How to make variable super-soldier size the norm versus a single size
Imagine you can build your soldiers in a lab somewhere. You can control everything, and you've found a the ideal humanoid form (ignoring potentially better forms here). You could build them in all sizes big and small, but this would also mean that production of weapons and equipment would need to account for various sizes and be more intensive, so using a single size for your super-soldiers would be more ideal.
You could have a few set sizes. Pilots of vehicles and aircraft would likely benefit from being small in size as it would mean they need less space inside the vehicle, but then you would simply have two set standard sizes: "normal" soldiers and "pilot" soldiers that are smaller but all still the same size within their category. For clarity let's say all normal soldiers are 1.8m in size and all pilots 1m in size without any further variation. You can possibly imagine a few more size variants like a heavy duty variant that is larger but that too would be set at a specific height without further variation.
What I want is to have these soldiers greatly differ in size, fir example from 1.5 to 2.5m, but I can't find a good reason. Especially for the kind of large-scale warfare I'm imagining the industrial advantage of building them all one size would be so immense it can hardly be ignored. It would likely need to be in part an evolutionary reason that allows a variable size army to succeed more than one with set sizes.
These soldiers rely for the most part on equipment, so building it into their bodies matching their size requirements is not going to be an option.
creature-design warfare evolution scientific-development
add a comment |
Imagine you can build your soldiers in a lab somewhere. You can control everything, and you've found a the ideal humanoid form (ignoring potentially better forms here). You could build them in all sizes big and small, but this would also mean that production of weapons and equipment would need to account for various sizes and be more intensive, so using a single size for your super-soldiers would be more ideal.
You could have a few set sizes. Pilots of vehicles and aircraft would likely benefit from being small in size as it would mean they need less space inside the vehicle, but then you would simply have two set standard sizes: "normal" soldiers and "pilot" soldiers that are smaller but all still the same size within their category. For clarity let's say all normal soldiers are 1.8m in size and all pilots 1m in size without any further variation. You can possibly imagine a few more size variants like a heavy duty variant that is larger but that too would be set at a specific height without further variation.
What I want is to have these soldiers greatly differ in size, fir example from 1.5 to 2.5m, but I can't find a good reason. Especially for the kind of large-scale warfare I'm imagining the industrial advantage of building them all one size would be so immense it can hardly be ignored. It would likely need to be in part an evolutionary reason that allows a variable size army to succeed more than one with set sizes.
These soldiers rely for the most part on equipment, so building it into their bodies matching their size requirements is not going to be an option.
creature-design warfare evolution scientific-development
Do you want, say, all "standard soldiers" to have different sizes? And also, how much variation do you expect - if a standard soldier is 1.8m, then can they go to 1m minimum or is it, say, 1.7m- 1.9m?
– vlaz
6 hours ago
@vlaz I want all standard soldiers to have different sizes yes. From for example 1.5m to 2.5m and vary constantly.
– Demigan
4 hours ago
OK, so that's a big variation. Initially I was thinking something smaller. It's useful to add this clarification to the question.
– vlaz
4 hours ago
Do you have a good in-lore reason for why you need to produce the equipment like old school industry would in a single size fits all? furthermore modern armies already vary 1.5 meters to 2 meters. The more advanced your civilization, the less advantage there is from producing just single sized jackets and it's easier to produce to individual fit.
– Lassi Kinnunen
3 hours ago
@Lassikinnunen the in-lore reason is the same as the real-life one: individual fit or adaptable fit production requires more costly factories and more resources to produce. Additionally it is a more complex supply line to maintain. Stockpiling replacement parts and equipment would become harder as you would need to stockpile per individual or needs to be requested and transported to the exact person each time rather than "We'll have this many soldiers who need a replacement part and they can grab it off the pile".
– Demigan
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Imagine you can build your soldiers in a lab somewhere. You can control everything, and you've found a the ideal humanoid form (ignoring potentially better forms here). You could build them in all sizes big and small, but this would also mean that production of weapons and equipment would need to account for various sizes and be more intensive, so using a single size for your super-soldiers would be more ideal.
You could have a few set sizes. Pilots of vehicles and aircraft would likely benefit from being small in size as it would mean they need less space inside the vehicle, but then you would simply have two set standard sizes: "normal" soldiers and "pilot" soldiers that are smaller but all still the same size within their category. For clarity let's say all normal soldiers are 1.8m in size and all pilots 1m in size without any further variation. You can possibly imagine a few more size variants like a heavy duty variant that is larger but that too would be set at a specific height without further variation.
What I want is to have these soldiers greatly differ in size, fir example from 1.5 to 2.5m, but I can't find a good reason. Especially for the kind of large-scale warfare I'm imagining the industrial advantage of building them all one size would be so immense it can hardly be ignored. It would likely need to be in part an evolutionary reason that allows a variable size army to succeed more than one with set sizes.
