In a setting where you have soldiers capable of the strength

Ask /k/, if they're not busy molesting local wildlife of digging underground cave system complex enough to baffle Vietcong veterans...

>>54152832
You could afford to go to a slightly larger cartridge like 6.5mm to optimize terminal ballistics and range; but the fundamental meta is unchanged.

Existing rounds are good enough for doing damage. Quantity of ammo carried is critical to success and survival. And the best way to "pierce" body armor is to shoot more rounds, not bigger ones, because body armor covers less than 18% of the body.

If your guys can carry more stuff, then the logical upgrades are more HE and more stuff for the crew served weapons. Think of a LAW for everyone, or extra mortar ammo, or extra GPMG ammo.

>>54152832
Bigger bullets are still bulky, which would likely be an issue even if weight's not for the troops.

And really, current weapons do a pretty good job - as >>54152977 says, you might get slightly bigger standard cartridge, and maybe a few more squad weapons if everyone can haul around ammo like it weighs fuckall, but you're not going to get everyone going around with a 50 cal like the Bulldozer of Fallujah - there's just not a need to bring more power, when the power we have is just fine and you could bring more of it

This might change if there were bigger/tougher things to hit, but then you'd have other questions to answer before you'd just upsize the guns

File: 1266685215448.jpg (100KB, 740x592px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 740x592px

>>54152977
>>54153129

Thirding what these chaps have said. If you can carry extra weight, the best thing to do would be to bring more ammo. If you can stay in contact with the enemy longer, or potentially even outlast him, that's an immense advantage.

>>54152977
this right here

>>54152832
Most likely you'd see soldiers carrying more rounds rather than just increase the caliber of weapons. It takes quite good body armor to stop a round from an assault rifle., and even when soldiers do have that kind of body armor, it doesn't cover their entire body. Not to mention that most casualties are consistently caused by support and heavy weapons anyway.

To be fair, soldiers might also be able to carry notably heavier armor and you could entertain the notion of armored stormtroopers of some sort as specialists. Otherwise - more bullets, more food, more tools that go boom.

>>54152832
If anything other than just more ammo carried would happen, I'd guess that LMG's would become more common

>>54152832
To answer this you need to answer. "What are they fighting?" If they are just fighting humans with our levels of body armor they might up scale it a little but not much. Overkill is a thing and in general it's better to fire more bullets then to fire bigger bullets when you are talking about a meatsack.