In a ZA, would you join a group or go lone wolf?

edited December 2012 in The Walking Dead
There are a lots of pros and cons when it comes to survive alone, along with groups.
Post what you think, and your reasons for it.

Personally, I feel safer with a medium sized group of, say, 6-10 people, this way we still have numbers, but not too much to atract attention. But there's also some problems with it, like possible food rationing, supplies, and of course, interpersonal problems.
«1

Comments

  • edited November 2012
    Luizao876 wrote: »
    There are a lots of pros and cons when it comes to survive alone, along with groups.
    Post what you think, and your reasons for it.

    Personally, I feel safer with a medium sized group of, say, 6-10 people, this way we still have numbers, but not too much to atract attention. But there's also some problems with it, like possible food rationing, supplies, and of course, interpersonal problems.

    I think it's essential to stay with a group at first, until you learn what it takes to survive in the zombie ridden world. After maybe a few months I would contemplate striking out on my own if i think I'd have a better chance at survival(food situation, inner rivalries, etc.), otherwise I'd try to always stay with a small-to-medium sized group.
  • edited November 2012
    I don't think going lone wolf is an option for me, 'cause I don't think I'd be able to survive on my own, unless I learned how to do it as the ZA progressed...I think I'd prefer to be on a small group (3~5 people) with people I know, but I would also be fine on a medium group.
  • edited November 2012
    I'd be alone. I work better that way, but I would not turn down Andrea from my group. Hot babe that likes to bone? I'll let her tag along.
  • edited November 2012
    Luizao876 wrote: »
    There are a lots of pros and cons when it comes to survive alone, along with groups.
    Post what you think, and your reasons for it.

    Personally, I feel safer with a medium sized group of, say, 6-10 people, this way we still have numbers, but not too much to atract attention. But there's also some problems with it, like possible food rationing, supplies, and of course, interpersonal problems.

    I think you are absolutely right... I would try to do the same.
  • edited November 2012
    I'd be alone. I work better that way, but I would not turn down Andrea from my group. Hot babe that likes to bone? I'll let her tag along.

    I love it when cats talk about women in the ZA as if their only use is a quick shag.

    later for that.

    I'll just wank it. I've wanked before and I can wank again, ZA ain't gonna change all that.

    If I join a group its because its going to help me live another day not so I can shoot my stuff off.
  • edited November 2012
    Alone always. Most people arent that good at handling pressure, just see as soon as their happens some natural disaster. People start acting like mindless sheep, mass looting and such. freaking disturbing.

    This describes it perfectly :) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkCwFkOZoOY
  • edited November 2012
    I'd deffo go physco during an invasion, as I would assume some of my friends or family would have died. I'd probly be really emo and just do a molly and keep stabbing zombies more than they need to be. Don't think it would be a good idea being around me if you like your sanity intact.
  • edited November 2012
    I think I would stay with a group for the same reasons I live amongst other people today. A life without others in it isn't worth living to me.
  • edited November 2012
    Certainly alone for the first couple of months. I don't want to be around the idiots who are first to go, I'd rather wait around until only the smart and the true survivors are left. I've said before but it'd not a terrible idea to stalk a large group and wait until they fall, the supplies they leave behind would be significant.
  • edited November 2012
    Ninnuendo wrote: »
    Certainly alone for the first couple of months. I don't want to be around the idiots who are first to go, I'd rather wait around until only the smart and the true survivors are left. I've said before but it'd not a terrible idea to stalk a large group and wait until they fall, the supplies they leave behind would be significant.

    Yeah I wonder if we would just become really cold hearted during a ZA.
    I can see survival for me would probly be my key goal. Also I see myself getting more attached to a dog instead of a group.
  • edited November 2012
    best thing would be to go alone and kill anyone who gets in your way
    and you should show mercy and kill all women who got raped, show mercy and kill all orphaned children and show mercy and kill all injured people you see
  • edited November 2012
    nomad098 wrote: »
    best thing would be to go alone and kill anyone who gets in your way
    and you should show mercy and kill all women who got raped, show mercy and kill all orphaned children and show mercy and kill all injured people you see

    This made me burst out laughing for some reason...?
  • edited November 2012
    ruairi46 wrote: »
    This made me burst out laughing for some reason...?