These soldiers rely for the most part on equipment, so building it into their bodies matching their size requirements is not going to be an option.
creature-design warfare evolution scientific-development
Imagine you can build your soldiers in a lab somewhere. You can control everything, and you've found a the ideal humanoid form (ignoring potentially better forms here). You could build them in all sizes big and small, but this would also mean that production of weapons and equipment would need to account for various sizes and be more intensive, so using a single size for your super-soldiers would be more ideal.
You could have a few set sizes. Pilots of vehicles and aircraft would likely benefit from being small in size as it would mean they need less space inside the vehicle, but then you would simply have two set standard sizes: "normal" soldiers and "pilot" soldiers that are smaller but all still the same size within their category. For clarity let's say all normal soldiers are 1.8m in size and all pilots 1m in size without any further variation. You can possibly imagine a few more size variants like a heavy duty variant that is larger but that too would be set at a specific height without further variation.
What I want is to have these soldiers greatly differ in size, fir example from 1.5 to 2.5m, but I can't find a good reason. Especially for the kind of large-scale warfare I'm imagining the industrial advantage of building them all one size would be so immense it can hardly be ignored. It would likely need to be in part an evolutionary reason that allows a variable size army to succeed more than one with set sizes.
These soldiers rely for the most part on equipment, so building it into their bodies matching their size requirements is not going to be an option.
creature-design warfare evolution scientific-development
creature-design warfare evolution scientific-development
edited 4 hours ago
Demigan
asked 6 hours ago
DemiganDemigan
8,0001740
8,0001740
Do you want, say, all "standard soldiers" to have different sizes? And also, how much variation do you expect - if a standard soldier is 1.8m, then can they go to 1m minimum or is it, say, 1.7m- 1.9m?
– vlaz
6 hours ago
@vlaz I want all standard soldiers to have different sizes yes. From for example 1.5m to 2.5m and vary constantly.
– Demigan
4 hours ago
OK, so that's a big variation. Initially I was thinking something smaller. It's useful to add this clarification to the question.
– vlaz
4 hours ago
Do you have a good in-lore reason for why you need to produce the equipment like old school industry would in a single size fits all? furthermore modern armies already vary 1.5 meters to 2 meters. The more advanced your civilization, the less advantage there is from producing just single sized jackets and it's easier to produce to individual fit.
– Lassi Kinnunen
3 hours ago
@Lassikinnunen the in-lore reason is the same as the real-life one: individual fit or adaptable fit production requires more costly factories and more resources to produce. Additionally it is a more complex supply line to maintain. Stockpiling replacement parts and equipment would become harder as you would need to stockpile per individual or needs to be requested and transported to the exact person each time rather than "We'll have this many soldiers who need a replacement part and they can grab it off the pile".
– Demigan
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Do you want, say, all "standard soldiers" to have different sizes? And also, how much variation do you expect - if a standard soldier is 1.8m, then can they go to 1m minimum or is it, say, 1.7m- 1.9m?
– vlaz
6 hours ago
@vlaz I want all standard soldiers to have different sizes yes. From for example 1.5m to 2.5m and vary constantly.
– Demigan
4 hours ago
OK, so that's a big variation. Initially I was thinking something smaller. It's useful to add this clarification to the question.
– vlaz
4 hours ago
Do you have a good in-lore reason for why you need to produce the equipment like old school industry would in a single size fits all? furthermore modern armies already vary 1.5 meters to 2 meters. The more advanced your civilization, the less advantage there is from producing just single sized jackets and it's easier to produce to individual fit.
– Lassi Kinnunen
3 hours ago
@Lassikinnunen the in-lore reason is the same as the real-life one: individual fit or adaptable fit production requires more costly factories and more resources to produce. Additionally it is a more complex supply line to maintain. Stockpiling replacement parts and equipment would become harder as you would need to stockpile per individual or needs to be requested and transported to the exact person each time rather than "We'll have this many soldiers who need a replacement part and they can grab it off the pile".
– Demigan
3 hours ago
Do you want, say, all "standard soldiers" to have different sizes? And also, how much variation do you expect - if a standard soldier is 1.8m, then can they go to 1m minimum or is it, say, 1.7m- 1.9m?
– vlaz
6 hours ago
Do you want, say, all "standard soldiers" to have different sizes? And also, how much variation do you expect - if a standard soldier is 1.8m, then can they go to 1m minimum or is it, say, 1.7m- 1.9m?
– vlaz
6 hours ago
@vlaz I want all standard soldiers to have different sizes yes. From for example 1.5m to 2.5m and vary constantly.
– Demigan
4 hours ago
@vlaz I want all standard soldiers to have different sizes yes. From for example 1.5m to 2.5m and vary constantly.
– Demigan
4 hours ago
OK, so that's a big variation. Initially I was thinking something smaller. It's useful to add this clarification to the question.
– vlaz
4 hours ago
OK, so that's a big variation. Initially I was thinking something smaller. It's useful to add this clarification to the question.
– vlaz
4 hours ago
Do you have a good in-lore reason for why you need to produce the equipment like old school industry would in a single size fits all? furthermore modern armies already vary 1.5 meters to 2 meters. The more advanced your civilization, the less advantage there is from producing just single sized jackets and it's easier to produce to individual fit.
– Lassi Kinnunen
3 hours ago
Do you have a good in-lore reason for why you need to produce the equipment like old school industry would in a single size fits all? furthermore modern armies already vary 1.5 meters to 2 meters. The more advanced your civilization, the less advantage there is from producing just single sized jackets and it's easier to produce to individual fit.
– Lassi Kinnunen
3 hours ago
@Lassikinnunen the in-lore reason is the same as the real-life one: individual fit or adaptable fit production requires more costly factories and more resources to produce. Additionally it is a more complex supply line to maintain. Stockpiling replacement parts and equipment would become harder as you would need to stockpile per individual or needs to be requested and transported to the exact person each time rather than "We'll have this many soldiers who need a replacement part and they can grab it off the pile".
– Demigan
3 hours ago
@Lassikinnunen the in-lore reason is the same as the real-life one: individual fit or adaptable fit production requires more costly factories and more resources to produce. Additionally it is a more complex supply line to maintain. Stockpiling replacement parts and equipment would become harder as you would need to stockpile per individual or needs to be requested and transported to the exact person each time rather than "We'll have this many soldiers who need a replacement part and they can grab it off the pile".
– Demigan
3 hours ago
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
The problem with identical clones is they lack diversity. One disease will wipe them all out, there won't be small people able to wriggle through cracks and large people able to apply huge brute strength or tall people able to see further.
If you standardize everything into conformity then you reduce the range of different tasks your teams can perform. Instead you want a mix of different physical types across the range and then let each take the role they are best suited for.
I assume "disease" in this case could be replaced with "one situation designed against these highly specific soldiers". It would be a rather stupid organization that builds soldiers to specifications but gives them all the exact same genes (even though this is exactly what happens in geneticly modified food, but that is because of patents and economy being more efficiënt if you dont create genetic diversity). You can still have variable genes and the same height.
– Demigan
1 hour ago
@Demigan: it would be a rather stupid society that risks elimination of most of the yield of an important crop that way, yet here we are.
– mikołak
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Your methods are helpless against mutation.
After the initial injection of DNA into the egg, one can no longer regulate their biological development outside of nourishment and hormone treatment. This allows possibilities of mutation during cell growth.
A particularly dominant mutation could spread throughout the fetus/embryo and result in a soldier with their own quirks. Every now and then one is born with different eye or hair colours, a slightly greater intellect or, coincidentally, an unusual height.
The mutations should not be too radical 'by default', but they could be amplified as a side-effect of the chemical cocktail used to accelerate growth.
Alternatively, mutation inhibitors may have been invented to reduce the frequency or severity of mutations. These chemicals may be too expensive for extensive use and are reserved for an elite force (an interesting concept).
It may simply not be worth ejecting all non-conforming soldiers due to the cost of fertilising an egg/monitoring it constantly/feeding it until it is born. Therefore the soldiers will have to adapt and be trained for their standard equipment.
I hope this provides some inspiration.
Edit:
Having soldiers of various heights could aid remaining unsuspicious when executing covert operations, since otherwise a soldier of exactly e.g. 1.836m in height would be suspicious and taken aside for inspection at border controls.
In large groups, having soldiers of various heights would aid visibility of a singular position, similar to stages.
Varying heights could aid in combat specialisation, with lower centers of gravity allowing for more athletic maneuvers while taller soldiers could perhaps have more strength or leverage.
Short soldiers would take less space, less food, less material for uniforms and less weight among other things, making them ideal for mechanical deployment, sieges or other forms of long-term semi-isolation.
Taller beings would be better suited as look-outs or for transport purposes, being able to march quicker, wade through deep marshes and step/climb over obstacles more efficiently, but having a high center of gravity would not necessarily be advantageous as far as I can tell.
Although it could be an option, it goes against the "you can control everything" part of the question. I would like a solid enough reason to actively encourage variable sizes despite the higher cost in industrial capacity this causes.
– Demigan
4 hours ago
1
@Demigan Your question did not exclude the possibility of your control over everything being imperfect, but I now understand your question better. I shall edit my answer to include more possibilities.
