How much does near-superhuman physique really matter in modern warfare?

[HeavyArmor]

I know when we talk about preparing and wining modern wars, we talk about logistics, combine arms tactics, smart equipment, smart weaponry, AI, and even bigger boom.

But how much does a peak-physique "normal" human (sorta like MCU Steve Rogers level physique) really matter in the grand scheme of things?

Like, if a mysterious broker is willing to sell to your country "Superhuman Serums" that boosts anyone who taken it to peak human physique (no side-effect to psychology what so ever), at 10 million USD per dose. With each dose lasting an individual a lifetime. Plus a guaranteed 20-year as sole customer before the broker release it to the world wide. Do you (as your country) think it is worth it?

How would that have affected the face of warfare?



Plus another curious question I have:

1. How likely is a normal human developing a sort-of "god complex" after receiving obtaining peak-human (or near-superhuman) physique?
2. What kind of social-cultural issues develop when the first gen super soldiers start retiring and return to civil life?

 

[Marek_Gutkowski]

Not at all. Is the answer to the main question.

The added.

1. Human is human. Atractive people are not any more likely to have a superiority complex than other do.

2. Human is human. Retiring soldiers are unlikely to create any socio-cultural changes that could be observed on the macro scale.

 

[Vikram]

1. God Complex? Definitely not. But that same arrogance and "Better Than Thou, Villein" aura is going to be ramped up to obnoxious degrees. Assuming it is India, this means a lot of very strong, very arrogant, and very isolated men with the ability to break a score of opponents with their bare hands. That will not go well.

2. Also, this is going to be creating a teensy bit of a Gravy Seals problem with the Dumbest Demographic, ie middle class teenaged to young adult boys. Who will inevitably grow into embarassing adults.

Warfare is an entirely different thing altogether, and will be basically superstrong dudes creating new commando units. That ends either good or bad, depending on how well our notoriously stupid government controls them.

 

[Lerticus]

Knowing the military mind of a Rear Echelon Mother Fucker, medals of valor given for the successful occupation of an office chair... operations somehow get less efficient for the first decade or so.

• "Look how strong they are! Let's give them another fifty kilos of useless gear."
• "More ammo? No, that would be wasteful."
• "Look how far they can march before tiring! Let's find their limit, and then push past it every day! Maximize our manpower!"
• "Oh, that pretty boy gets to be Captain before me? Just because he is a combat officer with perfect teeth and muscles? Fuck him, reassignment to the front lines without air and artillery support."

Which also covers (1).

(2) on the other hand... yeah, a bunch of them are going to join contractors for a lot of money, their muscles will mean virtually nothing in helping streamline their war crimes capabilities. Outside of combat, they are treated like shit, just like all the other returning troops. Go work three full time jobs for minimum wage, and don't you dare try to complain that you can't make ends meet. You toil under emotional abuse every day for your billionaire masters like everyone else, peon!

 

[Vikram]

Knowing the military mind of a Rear Echelon Mother Fucker, medals of valor given for the successful occupation of an office chair... operations somehow get less efficient for the first decade or so.

• "Look how strong they are! Let's give them another fifty kilos of useless gear."
• "More ammo? No, that would be wasteful."
• "Look how far they can march before tiring! Let's find their limit, and then push past it every day! Maximize our manpower!"
• "Oh, that pretty boy gets to be Captain before me? Just because he is a combat officer with perfect teeth and muscles? Fuck him, reassignment to the front lines without air and artillery support."

Which also covers (1).

(2) on the other hand... yeah, a bunch of them are going to join contractors for a lot of money, their muscles will mean virtually nothing in helping streamline their war crimes capabilities. Outside of combat, they are treated like shit, just like all the other returning troops. Go work three full time jobs for minimum wage, and don't you dare try to complain that you can't make ends meet. You toil under emotional abuse every day for your billionaire masters like everyone else, peon!

Unless they just group together and start trouble.

 

[Rufus Shinra]

Unless they just group together and start trouble.

Then they get droned. Superhuman physique doesn't make you an effective terrorist by itself.

 

[Marek_Gutkowski]

Unless they just group together and start trouble.

They are likely to run for office, and that will likely cause every politician to shit themselves. And I consider that a good thing. A scared politician is a thinking politician.

 

[IndyFront]

They are likely to run for office, and that will likely cause every politician to shit themselves. And I consider that a good thing. A scared politician is a thinking politician.

what

 

[Marek_Gutkowski]

what

@Vikram commented that the Supersoldiers after being discharged could group together and start trouble. What is the worlds most effective way of starting trouble domestically? You create a political party.

They, as in the superhuman soldiers, are more likely to run for office than to try to set up a terrorist organization.
If not carrier in the establishment then creating an activist group.