    what would you do?
    leave them or help them
  • edited November 2012
    What do you mean by 'help them'
  • edited November 2012
    A small group of capable people would be best, if you could find them. I wouldn't go alone though, I'd go crazy from having to constantly watch my back.
  • edited November 2012
    A think a group of two would be best for me, just like Christa and Omid.
  • edited November 2012
    ruairi46 wrote: »
    What do you mean by 'help them'

    killing them will be helping because weak people like them will turn in to zombies
  • edited November 2012
    It is clearly much more beneficial to be in a group. However, the chances you would actually get to pick and choose your group is very low and I would say no more then 10 members. Any bigger and its impossible to keep tabs on everyone.
  • edited November 2012
    I'm sure around 80% of humanity wouldn't stand a chance out there on their own. Most people are trained to be one-track specialists nowadays. A baker knows how to bake, but s/he's only ever learned how to actually make flour, or any other needed ingredients on a theoretical basis for instance... meaning if stock runs out, they also have a problem.

    Still, generally all craftsmen, be they carpenters, chefs, bakers, butchers blabla would stand a much greater chance to survive than office monkeys - be it in a group or alone. ;)
  • edited November 2012
    10-16 group. Id try help anyone i could. Take my bike to quickly nip for supplys.
  • edited November 2012
    Lone wolf? Not a chance. I'm sticking with a group.
  • edited November 2012
    I would like to be in a group with family and friends, possibly the closer family friends I prefer to be around, lol. I'm to afraid to be alone in a situation like a Z.A. (more afraid of coming into contact with a group of people I don't know than Zombies).
  • edited November 2012
    Michonne and Andrea have been fine on their own for months.

    Going lone wolf shouldnt be impossible. Also, there'd be no conflict in leadership, having to share supplies, trust issues, all that stuff. I'd be fine with just one, two or three people around me.
  • ThadeumThadeum Banned
    edited November 2012
    I would never go lone wolf.

    I need a bait, and a human shield.

    That makes two teammates with me.
  • edited November 2012
    Well. I don't know.

    I'd think I would have a nice chance of surviving alone. I'm an athletic 25 year old man who does parcour, and also used to do gymnastics till the age of 17.

    Physically, I would be able to outrun anything and everybody. Here in belgium there are not so many guns so I think I would have a huge edge going solo.

    On the other hand, I'm not the type of person to go alone. Even if i'm capable of doing so, I'd like some company in one form or the other. So I suppose, if I would be in a group, I would be the guy fetching/searching supplies.

    COULD I go lone wolf? Definatly.

    Do I choose to do so? Probly not. I'm a kind and helpfull person. That could perhaps be biting me in the ass in one way or the other. But on the other hand, I'm sure people would love a nice and agile young man in their group.

    Other skills I have would be Carpentry and Brickworking (that even a word? You know. Build houses and such). i know basic farming (grandparents used to own a farm and cattle).

    My negative traits would be, that I have slightly reduced hearing (not by much) in my right ear, and I am rather shy.

    if I would go in a group, I'd rather have it NOT more then 10 people.
  • edited November 2012
    I would be in a group, the bigger the better alot more benefits, when your going solo say you fall down hurt your ankle or get sick you need someone to watch your back
  • edited November 2012
    Macbeth3 wrote: »
    Well. I don't know.

    I'd think I would have a nice chance of surviving alone. I'm an athletic 25 year old man who does parcour, and also used to do gymnastics till the age of 17.

    Physically, I would be able to outrun anything and everybody. Here in belgium there are not so many guns so I think I would have a huge edge going solo.

    On the other hand, I'm not the type of person to go alone. Even if i'm capable of doing so, I'd like some company in one form or the other. So I suppose, if I would be in a group, I would be the guy fetching/searching supplies.

    COULD I go lone wolf? Definatly.

    Do I choose to do so? Probly not. I'm a kind and helpfull person. That could perhaps be biting me in the ass in one way or the other. But on the other hand, I'm sure people would love a nice and agile young man in their group.

    Other skills I have would be Carpentry and Brickworking (that even a word? You know. Build houses and such). i know basic farming (grandparents used to own a farm and cattle).

    My negative traits would be, that I have slightly reduced hearing (not by much) in my right ear, and I am rather shy.

    if I would go in a group, I'd rather have it NOT more then 10 people.

    Stuff like that will degrade fast, when you dont have perfect nutrition and isnt able to eat every day or so.

    I dont expect even the people in peak human condition would be able to keep that much.

    Take what you eat now, and imagine suddenly having barely enough food to survive, you sure dont have the energy or food to keep in that level of shape.

