if everyone became 6 ft 9 strongmen, would that change what type of guns were made?

if everyone became 6 ft 9 strongmen, would that change what type of guns were made?

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    LOP would go up. I don't think free recoil would go up all that much, but maybe heavier guns would be doable.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      nope, maybe some modifications to accommodate the sausage fingers but it wouldn't radically change weapons as we know them
      the average infantryman would be lugging a lot more shit

      50 cal. ARs

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        already a thing, and it's not used because it doesn't fill any niche other calibers do

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    nope, maybe some modifications to accommodate the sausage fingers but it wouldn't radically change weapons as we know them
    the average infantryman would be lugging a lot more shit

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      LOP would go up. I don't think free recoil would go up all that much, but maybe heavier guns would be doable.

      they would be able to wear a lot more and heavier armor

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        not really, you're right about more since it needs to acomodate the increased size but we won't be heavier than what it already is, we won't be seeing EOD sized suits roaming the battlefield since it's still a cumbersome to move in them

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Trips of truth, google the square-cube law. They might even have to wear less armor.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah. Their carrying capacity would increase at the cube of some multiplier, but the mass and volume of the armor would increase at the square.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          That's backwards. The total load a structure can bear is a function of unit area (square), while mass a function of volume (cube).
          Thus strength increases by the square while mass increases by the cube; the Square-Cube Law.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I was thinking about scaling a person up equally in all dimensions. let’s say your double every axis, you x8 the volume and mass of the person. Thus you x8 the size of the muscles and thus their strength. Is that wrong?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The Square-Cube Law has no legal basis and therefore is not legally binding

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Iz dat lawful law?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Smaller athletes have a higher weight to power ratio. Thor and Eddie don't have 3x bodyweight deads at competition weight (would be like 1,200+ lbs) but plenty of non-competitive guys, yours truly included, have pulled 3x bodyweight.

        But armor only has to be a given thickness over a given surface area and surface area doesn't increase 1:1 with bulk, so heavier guys seem like they could have an advantage. It just depends on the rate of change in weight/power vs change in surface area.

        EXCEPT, carrying armor around for hours is more of a cardio activity and smaller people have a much larger advantage there.

        Given that rich cross fit guys on roids can have impressive lifts, but die or have to be dragged up Everest, while 120lb Sherpa dudes carry 80lb packs up for the clients as part of their routine work, I say the advantage goes to the smaller guys.

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The would get a little bigger to accommodate the larger hands but that’s it

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Boring answer, but pretty much this.
      Larger controls with more tactile feedback to accommodate honey baked ham sized hands. Furniture would follow suit.

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yup. The minimum allowable recoil energy would scale, probabaly with body weight, strength, and like, the size of your feet proving traction on the ground, or something like that. Ammo could become much heavier. Guns could get bigger without being any less maneuverable. Sit MCX spear with like a 300 round load out of 6.8x51 could become standard issue.

    A 6’9” guy is 1.17x the height of a current average 5’9” guy. Assuming a strongman is stockier and wider/deeper than the average guy, at equal height, I’ll assume 25% increase in width and depth. All in all the 6’9” super soldier would be 1.83x as massive as the current soldier. So probabaly just scale everything up in size and mass by 1.83x

    Tbh a supersoldier/eugenics program could probabaly produce a race of 7 foot tall super soldiers with insane physical superlatives and strength to mass ratio in a matter of like single digit generations with strong enough selective pressures. Simply selectively breed the top percentile of men by skeleton volume with the top percentile of women in the same metric. Breed them the minute their growth plates ossify and repeat for subsequent generations. Fertility rate of like 10 kids per woman. In ~100 years you will have an army of super soldiers that can’t fit through doorways and can shoulder fire 50BMG machineguns accurately. Careful not to release them into the wild, as there will be no pussy left for the rest of us.

