>tfw i could easily beat the shit out of anyone who posts

what does it matter your height and muscles when someone could just shoot you in your stupid ass head

File: TriumphantPepe.jpg (175KB, 601x800px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 601x800px

>>73736283
Foolish leaf! If everyone in the steel cage went in coalition against you, you would not stand any chance. For you see, numbers matter, you would tire out easily.

File: image.jpg (69KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 640x640px

>unironically leaf posting in the year of our lord 2017

>>73736283
>Implying we wouldn't band together to take on the strong first.

>>73736347
>>73736398
This. /int/ellectuals aren't stupid.

>>73736347
>>73736398
>>73736412
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRyY54NYXVE

>>73736711
>he links a fucking video game on youtube to prove his "point"
Why don't you link an actual fight with 1 big guy vs. 8 smaller guys and then I'll watch it

>>73736749
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zof0WmcWwnk

>>73736818
I said 8, not 4. 8 would literally destroy any 1 person alone.

>>73736889
>implying i wouldn't team up with the other 6'4 lads and kill you beta runts

>>73736931
>implying there aren't enough small guys to just surround and overwhelm any number of big guys

>>73736982
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8LiQFnkuJY

>>73737004
That's with armour and weapons, and on a single section of street. Assuming that this is a steel cage match like you said before, the people who put us in there probably wouldn't put either of those things in there. Not to mention they probably wouldn't put all the big guys on one side, and all the small ones on the other, they'ed be salt and peppered around.

All in all, try again.

>>73737058
a theoretical steel cage that could fit the entirety of /int/ would be massive, allowing for free movement

try again, shrimp boy

>>73736931
>>73737004
This is all if the small number of big guys would have large open spaces available to them to maneuver around the large number of small guys. In a steel cage, as you said, small number of big guys would probably die to large number of small guys since they don't have space.

The only advantage you have, literally, is the space to move away from the small guys. If they got in close you'd die, simple as that.

And also there is a certain ratio where quantity triumphs over quality. Nazis had better weaponry and soldiers but they could not destroy the endless hordes of Soviets no matter how hard they tried.

>>73737124
small guys are inherently afraid, so they would run around trying to escape the big guys

>>73736283
doesnt matter when you can't catch me old man haha

>>73736931
I would try but i'm a lanky awkward faggot

>>73737094
It's not that you couldn't move around, it's that the shrimps around you would jump on you before you could move. Like a guy before said, we're small, not stupid. Big huge guys would get taken out first cause you're the biggest threat. Not only that, it's completely possible that some dumbass meatheads might start killing each other thinking the smaller guys are easy pickings, which just muddies things up even further. Either way, even if it was midgets vs giants, if the ratios are skewed enough, the midgets would win. And just to clarify, there are WAY more average sized people than big guys. You guys would probably take a few of us out, but there is no way you guys would win in a barefists free for all.

>>73737247
small guys are fearful of big guys, they would run around the cage trying to escape instead of teaming up

This is why i carry a gun on me.
T. manlet 5'10
Seriously though your right you'd outright pumble me

File: OnePunchPepe.png (123KB, 785x757px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 785x757px

>>73737165
That's usually never true, in many hard melee cases, and we can use medieval battles in this: in the Battle of Brunkeberg, 10,000 Swedish weakling peasants (big group of small guys) were able to destroy 6,000 fully trained, fully armored, professional Danish and German soldiers (small group of big guys).

The peasants (big group of small guys) weren't afraid, and were able to destroy the professionals (small group of big guys).

Do not underestimate your foe, do not underestimate quantity.

>>73737492
and it's been the other way around 1000 times for everytime the small guys win

File: ApuWithRevolver.png (239KB, 651x544px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 651x544px

>>73737591
Not really, in wars the army with the biggest quantity of troops usually wins, no matter how shitty they are in terms of fighting.

Quality is shit compared to quantity, remember that, big fella.

>>73736283
>and built like a brick shithouse
How do you move around without breaking your foundation?