– A Lambent Eye
4 hours ago
good addition, thanks.
– Demigan
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Weapons come in different size, usually called calibers for fire weapons, specialized on different use cases. I.e. no sane soldier would use a naval cannon to shot an opposing soldier.
Weapons are already produced on industrial scale, yet there are different sizes.
Your soldiers are nothing more than a new type of weapon. Just find the optimal use case for each size.
Similar to ammo production, they come in specific sizes. For army purposes you have a few common types for specific purposes with as much commonality as possible between weapons. This is also why many countries separately came to more or less the same bullet sizes for their armies. Yet when looking at the entire market theres many different ammo types and even within one caliber size the length can differ for different purposes. But you could be on to something: what if there are so many ideal sizes for specific tasks that you might as well have variable sizes?
– Demigan
4 hours ago
@Demigan, if it's ideal it logically must be unique.
– L.Dutch♦
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Different models for different jobs
The ideal infantryman looks nothing like the ideal pilot. The ideal pilot doesn’t necessarily look much like the ideal tank operator. The ideal tank operator certainly doesn’t look much like the ideal medic. An army is full of people who play different roles, and there’s no reason to make them all look the same.
Like father, like son
If you want a fun excuse for this, say that each job role has a ‘blueprint’, based on the most outstanding representative of that role at the time when this super soldier was begun. All the medics are the perfected ‘sons’ of a highly decorated combat medic, etc. This gives you diverse looking troops who are incredibly proud of their lineage.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f136518%2fhow-to-make-variable-super-soldier-size-the-norm-versus-a-single-size%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The problem with identical clones is they lack diversity. One disease will wipe them all out, there won't be small people able to wriggle through cracks and large people able to apply huge brute strength or tall people able to see further.
If you standardize everything into conformity then you reduce the range of different tasks your teams can perform. Instead you want a mix of different physical types across the range and then let each take the role they are best suited for.
I assume "disease" in this case could be replaced with "one situation designed against these highly specific soldiers". It would be a rather stupid organization that builds soldiers to specifications but gives them all the exact same genes (even though this is exactly what happens in geneticly modified food, but that is because of patents and economy being more efficiënt if you dont create genetic diversity). You can still have variable genes and the same height.
– Demigan
1 hour ago
@Demigan: it would be a rather stupid society that risks elimination of most of the yield of an important crop that way, yet here we are.
– mikołak
1 hour ago
add a comment |
The problem with identical clones is they lack diversity. One disease will wipe them all out, there won't be small people able to wriggle through cracks and large people able to apply huge brute strength or tall people able to see further.
If you standardize everything into conformity then you reduce the range of different tasks your teams can perform. Instead you want a mix of different physical types across the range and then let each take the role they are best suited for.
I assume "disease" in this case could be replaced with "one situation designed against these highly specific soldiers". It would be a rather stupid organization that builds soldiers to specifications but gives them all the exact same genes (even though this is exactly what happens in geneticly modified food, but that is because of patents and economy being more efficiënt if you dont create genetic diversity). You can still have variable genes and the same height.
– Demigan
1 hour ago
@Demigan: it would be a rather stupid society that risks elimination of most of the yield of an important crop that way, yet here we are.
– mikołak
1 hour ago
add a comment |
The problem with identical clones is they lack diversity. One disease will wipe them all out, there won't be small people able to wriggle through cracks and large people able to apply huge brute strength or tall people able to see further.
If you standardize everything into conformity then you reduce the range of different tasks your teams can perform. Instead you want a mix of different physical types across the range and then let each take the role they are best suited for.
The problem with identical clones is they lack diversity. One disease will wipe them all out, there won't be small people able to wriggle through cracks and large people able to apply huge brute strength or tall people able to see further.
If you standardize everything into conformity then you reduce the range of different tasks your teams can perform. Instead you want a mix of different physical types across the range and then let each take the role they are best suited for.
answered 5 hours ago
Tim B♦Tim B
60.7k23172289
60.7k23172289
I assume "disease" in this case could be replaced with "one situation designed against these highly specific soldiers". It would be a rather stupid organization that builds soldiers to specifications but gives them all the exact same genes (even though this is exactly what happens in geneticly modified food, but that is because of patents and economy being more efficiënt if you dont create genetic diversity). You can still have variable genes and the same height.
– Demigan
1 hour ago
@Demigan: it would be a rather stupid society that risks elimination of most of the yield of an important crop that way, yet here we are.
– mikołak
1 hour ago
add a comment |
I assume "disease" in this case could be replaced with "one situation designed against these highly specific soldiers". It would be a rather stupid organization that builds soldiers to specifications but gives them all the exact same genes (even though this is exactly what happens in geneticly modified food, but that is because of patents and economy being more efficiënt if you dont create genetic diversity). You can still have variable genes and the same height.