    Thats the real downside of the human body, and yet its not a downside, but the body gets rid of what it does need, meaning as soon as you stop training and dont get enough food, it throws muscle out the window very fast.

    I would imagine even the best athelet would be back to under what is average down in less than 1 year with barely enough food to survive, eating maybe once or twice every week if your lucky.

    Now you can say sure, but there is lots of good around. i would say that around 95% of the food in stores and such will go bad without 1 month if not less.

    Then youre left with can food which isnt exactly healthy or good for you, but again its better than dying.

    when it comes down to a human having to catch your own food, without any tools, even the fastest runner in a world cant even catch something as simple as a rat or bird. Humans really suck in that aspect, take away our tools and were fucked lol.

    actually is amazing just how slow humans are, that we cannot catch live food.

    Come to think of it, the best bet at getting somewhat proper food, would be to find a military installation, get some of those MRE, Meals ready to eat that the military uses, and even those, i blieve had a life at around 4 or 5 years before they go bad.

    So no matter how you look at in 5 maybe some food on cans can last 10, but no more than 10 years and there will be no good food around anywhere at all, thats fit for human consumptions.

    i actually think more humans will die of starvation than by zombie. because there isnt enough food around without all the stuff running like clockwork, like farms and such, and even then most people cannot take care of them selves but finding food.

    I may be a trained butcher, but that doesnt help squat if i cannot catch by food lol, so im fucked as well.
  • edited November 2012
    Depends if I can find right group. I would prefer to be alone mostly I think though
  • edited November 2012
    I am a lone wolf, but surviving is always best done in a group. That said, I would probably not join a group as much as a horde... (braaaiiins!)
  • edited November 2012
    Thadeum wrote: »
    I would never go lone wolf.

    I need a bait, and a human shield.

    That makes two teammates with me.

    Maybe that's also what your teammates would be thinking, might make for an interesting threesome

    :eek:
  • edited November 2012
    Going Lone wolf would be a double edged sword for me. I can be alone I've done it most of my life, but being in a group of family/family friends would be a better option for me(I'm deathly defensive of family). So the group would be fairly safe. Unfortunately with the group being family there would be fights over someone not pulling their weight in the matter. Going lone wolf if no family survived the initial run wouldn't be that hard for me to adjust to keeping my sanity/humanity would be the main focus along with survival.
  • edited November 2012
    I'd probably be alone for a while, see how it is. If i'm lucky to find a group, I'd gladly stay. If they want me.
  • edited November 2012
    My intention would be lone wolf, but I'd pick-up stragglers.
  • edited November 2012
    Macbeth3 wrote: »
    My negative traits would be, that I have slightly reduced hearing (not by much) in my right ear, and I am rather shy.

    if I would go in a group, I'd rather have it NOT more then 10 people.

    I would say to just keep mum about the negatives, no one needs to know about those for the most part. I think the people of Crawford would have given you a pass on the reduced hearing, though it would make things a little harder for you out in the field with zombies all around.
  • edited November 2012
    My family has a TEOTWAWKI plan and would be my group, and you know, any more trustworthy people that come along and can pull their weight.

    8Bit, I feel what you're saying about people basically having one skill.. I myself have been learning many different skills, so I can be a jack of all trades so I'll be valuable if SHTF and will have the skills and knowledge to take care of myself and family.

    And our bug-out bags are always fully stocked and ready to go! :)
  • edited November 2012
    You get a group and you keep building upon it. In that particular scenario, eventually humanity must go back on the offensive or all the surviving in the world is for naught.
  • edited November 2012
    It'll HAVE to be a group for me, I'm sure I won't be in my right mind, I'm sure I'd be like Ben :) Plus me and the whole seeing blood thing don't mix, so I'll need someone to carry me if I pass out lol!
  • edited November 2012
    I'd stick with a group. I reckon that a couple of months without even the option of human contact in a world that is infinitely hostile would batter anyone's mind, especially given the mental trauma that a zombie apocalypse would induce.
  • edited December 2012
    nomad098 wrote: »
    killing them will be helping because weak people like them will turn in to zombies

    Like Chuck said,you are alive,you ain't a girl,you ain't little,you ain't a boy,you ain't strong, you ain't smart,your alive.
  • edited December 2012
    I would stick with a group,atleast with around 3-5 people,I may at some point break off from the group though,once I know how to handle myself,though I would probably take my best friend,the person I could trust (and maybe a ton of supplies...mwahahaha)
This discussion has been closed.