    God damn that would be cool

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I disagree. Recoil energy is mostly limited by human meat durability, having a stock slam against a pectoral simply mashes it I guess you would gain a little bit of resistance as the butt plate gets bigger on the gun, but not that much.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Damn, you might be right. Maybe wear something over your shoulder to distribute the force over a larger area? Their muscles would be thicker though, wouldn’t that mean they could be squished more for the same, idk, pain?

        Or alternatively, use constant recoil machine guns. Their peak force is lower than conventional MGs where the bolt deposits all of its energy into the receiver instantly.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Go fight a heavyweight then a lightweight. Test your silly theory

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Give a buff dude a 500NE and see if he gets bruises from shooting it. He will, because it's not a strength thing, it's a materials limit of flesh thing.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It’d be faster to just develop gene editing.
      Also, while super soldiers are cool and all, I don’t think they’d be as useful as you might think. Even a 7ft tall ripped dude will die to a bullet. Instead, breed a race of Einstein tier geniuses to make weapons of war.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Instead, breed a race of Einstein tier geniuses to make weapons of war.
        Anon...

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Holy hell that’s impressive.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You aren't accounting for regression to the mean. Organisms are complex systems with all sorts of positive and negative feedback systems. You could breed a taller population, but only to a point. You're not going to get to 15 foot tall people. Human organs didn't evolve for gigantic frames and so as some of the genes that increase height are bred for you will start to kick off feedback mechanisms they limit growth. You also have tipping points in complex systems and can hit a point where your breeding program produced high levels of dysfunction. Look at all the issues with purebred dogs.

      Height is controlled by many genes. Some of those that tend to increase height are recessive but your breeding program is likely to extinguish this.

      There is a reason generations of dog breeding haven't produced tiger sized dogs. Without mutations you will run into an upper bound. People also don't really care about breeding defects the way they would if they were breeding for something important like super soldiers. You might get some better guys but you will also get some who are worse and have to be culled. Determining which is which wouldn't always be easy.

      It's impractical if you don't have a good understanding of how the genome works and the ability to edit it IMO. People seem large correlation coefficients for traits like IQ and forget that these are not additive and are often measured as variance from the population mean. IQ can be highly heritable and the progeny of two very high IQ individuals can still be highly likely to be lower than either parent.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I’m vaguely aware of the things you fleshed in more detail. I picked 7 feet because that doesn’t seem too far away from what is possible naturally. Google “angus macaskill”. A natural 7 foot something inch tall man with non pathological gigantism. It’s certainly possible.

        Regression to the mean is part of the reason I said that the feriliity rate should be something crazy like 10 kids per woman. To account for all the manlets (and speed up the process + having a big pool of soldiers). Nevertheless I wasn’t even trying to be scientically accurate, I’m not writing a book or actually putting together a supersoldier program. Just spitballing with frens.

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Nothing will change, but everyone can carry more mags.

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yep. Strongman type of guys can barely move their fingers and arms. The weapons would be bigger

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    spess muhreen?

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm only 6'4 and not very strong and I can shoot 12ga like a handgun so.
    50ae service pistols when?

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Everything would be belt fed.

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    everybody becomes an Ogryn? World becomes a better, but dumber, place.

    Also who is stronger, an Ogryn who just lost a buddy or a naked space marine?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Also who is stronger, an Ogryn who just lost a buddy or a naked space marine?
      Money's on the space marine, they're big, stronk AND smart.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        i just mean in an arm-wrestling sort of competition where only STR matters. No black carapace bullshittery.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Ah that changes things.
          I think it might be a closer call, a lot of what puts the space marine on top is targeted towards survivability and reaction time.
          The Ogryn would definitely have a leg up with that enraged tard strength, but if the space marine could at least match them in power it'd go to them since they could probably put out the same force for longer.
          That said, without their suit, I'm pretty sure the Ogryn's got the edge in raw strength so they'd probably win.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Ogryns are pretty friggin' big. My money would be on them in a lifting competition.
      Other anon has a point about marines being cannier though. I'd probably put money on the marine in an actual fight.

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No, guns are already pretty good at hitting large, slow moving targets.

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    for gods sake dont ask what brian shaw did to larry wheels!!!

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *