite hospitible in the warmer months. of course if you were in the middle of the wastes you would likely be saying, "what zombie apocalypse?" in the middle of the frozen wastes of russia, there wouldn't be enough people for the ZA to take hold and have an impact, conversely if you were in the jungles of south america, there is an abundunce of natural resources and enough people in towns that the ZA would drive you to the wild. from there survival is just a matter of know how, but if you live in the jungle you already proly have that know how.

[Osiris]

You and I are in agreement in this. As soon as you can get out get out of the city.

Rotting bodies (and there are going to be dead things alot of dead things) = all sorts of funky diseases. Yes finding supplies would be easier but then again those supplies have a shelf life. My idea use the city as a supermarket, get gear together, a host of starter seeds for a nice garden and head to the country. Clean air, a nice bit of ground and go rural. Also wouldn't you say that a rural location would have fewer of the infected to deal with?

Rural is one thing. I'm talking about someplace must more inhospitable and hostile than 'the country'. You wouldn't consider the Sahara as being 'rural'. There's a big difference between surviving outside of an American city on what is essentially farm land (unless you live in Arizona maybe) and surviving in a place where resources are far more scarce than you would like them to be. You wouldn't flee the comfort and safety of The Tower for unprotected, harsh nights on the Siberian tundra. Not unless you were insane. That's what I'm talking about, W.A. in a region where the elements play a much larger factor.


it also depends on seasons, russia can be quite hospitible in the warmer months. of course if you were in the middle of the wastes you would likely be saying, "what zombie apocalypse?" in the middle of the frozen wastes of russia, there wouldn't be enough people for the ZA to take hold and have an impact, conversely if you were in the jungles of south america, there is an abundunce of natural resources and enough people in towns that the ZA would drive you to the wild. from there survival is just a matter of know how, but if you live in the jungle you already proly have that know how.

If we're going that route, then why would we be talking about a zombie apocoalypse anyway? It would never happen, so staying in L.A. would be fine I guess. You'd thrive just as well in the jungle as you would the city. No need to carry the thread on. It's been solved.

[reaper239]

Rural is one thing. I'm talking about someplace must more inhospitable and hostile than 'the country'. You wouldn't consider the Sahara as being 'rural'. There's a big difference between surviving outside of an American city on what is essentially farm land (unless you live in Arizona maybe) and surviving in a place where resources are far more scarce than you would like them to be. You wouldn't flee the comfort and safety of The Tower for unprotected, harsh nights on the Siberian tundra. Not unless you were insane. That's what I'm talking about, W.A. in a region where the elements play a much larger factor.



If we're going that route, then why would we be talking about a zombie apocoalypse anyway? It would never happen, so staying in L.A. would be fine I guess. You'd thrive just as well in the jungle as you would the city. No need to carry the thread on. It's been solved.

that's a cop out and you know it. all i'm asking you is: in the middle of the sahara, how many people are there to be affected by the ZA? not many right? so are you just going to create a bunch of random people to turn into zombies who have no other purpose than to turn into zombies? what makes the city interesting is that if a zombie virus broke out (and there are nerve agents and virus's that make people act like hyper aggressive and... bitey) there are people there and survival is difficult. what you're describing is someone going out into the middle of nowhere, where no people would regularly be, finding a bunch of people standing around waiting to turn into zombies, and surviving. it just doesn't seem plausible, even with the zombie aspect. now survival in a harsh environment is one thing, but people don't congregate places where your odds of survival drop dramatically because there is nothing there. there needs to be some kind of livelyhood. now people do live in some crazy places and i would love to see outbreaks in those places too (spreading the love). like the alaskan wilderness: cold, harsh, unforgiving but livable.

[Osiris]

that's a cop out and you know it. all i'm asking you is: in the middle of the sahara, how many people are there to be affected by the ZA? not many right? so are you just going to create a bunch of random people to turn into zombies who have no other purpose than to turn into zombies? what makes the city interesting is that if a zombie virus broke out (and there are nerve agents and virus's that make people act like hyper aggressive and... bitey) there are people there and survival is difficult. what you're describing is someone going out into the middle of nowhere, where no people would regularly be, finding a bunch of people standing around waiting to turn into zombies, and surviving. it just doesn't seem plausible, even with the zombie aspect. now survival in a harsh environment is one thing, but people don't congregate places where your odds of survival drop dramatically because there is nothing there. there needs to be some kind of livelyhood. now people do live in some crazy places and i would love to see outbreaks in those places too (spreading the love). like the alaskan wilderness: cold, harsh, unforgiving but livable.