– Demigan
1 hour ago
@Demigan: it would be a rather stupid society that risks elimination of most of the yield of an important crop that way, yet here we are.
– mikołak
1 hour ago
I assume "disease" in this case could be replaced with "one situation designed against these highly specific soldiers". It would be a rather stupid organization that builds soldiers to specifications but gives them all the exact same genes (even though this is exactly what happens in geneticly modified food, but that is because of patents and economy being more efficiënt if you dont create genetic diversity). You can still have variable genes and the same height.
– Demigan
1 hour ago
I assume "disease" in this case could be replaced with "one situation designed against these highly specific soldiers". It would be a rather stupid organization that builds soldiers to specifications but gives them all the exact same genes (even though this is exactly what happens in geneticly modified food, but that is because of patents and economy being more efficiënt if you dont create genetic diversity). You can still have variable genes and the same height.
– Demigan
1 hour ago
@Demigan: it would be a rather stupid society that risks elimination of most of the yield of an important crop that way, yet here we are.
– mikołak
1 hour ago
@Demigan: it would be a rather stupid society that risks elimination of most of the yield of an important crop that way, yet here we are.
– mikołak
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Your methods are helpless against mutation.
After the initial injection of DNA into the egg, one can no longer regulate their biological development outside of nourishment and hormone treatment. This allows possibilities of mutation during cell growth.
A particularly dominant mutation could spread throughout the fetus/embryo and result in a soldier with their own quirks. Every now and then one is born with different eye or hair colours, a slightly greater intellect or, coincidentally, an unusual height.
The mutations should not be too radical 'by default', but they could be amplified as a side-effect of the chemical cocktail used to accelerate growth.
Alternatively, mutation inhibitors may have been invented to reduce the frequency or severity of mutations. These chemicals may be too expensive for extensive use and are reserved for an elite force (an interesting concept).
It may simply not be worth ejecting all non-conforming soldiers due to the cost of fertilising an egg/monitoring it constantly/feeding it until it is born. Therefore the soldiers will have to adapt and be trained for their standard equipment.
I hope this provides some inspiration.
Edit:
Having soldiers of various heights could aid remaining unsuspicious when executing covert operations, since otherwise a soldier of exactly e.g. 1.836m in height would be suspicious and taken aside for inspection at border controls.
In large groups, having soldiers of various heights would aid visibility of a singular position, similar to stages.
Varying heights could aid in combat specialisation, with lower centers of gravity allowing for more athletic maneuvers while taller soldiers could perhaps have more strength or leverage.
Short soldiers would take less space, less food, less material for uniforms and less weight among other things, making them ideal for mechanical deployment, sieges or other forms of long-term semi-isolation.
Taller beings would be better suited as look-outs or for transport purposes, being able to march quicker, wade through deep marshes and step/climb over obstacles more efficiently, but having a high center of gravity would not necessarily be advantageous as far as I can tell.
Although it could be an option, it goes against the "you can control everything" part of the question. I would like a solid enough reason to actively encourage variable sizes despite the higher cost in industrial capacity this causes.
– Demigan
4 hours ago
1
@Demigan Your question did not exclude the possibility of your control over everything being imperfect, but I now understand your question better. I shall edit my answer to include more possibilities.
– A Lambent Eye
4 hours ago
good addition, thanks.
– Demigan
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Your methods are helpless against mutation.
After the initial injection of DNA into the egg, one can no longer regulate their biological development outside of nourishment and hormone treatment. This allows possibilities of mutation during cell growth.
A particularly dominant mutation could spread throughout the fetus/embryo and result in a soldier with their own quirks. Every now and then one is born with different eye or hair colours, a slightly greater intellect or, coincidentally, an unusual height.
The mutations should not be too radical 'by default', but they could be amplified as a side-effect of the chemical cocktail used to accelerate growth.
Alternatively, mutation inhibitors may have been invented to reduce the frequency or severity of mutations. These chemicals may be too expensive for extensive use and are reserved for an elite force (an interesting concept).
It may simply not be worth ejecting all non-conforming soldiers due to the cost of fertilising an egg/monitoring it constantly/feeding it until it is born. Therefore the soldiers will have to adapt and be trained for their standard equipment.
I hope this provides some inspiration.
Edit:
Having soldiers of various heights could aid remaining unsuspicious when executing covert operations, since otherwise a soldier of exactly e.g. 1.836m in height would be suspicious and taken aside for inspection at border controls.
In large groups, having soldiers of various heights would aid visibility of a singular position, similar to stages.
Varying heights could aid in combat specialisation, with lower centers of gravity allowing for more athletic maneuvers while taller soldiers could perhaps have more strength or leverage.
