Signs of mass panic

Once again another post. Also dunno if I’ve made a post similar to this before.
Basically more bridges leading to/ away from cities destroyed and buildings more damaged, more parts of cities on fire from napalm, gas being mostly gone, entire roads blocked off with destroyed cars. Also burned out buildings from riots and same with cars as well. Buildings barricaded and signs of gunfights ect. Just overall more damage. Possibly even burning trains going down the tracks at high speeds. Might work with that one post about trains going through the map. Probably a smoke covered sky above areas, houses with walls torn open yada yada yada.
More apocalyptic themes for maps.


I suggested this multiple times, and in fact my small map showcased signs of mass panic quite well.

Tanks in the street, encampments, zombies ligit everywhere, militia in streets, barricaded locations, people moving out, fallen survivor outposts, war zones between factions, flipped tables, really wrecked ships, exa.

I want to see that, in 4.0, like my old map.


I think Berlin (in Germany), Greece, and Cyprus did a somewhat good job of this.

+1 simply for immersion, though it should be exclusive to details that aren’t too fresh. A burning train still moving down the tracks makes me feel as if the apocalypse struck merely hours ago.


Well when you have that feel, it makes it feel more dangerous. Maybe the maps could be based during different times, so we get ideas of how much panic was going on. Like maybe even maps where the lights are still on and the fires still burning.

1 Like

Sure, this would be nice, but how do bridges break in mass panic?

End of the world clichè.

As far as i remember, the bridge on PEI was destroyed in order to contain the infection



Unlike russia, they blew up those to contain the virus. (Which failed. Because apparently, zombie can climb up hills.) But that’s no bridge so you do you.

And the bridge of rainbridge island on Washington got destroyed from too many cars? It doesn’t make sense on why it’d break.

Mostly I was thinking the military trying to make cities safe by blowing up bridges.

Also it’s 4 in the morning xd

So they wouldn’t blow up the Everett to Seattle bridge?

Silly military.

They would, but in 3.0 their idiots.


(10 char limit)

Straight fire. :fire:


1 Like

Once again, that’s one I’ve always wanted to use xdxd welp better get back to sleep, I gotta water some fields later.

I Think this is needed for the apocalyptic ambiance on the maps. some area, villages, maybe cities could be intact and undamaged while other cities could be massively damaged, burned… i would even imagine destroyed cities with bombs that didn’t exploded, just imagine that :

the player arrive at a random city , let’s say Bordeaux for example since it is a large city in france, you could find some bombs on the ground and sometimes, if you interact with thoses, they would explode and damage other buildings, kill players, and zombies… etc…

1 Like

Really nice idea,
but I hope it won’t affect the performance to much.

This topic was automatically closed 28 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.