That's ridiculous. And to think that you got that out of what I wrote. Let me break it down. You have a small group of survivors in a city somewhere on the edge of civilization after an outbreak that at are being forced to leave the city because it's overrun. I have no idea where you got 'people hanging around in the middle of nowhere waiting to be turned into zombies' unless of course you were simply trying to force words into my mouth for argument's sake.

Now, you've got a group of survivors on the run into a truly inhospitable terrain, Zeds at their heels, no comfort, no safety, just a whole lot of empty wilderness ahead of them as they try to escape. Are you following easier, or will I need to draw some pictures for you? Not once did I describe someone walking into the wilderness and finding a group of people waiting to be turned into zombies.

[Cabbage Patch]

World War Z did a great job reflecting the impact of a zombie apocalypse on different areas around the world. Geography and climate, the nature of the government and society, and plain dumb luck all play enormous roles, creating unique circumstances everywhere the zombies show up. I'd love to see some of those stories, once KC gives us the bigger picture of what's happening around the world.

[Osiris]

World War Z did a great job reflecting the impact of a zombie apocalypse on different areas around the world. Geography and climate, the nature of the government and society, and plain dumb luck all play enormous roles, creating unique circumstances everywhere the zombies show up. I'd love to see some of those stories, once KC gives us the bigger picture of what's happening around the world.

World War Z was really good. Brooks did a great job on it... now that you mention it... I should re-read that.

[reaper239]

That's ridiculous. And to think that you got that out of what I wrote. Let me break it down. You have a small group of survivors in a city somewhere on the edge of civilization after an outbreak that at are being forced to leave the city because it's overrun. I have no idea where you got 'people hanging around in the middle of nowhere waiting to be turned into zombies' unless of course you were simply trying to force words into my mouth for argument's sake.

Now, you've got a group of survivors on the run into a truly inhospitable terrain, Zeds at their heels, no comfort, no safety, just a whole lot of empty wilderness ahead of them as they try to escape. Are you following easier, or will I need to draw some pictures for you? Not once did I describe someone walking into the wilderness and finding a group of people waiting to be turned into zombies.

ok, i see where you were going. i totally didn't grab that from what you were posting.

[reaper239]

World War Z was really good. Brooks did a great job on it... now that you mention it... I should re-read that.


world war z was a one time read for me. i mean it was great for the zombie nut in me, but it just moved a little too slow for a re-read.

[Osiris]

ok, i see where you were going. i totally didn't grab that from what you were posting.

I'm also super medicated lately, so my posts are probably confusing. No harm, no foul.

[yarri]

[QUOTE=Osiris;38598]Rural is one thing. I'm talking about someplace must more inhospitable and hostile than 'the country'. You wouldn't consider the Sahara as being 'rural'. There's a big difference between surviving outside of an American city on what is essentially farm land (unless you live in Arizona maybe) and surviving in a place where resources are far more scarce than you would like them to be. You wouldn't flee the comfort and safety of The Tower for unprotected, harsh nights on the Siberian tundra. Not unless you were insane. That's what I'm talking about, W.A. in a region where the elements play a much larger factor.

Ok now that make sense

[Osiris]

I shouldn't post when I'm medicated. :hsugh:

[yarri]

I shouldn't post when I'm medicated. :hsugh:

Its ok drugs are good.

[Cabbage Patch]

I shouldn't post when I'm medicated. :hsugh:

How well do you shoot when medicated? Sorry, leakage from the "Locked and Loaded" thread.

[Osiris]

How well do you shoot when medicated? Sorry, leakage from the "Locked and Loaded" thread.

My aim is actually really good. I'm completely relaxed, so that helps. It's just my inner voice to typed 'speech' that suffers. And my balance. Any my general coherence...


You should probably put me up front...

[Osiris]

Sorry for the derail, HorrorHiro.

[Cabbage Patch]

Here are some spots I'd love to see the WA scenario played out:

• Anywhere in the US outside of LA
• The United Kingdom
• Switzerland (I just think they're positioned to fare better than most!)
• Northern Mexico, in the areas where the government and the drug cartels are battling for control
• Afghanistan (where most everybody seems to be armed) versus Iran (which has pretty effectively disarmed its population)
• The big cities of Brazil versus the Amazon Basin Rain Forest
• And yes, I'd like to see how this plays out in Siberia

[GeneTwo]

Hawaii & Philippines