Short soldiers would take less space, less food, less material for uniforms and less weight among other things, making them ideal for mechanical deployment, sieges or other forms of long-term semi-isolation.
Taller beings would be better suited as look-outs or for transport purposes, being able to march quicker, wade through deep marshes and step/climb over obstacles more efficiently, but having a high center of gravity would not necessarily be advantageous as far as I can tell.
Although it could be an option, it goes against the "you can control everything" part of the question. I would like a solid enough reason to actively encourage variable sizes despite the higher cost in industrial capacity this causes.
– Demigan
4 hours ago
1
@Demigan Your question did not exclude the possibility of your control over everything being imperfect, but I now understand your question better. I shall edit my answer to include more possibilities.
– A Lambent Eye
4 hours ago
good addition, thanks.
– Demigan
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Your methods are helpless against mutation.
After the initial injection of DNA into the egg, one can no longer regulate their biological development outside of nourishment and hormone treatment. This allows possibilities of mutation during cell growth.
A particularly dominant mutation could spread throughout the fetus/embryo and result in a soldier with their own quirks. Every now and then one is born with different eye or hair colours, a slightly greater intellect or, coincidentally, an unusual height.
The mutations should not be too radical 'by default', but they could be amplified as a side-effect of the chemical cocktail used to accelerate growth.
Alternatively, mutation inhibitors may have been invented to reduce the frequency or severity of mutations. These chemicals may be too expensive for extensive use and are reserved for an elite force (an interesting concept).
It may simply not be worth ejecting all non-conforming soldiers due to the cost of fertilising an egg/monitoring it constantly/feeding it until it is born. Therefore the soldiers will have to adapt and be trained for their standard equipment.
I hope this provides some inspiration.
Edit:
Having soldiers of various heights could aid remaining unsuspicious when executing covert operations, since otherwise a soldier of exactly e.g. 1.836m in height would be suspicious and taken aside for inspection at border controls.
In large groups, having soldiers of various heights would aid visibility of a singular position, similar to stages.
Varying heights could aid in combat specialisation, with lower centers of gravity allowing for more athletic maneuvers while taller soldiers could perhaps have more strength or leverage.
Short soldiers would take less space, less food, less material for uniforms and less weight among other things, making them ideal for mechanical deployment, sieges or other forms of long-term semi-isolation.
Taller beings would be better suited as look-outs or for transport purposes, being able to march quicker, wade through deep marshes and step/climb over obstacles more efficiently, but having a high center of gravity would not necessarily be advantageous as far as I can tell.
Your methods are helpless against mutation.
After the initial injection of DNA into the egg, one can no longer regulate their biological development outside of nourishment and hormone treatment. This allows possibilities of mutation during cell growth.
A particularly dominant mutation could spread throughout the fetus/embryo and result in a soldier with their own quirks. Every now and then one is born with different eye or hair colours, a slightly greater intellect or, coincidentally, an unusual height.
The mutations should not be too radical 'by default', but they could be amplified as a side-effect of the chemical cocktail used to accelerate growth.
Alternatively, mutation inhibitors may have been invented to reduce the frequency or severity of mutations. These chemicals may be too expensive for extensive use and are reserved for an elite force (an interesting concept).
It may simply not be worth ejecting all non-conforming soldiers due to the cost of fertilising an egg/monitoring it constantly/feeding it until it is born. Therefore the soldiers will have to adapt and be trained for their standard equipment.
I hope this provides some inspiration.
Edit:
Having soldiers of various heights could aid remaining unsuspicious when executing covert operations, since otherwise a soldier of exactly e.g. 1.836m in height would be suspicious and taken aside for inspection at border controls.
In large groups, having soldiers of various heights would aid visibility of a singular position, similar to stages.
Varying heights could aid in combat specialisation, with lower centers of gravity allowing for more athletic maneuvers while taller soldiers could perhaps have more strength or leverage.
Short soldiers would take less space, less food, less material for uniforms and less weight among other things, making them ideal for mechanical deployment, sieges or other forms of long-term semi-isolation.
Taller beings would be better suited as look-outs or for transport purposes, being able to march quicker, wade through deep marshes and step/climb over obstacles more efficiently, but having a high center of gravity would not necessarily be advantageous as far as I can tell.
edited 3 hours ago
answered 6 hours ago
A Lambent EyeA Lambent Eye
1,019323
1,019323
Although it could be an option, it goes against the "you can control everything" part of the question. I would like a solid enough reason to actively encourage variable sizes despite the higher cost in industrial capacity this causes.
– Demigan
4 hours ago
1
@Demigan Your question did not exclude the possibility of your control over everything being imperfect, but I now understand your question better. I shall edit my answer to include more possibilities.