But if you are asking about the scared politician part, A bunch of adonis looking men and statuesque women that all have distinguished military careers. I guess if they put medals on they look like a Christmas Tree. The military gives out medals like candy. Hell, I have a medal! And the highest rank I ever held was a lance corporal.

Now some career politician is running for office and his opponent looks like Gal Gadot or Chris Evans. That politician will be scared out of his mind. That politician would need to put on his "A" game.

 

[<Reaper>666]

For imforamtion:

These fly in swarms, are do facto a flying directional mine equivalent and can track you by your biometric signature (ie. face).

And here you can see how use of UCAVs and loitering attack munitions (LAMs) look like in reallife.


Of note: look like munitions and LAMs fly through openings in shelters

And here look like how it is in a real combat zone:



Your "superhumans" are more expensive meat for the grinder. Whole idea for "supersoldiers" came circa late 90s when Rumsfeld was taken by surprise by DARPA crew, and shown some kitbash animation. General idea was to have commandos and SOFs for fighting with global terrorism. In any scenario involving real fighting such troops are expandable asset for taking down critical targets (like C4ISR hubs) or deep reconaisance. For real fghting not so much.
I know that pop culture have drowes of them, but even in Warhammer, the Space Marines are akin to heavy air assault troops rather than anything else. Nowadays we scaled back programs in scope, no one tries to make powered armor digital soldiers of the future like 30 years ago. But even then, the idea was to give them portable GPS and digital, coded radios. All these mission planning apps, digital maps, decision support systems based on AGI, all these displayed on HMD are just panning out due to the technology neccessary for that recently matured to level where you actually can make something that more or less works. In the end such gear seems like equipeemnt for commanders, combat managers and SOFs - it necessitates capabilty to deal with large amount of information and to work in perpetual sensory overload, something that not everyone can do.

For all information check this out:

38. The Multi-Domain “Dragoon” Squad: A Hyper-enabled Combat System | Mad Scientist Laboratory

madsciblog.tradoc.army.mil

An ideogram for things to come - here human soldeirs act like information/combat managers - most of the actual combat effort is conducted by heterogynous combat swarm of unmanned systems - humans point targets and undertake go/no-go decisions.
And yes, when you play with combat swarm of LAMs and UAVs on Battlefield Management System (BMS) it looks like that you are pinting the target and nearest appropriate munition fall on them. Most of countries conducts aggressive research and testing of that. Karbakh was an extreme equivalent - de facto first large scale use of UAVs and LAMs in armed conflict as a combined force, either seperately and with conjunction with other traditional forces. Effects were disastrous for Albanians. "Spring Shield" was actually predecessor for that, on a smaller scale, demonstrating what these emerging military technologies can do.

 

[Vikram]

For imforamtion:

These fly in swarms, are do facto a flying directional mine equivalent and can track you by your biometric signature (ie. face).

And here you can see how use of UCAVs and loitering attack munitions (LAMs) look like in reallife.


Of note: look like munitions and LAMs fly through openings in shelters

And here look like how it is in a real combat zone:



Your "superhumans" are more expensive meat for the grinder. Whole idea for "supersoldiers" came circa late 90s when Rumsfeld was taken by surprise by DARPA crew, and shown some kitbash animation. General idea was to have commandos and SOFs for fighting with global terrorism. In any scenario involving real fighting such troops are expandable asset for taking down critical targets (like C4ISR hubs) or deep reconaisance. For real fghting not so much.
I know that pop culture have drowes of them, but even in Warhammer, the Space Marines are akin to heavy air assault troops rather than anything else. Nowadays we scaled back programs in scope, no one tries to make powered armor digital soldiers of the future like 30 years ago. But even then, the idea was to give them portable GPS and digital, coded radios. All these mission planning apps, digital maps, decision support systems based on AGI, all these displayed on HMD are just panning out due to the technology neccessary for that recently matured to level where you actually can make something that more or less works. In the end such gear seems like equipeemnt for commanders, combat managers and SOFs - it necessitates capabilty to deal with large amount of information and to work in perpetual sensory overload, something that not everyone can do.

For all information check this out:

View attachment 3484

38. The Multi-Domain “Dragoon” Squad: A Hyper-enabled Combat System | Mad Scientist Laboratory

madsciblog.tradoc.army.mil

An ideogram for things to come - here human soldeirs act like information/combat managers - most of the actual combat effort is conducted by heterogynous combat swarm of unmanned systems - humans point targets and undertake go/no-go decisions.
And yes, when you play with combat swarm of LAMs and UAVs on Battlefield Management System (BMS) it looks like that you are pinting the target and nearest appropriate munition fall on them. Most of countries conducts aggressive research and testing of that. Karbakh was an extreme equivalent - de facto first large scale use of UAVs and LAMs in armed conflict as a combined force, either seperately and with conjunction with other traditional forces. Effects were disastrous for Albanians. "Spring Shield" was actually predecessor for that, on a smaller scale, demonstrating what these emerging military technologies can do.

