So your saying its more realistic that a bee the size of a dog can fly, yet a person despite going through various mutations, even possible shrinkage to “tiny” proportions is unrealistic.
Even through a human mutated celahopod which is drivied from a mainly aquatic based species, with absolutly no means to travel the dry terrain let alone do so for extensive and indefinite period of times; is realistic.
I dunno man. This whole thing just sounds like a never ending loop.
“Its not realistic!” Despite everything else not following suit
“Its not balanced!” Despite it already pre-existing handicaps, which of course can lead to more if that fixes things but no.
So I just. Don’t. Know. What the actualy hold up is.
Sorry, I did lead to that. What I meant by that is its a bit of a double standard. While you agree it unrealistic for a bee to be unable to fly. You don’t enforce it. Yet for flying mutant you do. Why?
Not yet. I could easily see a line of zombies that’s pretty flimsy, but has strong leg muscles and wings and leaps into the air (like a frog) and glides into the player to either prone or grapple them. I assume these creatures would seek out high places (rooftops, cell towers) and wide vision to try and LAWNDART into their prey.
I mean the predator zombies leap like 20 feet without the use of hang-glider wings. Also human flying squirrel suits are a thing. Literally just make zombie versions of that (made lighter without things like internal organs) and call them harpies.
Honestly, I would prefer gliding be a thing before flight. I would love to pilot a hang glider from s radio tower.
If the conclusion of this entire debate was “removal of giant wasps”, I’d be ok with that. Its not really a double standard, I’m just not actively seeking to remove elements from the game. As I said, my personal opinion is that monsters are distinct from the player, and play by a different set of rules, like most enemies in most games.
Some of the more extreme mutations like tentacle limbs are possible in theory, assuming you could solve the whole “rewrite and rebuild human genetics on the fly”, which its assumed mutagen can do. Given that, its a question of whether the thing can exist in reality. Tentacle limbs would require some strong musculature, but not impossible so. Advanced healing and tougher bodies are also viable, assuming you could write the appropriate genetic changes which again, we assume mutagen can do. Creating wings on humans is fine within the realm of what to do. However, using those wings still has to obey physics. And that’s where flying bird mutations falls apart.
Edit: As for gliding, thats still a tough one. You could theoretically glide, but good luck landing.
Yes but physics loses some ground on the scope of reality when things like bees exist. A normally I would agree. Monsters are an exception to this rule, since most would be following that whole “eldrich” or “Alien” make up type deal.
But these are just big bees; normal big bees that have grown proportionally larger than their common garden variety cousins. A some how in the process, the universe has decided to give them a pass in terms of physics. Yet humans despite being infected by the same blob species still has to obey it.
Maybe revenger for the royal mess up humanity did? Who know.
I mean. If these were “alien” bees, sure it could be something beyond our understanding like Mi’gos; but these bees are from earth. A they do follow the same principles. Whatever they got, why can’t mutant flying humans?
While it’s true that (bumble-)bees do have a size advantage, may I remind you that there are giant wasps in the game and they do fly?
Yes, flapping human sized wings 200 times a second most certainly will damage the them. I didn’t mean that the human should be able to do that (also, bees are able to stay in the air nearly indefinately (“while their energy lasts”), and we don’t want to do that either). It was intended as a nudge into the direction of an other way to think about.
By the way, friction should not scale like that, and while it will heat up (bumblebees actually use this as a way to be able to fly in low temperatures), it should not cause burns.
Unrelated, but in the reponse linked, it was stated that the (probably swiss) physicist is unknown. However, in actuality it is thought that it was either Swiss gas dynamicist Jacob Ackeret or André Sainte-Laguë, a French mathematician.
Edit: Well, looks like my wasp argument was already brought up…
Hm, than the question should be: How many muscles does a human need to be strong enough to lift itself with bird or bug (or any other adaptation type of) wings.
Oh, waitwaitwait! There was a good documentary about the theoretical existence of dragons! It explained how they could fly while respecting existing physics. I’ll see if I can find it.
Found it! (Here’s the name - in case the video gets removed at some point: Dragon’s World; a fantasy made real)
Maybe that could be adapted somehow?
For those that don’t have the time to watch a one and a half hours (fake) documentary…: It plays with the idea that dragons could have had an air sack, filled with a gas lighter than air (hydrogen), which reduced the weight of the animal, which in turn (with wings) allowed them flight. (I’m not sure if that’s all there is to it, it’s a long time ago since I’ve watched it.)