– A Lambent Eye
4 hours ago
good addition, thanks.
– Demigan
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Although it could be an option, it goes against the "you can control everything" part of the question. I would like a solid enough reason to actively encourage variable sizes despite the higher cost in industrial capacity this causes.
– Demigan
4 hours ago
1
@Demigan Your question did not exclude the possibility of your control over everything being imperfect, but I now understand your question better. I shall edit my answer to include more possibilities.
– A Lambent Eye
4 hours ago
good addition, thanks.
– Demigan
3 hours ago
Although it could be an option, it goes against the "you can control everything" part of the question. I would like a solid enough reason to actively encourage variable sizes despite the higher cost in industrial capacity this causes.
– Demigan
4 hours ago
Although it could be an option, it goes against the "you can control everything" part of the question. I would like a solid enough reason to actively encourage variable sizes despite the higher cost in industrial capacity this causes.
– Demigan
4 hours ago
1
1
@Demigan Your question did not exclude the possibility of your control over everything being imperfect, but I now understand your question better. I shall edit my answer to include more possibilities.
– A Lambent Eye
4 hours ago
@Demigan Your question did not exclude the possibility of your control over everything being imperfect, but I now understand your question better. I shall edit my answer to include more possibilities.
– A Lambent Eye
4 hours ago
good addition, thanks.
– Demigan
3 hours ago
good addition, thanks.
– Demigan
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Weapons come in different size, usually called calibers for fire weapons, specialized on different use cases. I.e. no sane soldier would use a naval cannon to shot an opposing soldier.
Weapons are already produced on industrial scale, yet there are different sizes.
Your soldiers are nothing more than a new type of weapon. Just find the optimal use case for each size.
Similar to ammo production, they come in specific sizes. For army purposes you have a few common types for specific purposes with as much commonality as possible between weapons. This is also why many countries separately came to more or less the same bullet sizes for their armies. Yet when looking at the entire market theres many different ammo types and even within one caliber size the length can differ for different purposes. But you could be on to something: what if there are so many ideal sizes for specific tasks that you might as well have variable sizes?
– Demigan
4 hours ago
@Demigan, if it's ideal it logically must be unique.
– L.Dutch♦
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Weapons come in different size, usually called calibers for fire weapons, specialized on different use cases. I.e. no sane soldier would use a naval cannon to shot an opposing soldier.
Weapons are already produced on industrial scale, yet there are different sizes.
Your soldiers are nothing more than a new type of weapon. Just find the optimal use case for each size.
Similar to ammo production, they come in specific sizes. For army purposes you have a few common types for specific purposes with as much commonality as possible between weapons. This is also why many countries separately came to more or less the same bullet sizes for their armies. Yet when looking at the entire market theres many different ammo types and even within one caliber size the length can differ for different purposes. But you could be on to something: what if there are so many ideal sizes for specific tasks that you might as well have variable sizes?
– Demigan
4 hours ago
@Demigan, if it's ideal it logically must be unique.
– L.Dutch♦
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Weapons come in different size, usually called calibers for fire weapons, specialized on different use cases. I.e. no sane soldier would use a naval cannon to shot an opposing soldier.
Weapons are already produced on industrial scale, yet there are different sizes.
Your soldiers are nothing more than a new type of weapon. Just find the optimal use case for each size.
Weapons come in different size, usually called calibers for fire weapons, specialized on different use cases. I.e. no sane soldier would use a naval cannon to shot an opposing soldier.
Weapons are already produced on industrial scale, yet there are different sizes.
Your soldiers are nothing more than a new type of weapon. Just find the optimal use case for each size.
answered 6 hours ago
L.Dutch♦L.Dutch
79.3k26189387
79.3k26189387
Similar to ammo production, they come in specific sizes. For army purposes you have a few common types for specific purposes with as much commonality as possible between weapons. This is also why many countries separately came to more or less the same bullet sizes for their armies. Yet when looking at the entire market theres many different ammo types and even within one caliber size the length can differ for different purposes. But you could be on to something: what if there are so many ideal sizes for specific tasks that you might as well have variable sizes?
– Demigan
4 hours ago
@Demigan, if it's ideal it logically must be unique.
– L.Dutch♦
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Similar to ammo production, they come in specific sizes. For army purposes you have a few common types for specific purposes with as much commonality as possible between weapons. This is also why many countries separately came to more or less the same bullet sizes for their armies. Yet when looking at the entire market theres many different ammo types and even within one caliber size the length can differ for different purposes. But you could be on to something: what if there are so many ideal sizes for specific tasks that you might as well have variable sizes?
– Demigan
4 hours ago
@Demigan, if it's ideal it logically must be unique.