While I totally agree with you, I believe our concpetion of what soldiers do is going to change soon.

 

[<Reaper>666]

While I totally agree with you, I believe our concpetion of what soldiers do is going to change soon.

It will not change ever actually. What changes are the tools we are using.

 

[lackofgravitas]

supersoldiers are a bullshit solution to a bullshit problem
be able to see at night nightvision gear
see further bingos and optics
hear better not really useful GUNS ARE LOUD
stronger fast tougher yeah melee isn't really going to make a lot of difference

go faster Jeep
Jeep not Armoured, tank ,tanks comes with bigger gun and sensors and can go faster and further and tank makes tea as well.

supersoldiers work if war is some sort of duel / tournament

if you add indirect fire ,air support ,drones teamwork supersoldiers lose
mines barbed wire artillery machine guns make super soldiers irrelevant.

its basically breeding this https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Krieg_Mount and expecting it to be useful on a modern battlefield

 

[Rufus Shinra]

supersoldiers are a bullshit solution to a bullshit problem
be able to see at night nightvision gear
see further bingos and optics
hear better not really useful GUNS ARE LOUD
stronger fast tougher yeah melee isn't really going to make a lot of difference

go faster Jeep
Jeep not Armoured, tank ,tanks comes with bigger gun and sensors and can go faster and further and tank makes tea as well.

supersoldiers work if war is some sort of duel / tournament

if you add indirect fire ,air support ,drones teamwork supersoldiers lose
mines barbed wire artillery machine guns make super soldiers irrelevant.

its basically breeding this https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Krieg_Mount and expecting it to be useful on a modern battlefield

You are utterly wrong and a disgrace to the British Army by saying such nonsense. Imagine for a minute how much more the squaddies could nick if they had superstrength!

 

[lackofgravitas]

That's what a borrowed rough terrain forklift is for

 

[Rufus Shinra]

That's what a borrowed rough terrain forklift is for

Too slow compared to a superpowered British Museum provisioner. You should dream of emulating the Blood Ravens, not a forklift operator.

 

[Scottty]

So let's see - one side is the argument of "Strength, endurance and other physical qualities are important for a soldier, so let's make those things better"
Other side is "robotic weapons will make the human element obsolete"

If war is going to turn into being like a videogame, where some guy sits at a control panel telling there bots where to shoot while munching on a burger, then "infantry" as such might be obsolete.
But... how long would a serious high intensity war stay like that?

 

[Marek_Gutkowski]

Thinking about this superhuman serum idea.
My guess is that within a few years it would be commercially available to civilians.
The OP basically describes an extensive cosmetic surgery in a syringe.
In a decade or two it would be come about as affordable as owning an automobile.
So two decades down the road everybody already are peak human and we are back to square one.

But... how long would a serious high intensity war stay like that?

not that long.
Big boys come out to play, sunshine in a can gets unleashed.


But I don't see what you are getting at.
If we ever get to fully robotic armed forces. Then how would that situation be reversed?
If robots are not enough where would you get the people to train the people you want to draft?

 

[Rufus Shinra]

not that long.
Big boys come out to play, sunshine in a can gets unleashed.

Dunno, we can see a high intensity war going on for years without nukes popping.

 

[Marek_Gutkowski]

Dunno, we can see a high-intensity war going on for years without nukes popping.

The conflicts between two nuclear-armed states were never high-intensity. India and Pakistan conflict was hardly high intensity.

On the other hand, Iran-Iraq War saw the use of chemical weapons by both sides.

Yes, you could point to Arab-Israel conflict of 1973 as a high intesity war where one side had(allegedly) nuclear weapons but chose not to use it.
But, I would argue Israelis did stabilize the front quickly enough. There was no need for going nuclear.

 

[Rufus Shinra]

The conflicts between two nuclear-armed states were never high-intensity. India and Pakistan conflict was hardly high intensity.

On the other hand, Iran-Iraq War saw the use of chemical weapons by both sides.

Yes, you could point to Arab-Israel conflict of 1973 as a high intesity war where one side had(allegedly) nuclear weapons but chose not to use it.
But, I would argue Israelis did stabilize the front quickly enough. There was no need for going nuclear.

But we see major nuclear powers fighting wars for years, getting their asses kicked by the non-nuclear one, with their planes shot down, their tanks demolished, yet not escalating to the nukes.

