User talk:President James K Polk

That Fence Thing

You said: Nonsense. I don't buy the idea that halving the number of buildings that beginning zombies can enter improves their lot. By that logic, you should have there be only one location on the map without a door. (Why, just think how easy (un)life would be for low-level zombies; they could all converge on that spot...)

I have to respond. Just to note, though - I'm not trying to persuade you to change your vote - it's your vote to do with what you will. My logic doesn't stretch to your one-building theory at all. That would be ridiculous. What I was suggesting was that an even dispersal of less buildings would be better than an even dispersal of more buildings. Imagine a suburb has 2 churches and 2 junkyards - the zombies who can't open doors (assuming they're not with a horde than can), have 4 targets to choose from, thus potentially dividing their numbers. If there were only 2 such locations in the 'burb, the zombies would be more likely to meet up, thus forming a stronger unit. Leaping from that to a single building in the whole of Malton is not logical at all, because it doesn't take into account the distances involved or the size of the city or the general dispersal of the population, which are all key points. --Funt Solo 15:15, 15 December 2006 (UTC)