– L.Dutch♦
4 hours ago
Similar to ammo production, they come in specific sizes. For army purposes you have a few common types for specific purposes with as much commonality as possible between weapons. This is also why many countries separately came to more or less the same bullet sizes for their armies. Yet when looking at the entire market theres many different ammo types and even within one caliber size the length can differ for different purposes. But you could be on to something: what if there are so many ideal sizes for specific tasks that you might as well have variable sizes?
– Demigan
4 hours ago
Similar to ammo production, they come in specific sizes. For army purposes you have a few common types for specific purposes with as much commonality as possible between weapons. This is also why many countries separately came to more or less the same bullet sizes for their armies. Yet when looking at the entire market theres many different ammo types and even within one caliber size the length can differ for different purposes. But you could be on to something: what if there are so many ideal sizes for specific tasks that you might as well have variable sizes?
– Demigan
4 hours ago
@Demigan, if it's ideal it logically must be unique.
– L.Dutch♦
4 hours ago
@Demigan, if it's ideal it logically must be unique.
– L.Dutch♦
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Different models for different jobs
The ideal infantryman looks nothing like the ideal pilot. The ideal pilot doesn’t necessarily look much like the ideal tank operator. The ideal tank operator certainly doesn’t look much like the ideal medic. An army is full of people who play different roles, and there’s no reason to make them all look the same.
Like father, like son
If you want a fun excuse for this, say that each job role has a ‘blueprint’, based on the most outstanding representative of that role at the time when this super soldier was begun. All the medics are the perfected ‘sons’ of a highly decorated combat medic, etc. This gives you diverse looking troops who are incredibly proud of their lineage.
add a comment |
Different models for different jobs
The ideal infantryman looks nothing like the ideal pilot. The ideal pilot doesn’t necessarily look much like the ideal tank operator. The ideal tank operator certainly doesn’t look much like the ideal medic. An army is full of people who play different roles, and there’s no reason to make them all look the same.
Like father, like son
If you want a fun excuse for this, say that each job role has a ‘blueprint’, based on the most outstanding representative of that role at the time when this super soldier was begun. All the medics are the perfected ‘sons’ of a highly decorated combat medic, etc. This gives you diverse looking troops who are incredibly proud of their lineage.
add a comment |
Different models for different jobs
The ideal infantryman looks nothing like the ideal pilot. The ideal pilot doesn’t necessarily look much like the ideal tank operator. The ideal tank operator certainly doesn’t look much like the ideal medic. An army is full of people who play different roles, and there’s no reason to make them all look the same.
Like father, like son
If you want a fun excuse for this, say that each job role has a ‘blueprint’, based on the most outstanding representative of that role at the time when this super soldier was begun. All the medics are the perfected ‘sons’ of a highly decorated combat medic, etc. This gives you diverse looking troops who are incredibly proud of their lineage.
Different models for different jobs
The ideal infantryman looks nothing like the ideal pilot. The ideal pilot doesn’t necessarily look much like the ideal tank operator. The ideal tank operator certainly doesn’t look much like the ideal medic. An army is full of people who play different roles, and there’s no reason to make them all look the same.
Like father, like son
If you want a fun excuse for this, say that each job role has a ‘blueprint’, based on the most outstanding representative of that role at the time when this super soldier was begun. All the medics are the perfected ‘sons’ of a highly decorated combat medic, etc. This gives you diverse looking troops who are incredibly proud of their lineage.
answered 1 hour ago
Daniel BDaniel B
4,4641726
4,4641726
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f136518%2fhow-to-make-variable-super-soldier-size-the-norm-versus-a-single-size%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Do you want, say, all "standard soldiers" to have different sizes? And also, how much variation do you expect - if a standard soldier is 1.8m, then can they go to 1m minimum or is it, say, 1.7m- 1.9m?
– vlaz
6 hours ago
@vlaz I want all standard soldiers to have different sizes yes. From for example 1.5m to 2.5m and vary constantly.
– Demigan
4 hours ago
OK, so that's a big variation. Initially I was thinking something smaller. It's useful to add this clarification to the question.
– vlaz
4 hours ago
Do you have a good in-lore reason for why you need to produce the equipment like old school industry would in a single size fits all? furthermore modern armies already vary 1.5 meters to 2 meters. The more advanced your civilization, the less advantage there is from producing just single sized jackets and it's easier to produce to individual fit.
– Lassi Kinnunen
3 hours ago
@Lassikinnunen the in-lore reason is the same as the real-life one: individual fit or adaptable fit production requires more costly factories and more resources to produce. Additionally it is a more complex supply line to maintain. Stockpiling replacement parts and equipment would become harder as you would need to stockpile per individual or needs to be requested and transported to the exact person each time rather than "We'll have this many soldiers who need a replacement part and they can grab it off the pile".
– Demigan
3 hours ago