 

[Scottty]

So two decades down the road everybody already are peak human

Not seeing the downside to that.
Yes, yes, I get it - if everyone is a superman then no one really is.
But on the positive side you don't have to worry as much about fitness qualifications and so on, if your entire population are Peak Human.

But I don't see what you are getting at.
If we ever get to fully robotic armed forces. Then how would that situation be reversed?
If robots are not enough where would you get the people to train the people you want to draft?

It's not really about nukes, but let me try to explain what I'm getting at.
The technocrat fantasy is that they will be able to sit in a room gleefully murdering people far away with a push of a button. But this will break down hard once they try that on people who can track where that control room is, and send some cruise missiles that way. Nuclear warheads optional.

In a serious war with neither side holding back, everything is a target. And those control systems? The factories where they make the drones, or the electronics for them? Those are all going away. Did your side remember to install anti-missile defenses for the mines where you dig up the ore for the metal to make more robots? And the smelting plants? And so on?
The real world is not like Missile Command where you just get new ammo for free.

So the idea here is that all the fancy stuff only gets to be used early on, and then it gets broken.

 

[Marek_Gutkowski]

But we see major nuclear powers fighting wars for years, getting their asses kicked by the non-nuclear one, with their planes shot down, their tanks demolished, yet not escalating to the nukes.

This is basic human psychology.
Being unarmed you are far less likely to get shot even if you get in an altercation with an armed individual.
Armed people tend to get shot at far more than unarmed ones. They, admittedly, get victimized a lot more.

So it is basically down to fear, as I understand it.
Getting your soldiers killed tanks blown up and airplanes shot down is not good.

But it will not fill you with existential dread.
Even something like an attack on your cities with drones or jetliners. If the other side doesn't have DA bomb, then there is no real dread.

It's not really about nukes, but let me try to explain what I'm getting at.
The technocrat fantasy is that they will be able to sit in a room gleefully murdering people far away with a push of a button. But this will break down hard once they try that on people who can track where that control room is, and send some cruise missiles that way. Nuclear warheads optional.

In a serious war with neither side holding back, everything is a target. And those control systems? The factories where they make the drones, or the electronics for them? Those are all going away. Did your side remember to install anti-missile defenses for the mines where you dig up the ore for the metal to make more robots? And the smelting plants? And so on?
The real world is not like Missile Command where you just get new ammo for free.

So the idea here is that all the fancy stuff only gets to be used early on, and then it gets broken.

I think you jumped a few steps and made assumptions.
Targeting enemy control centers is basically what you always try to do.
This hypothetical robot army would have redundancies. Otherwise, it would not be a credible armed force.

And the idea that fancy stuff only get used early on and then gets broken is what 1980s theorist expected the WarPact NATO conflict would look like. About a month of high-intensity fighting and then both sides would attrit each other to the point where combat would slow down considerably.
Even all the way back in Vietnam War era US tried to go to wartime production in the Aviation department. Even something we would consider today as comparably primitive as a 1960 fighter jet had too many production bottlenecks.
In the case of F-4 the problems were the avionics the titanium the optics and the radar.

Peacetime war stocks being insufficient for large-scale conflict was first observed in the Crimean War. The 1850s one.
Even the memetic industrial powerhouse that was the US in WWII had to stop bombing Germany twice because of the high losses suffered by the B-17 fleet.
And they didn't start with peacetime stock but had quite a sizable head start on wartime production before they started fighting.

But yes, I think you are largely correct. Peer level conflict is something where we assume whatever capabilities we have the enemy has as well.
If we can strike their country they can strike ours. So yeah, our robot making industry would likely not last long.
On the other hand if we have war fighting robots then we must have building robots.
So our robots are rebuilding the factories that the enemy is blowing up so they can resume building robots.

I think I read a story somewhere where an automated MIC was fighting a war long after every living thing on the planet was dead from nuclear fire.

 

[Scottty]

I think I read a story somewhere where an automated MIC was fighting a war long after every living thing on the planet was dead from nuclear fire.

There are some short movies based on that concept as well.

 

[Rufus Shinra]

This is basic human psychology.
Being unarmed you are far less likely to get shot even if you get in an altercation with an armed individual.
Armed people tend to get shot at far more than unarmed ones. They, admittedly, get victimized a lot more.

So it is basically down to fear, as I understand it.
Getting your soldiers killed tanks blown up and airplanes shot down is not good.

But it will not fill you with existential dread.
Even something like an attack on your cities with drones or jetliners. If the other side doesn't have DA bomb, then there is no real dread.

Well, thank you for this reminder that escalation isn't really a danger after all, more hot air than anything else.