Weapon Madness – Round Two – Ranged Weapon Contest: Grenade Launcher vs. Minigun
The last matchup was quite good, coming down to the wire but at the end of the day, a slim majority of people decided to go with the crowbar than use an axe to take out the zombies. Personally, I would have stuck with the crowbar although I do love the fire axe. I just know that after a few close encounters, my arms would likely be exhausted. Granted, I don’t like the idea of being close and personal with a zombie either.
The next matchup returns us to the ranged weapons, pitting two powerhouses against one another. In one corner, we have a grenade launcher. In the other, we have a minigun. Here’s the breakdown:
Grenade Launcher
Pros: Can take out a lot of zombies, easy to operate, adequate melee weapon
Cons: Useless up close, rare ammo, wasted power against single targets
Minigun
Pros: massive fire rate, effective against hordes, excellent range
Cons: very loud, fixed position, reloading must be a bitch
Just a reminder about the judging. These are Romero type zombies. They are slow and sluggish. Headshots or decapitations will kill them. Bites will lead to probable infection, then death. You should judge a weapon based on its effectiveness against one zombie to an entire horde. A weapon does not need to be lethal to be effective. If it buys you some time to escape, then it should be looked on with favor.
So which do you think will make for a better zombie killing weapon?
Filed under: Zombie Madness Bracket Challenge · Tags: Weapon Madness
I think I might go with the minigun, depending on caliber. It likely has greater range and can also be used point blank, where a grenade launcher would be way danger close. Depends on what grenade launcher you mean, though. M203? Mk19? M32?
By the way, can I still weigh in on past weapon contests?
launcher cus it can make the zombies pretty much a non threat. it wont kill but the minigun wouldn’t either no accuracy for the head shot even in bursts and the “scythe” would work cus not are zombies are the same height remember and its heavy. i would use it only for static defense wit a but load of ammo to waist and ample time for the siege cus the noise would just attract more zombies
I think in all fairness you need to be more specific here. Are you specifically referring to the weapons pictured? If so I would probably go with the mini-gun mounted in a vehicle.
But what about a Mark19? A fully automatic grenade launching machine gun would make me change my mind.
If we are talking about hand held, shoulder fired type weapons then I’d go with the grenade launcher. There is no way you could lug around a mini gun and the obscene amount of ammo required for it…. See More
Considering the ammo requirements my final answer is grenade launcher.
Depends on the weapons in question. However, the fact that a minigun with sufficient ammo could hold of the horde pretty much forever, puts it slightly ahead in my book. Seriously people, if you put a bullet big bullet in a zombie’s leg, it isn’t going to be coming with any speed.
The machine guns = suck argument doesn’t make sense, their use is restricted, true (on account of size and ammo, mostly), but I’d have no problem including Ma deuce in any defensive plans I drew up.
grenade launcher holds usually 6 grenades and since there romero zombies you can stay at a distance because theyre slow so itd be easy to take them out, plus you can manipulate them and get them together for easier kills
I’m thinking either way Ammo will be almost non-existant and both weapons would be more trouble than benefit. I’m gonna go with the minigun, assuming ammo is a non issue this thing would be amazing for defending a position.
I would take the grenade launcher.
Can you use different ammo? for instance, a slug/shotgun round for up close shots and then a high explosive for distance shots?
How about a knife attachment at the barrell?
How many grenade launchers work like that, pray tell?