What would the modern warfare look like if gunpowder was never discovered?

[BenJepheneT]

Just asking to see what your speculations would be. I personally don't know much about the evolution of arms and armies to make a bold claim out of it.

The best I could come up with is ancient Rome but extra guerilla, with a heavy use of ballistic knives.

Also, when I said no gunpowder, I didn't say no projectiles. They might make gigantic fucking arrows or drop missiles from the sky for all we know.

 

[Razzle-Dazzle]

There are several videos on how history would have changed... But I imagine... a lean into chemical warfare and biological weapons...

while the wars might be different... petroleum would still be discovered tho...

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

The world would have remained stuck into something like late Medieval European armies varying depending on local resources and circumstances.

But the invention of gunpowder was inevitable with the progress made in the areas of chemistry and science in general. Sooner or later, it would have been invented regardless unless a complete technological stagnation takes place.

 

[Razzle-Dazzle]

@BenJepheneT
Thnx for bringing up this topic, didn't think I would learn about the generations of warfare today,

Generations of warfare - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It's quite interesting.

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

@BenJepheneT
Thnx for bringing up this topic, didn't think I would learn about the generations of warfare today,

Generations of warfare - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It's quite interesting.

<.< The division is quite obvious between asymmetrical and symmetrical. No idea why you need to give them full generations as denominations.

 

[Razzle-Dazzle]

asymmetrical and symmetrical

can you elaborate?

 

[Shirabe]

so bombs would still exist then?

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

can you elaborate?

Symmetrical conflicts are where the forces of the opposing sides are comparable, which usually results in conventional conflicts between the two entities. Example for symmetrical conflicts are WWI, WWII, Korea, the second phase of Vietnam, the Cold War, etc.

Asymmetrical conflict are where there is a strong disparity between the forces of both sides, which forces the weaker side to adopt a more defensive strategy to level the playing field. The US are fighting goat shepherds on the Hindu Kush since two decades now and no victory is in sight. In fact, the mighty US military is losing badly. Strategically, the war is lost despite drones and operators.

But in the end, asymmetrical conflict are only temporary states, and they will quickly turn into symmetrical ones under the right circumstances.

In short, Fourth generation warfare is nothing new under the sun unless you slept through your counter insurgency classes.

 

[Sabruness]

But the invention of gunpowder was inevitable with the progress made in the areas of chemistry and science in general. Sooner or later, it would have been invented regardless unless a complete technological stagnation takes place.

I'm with this.

 

[Razzle-Dazzle]

Fourth generation warfare is nothing new under the sun

I see... that's what you meant, yeah
I do think the 4G warfare thing is one perspective by some guy, there are certainly some other guys pointing out the problems
"nothing more than a repackaging of the traditional clash between the non-state insurgent and the soldiers of a nation-state."
etc etc.

Tho at this moment... nothing to do with anything...I think that... counterinsurgency is really hard ain't it...
Was it ever easy, I wonder... people don't tend to go "hey you won, good one! You got me. I am your citizen now, let's just move on"

Not to be a drag, but... war kinda suck...

 

[Undeadd]

But the invention of gunpowder was inevitable with the progress made in the areas of chemistry and science in general. Sooner or later, it would have been invented regardless unless a complete technological stagnation takes place.

yep, sounds about right

now lets consider a paralel world where chemical reactions that result in a massive release of kinetic and thermal energy (explosions) don't work, likely we'd be seeing some weapons running on compressed air, automatic/semi automatic crossbows, stuff like Joerg's Instant Legolas, ballistas, and the likes in warfare, molotov coctails would probably replace grenades, flamethrowers would likely be really common too, vehicles would likely be all electric or steam powered as well

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

yep, sounds about right

now lets consider a paralel world where chemical reactions that result in a massive release of kinetic and thermal energy (explosions) don't work, likely we'd be seeing some weapons running on compressed air, automatic/semi automatic crossbows, stuff like Joerg's Instant Legolas, ballistas, and the likes in warfare, molotov coctails would probably replace grenades, flamethrowers would likely be really common too, vehicles would likely be all electric or steam powered as well

Unlikely. Explosions are exothermic reactions, which release energy in the form of heat. You know what the most classical exothermic reaction is, exactly fire!

Fire is redox exothermic, thus closely related to explosions in basic function. If there are no explosions possible, there also exists no fire! The implications of such a seemingly innocuous step like making explosions impossible would massive for the chemical laws of the world in question!

 

[Kaguro]

You would have an extended spanish style colonial era, with really good metalworking, ships, and horses. Eventually you'd get guns though, unless you removed fire entirely, and even without fire there are other ways to launch a bullet.

 

[atgongumerki]

Rail guns still work though.
Most modern weapons don't use gunpowder; there are sound-, light-, water-, magnetic-based weapons.

The question is: aside from warfare, what else changes?
Example: mining (no TNT). This leads to a reduced rate of resource-extraction, which means industrial growth also slows down.
Less industrial growth leads to slower research, meaning that in 2020, you would still be kinda far away from these modern weapons.

Then the question is how much of this limited research goes into warfare!
Without Gunpowder, warfare likely retains its romanticised status.
Instead of seeing death, destruction and horror, people see honour and prestige in war.

Another point of consideration: no gunpowder no colonialism.
Due to the lack of scientific progress related to warfare, each continent has similar militaristic capabilities.

Or we would have gone and researched stuff we did not in today's time and everything is unpredictable.

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

Rail guns still work though.
Most modern weapons don't use gunpowder; there are sound-, light-, water-, magnetic-based weapons.

The question is: aside from warfare, what else changes?
Example: mining (no TNT). This leads to a reduced rate of resource-extraction, which means industrial growth also slows down.
Less industrial growth leads to slower research, meaning that in 2020, you would still be kinda far away from these modern weapons.

Then the question is how much of this limited research goes into warfare!
Without Gunpowder, warfare likely retains its romanticised status.
Instead of seeing death, destruction and horror, people see honour and prestige in war.

Another point of consideration: no gunpowder no colonialism.
Due to the lack of scientific progress related to warfare, each continent has similar militaristic capabilities.

Or we would have gone and researched stuff we did not in today's time and everything is unpredictable.

Rail guns? Seriously? Their cost would even ruin the US military. They are outclassed by chemical propellant weapons by far.

And I also want to see evidence for the idea that most weapons are sound, light, water and magnetic based?

 

[atgongumerki]

nd I also want to see evidence for the idea that most weapons are sound, light, water and magnetic based?

I apologise for my poor wording.
Not most weapons in use.
But from what I know, (aside from weapon-systems, and specialisations for urban warfare), recent research focusses on these kinds of things. There are also some relics of WWII which had the use these kinda methods in mind (like a whirlwind cannon).

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

I apologise for my poor wording.
Not most weapons in use.
But from what I know, (aside from weapon-systems, and specialisations for urban warfare), recent research focusses on these kinds of things. There are also some relics of WWII which had the use these kinda methods in mind (like a whirlwind cannon).

Not sure. Sound and light are used for crowd control and dispersion by the police, but most of these applications are non-lethal and not meant for a combat environment where the enemy actually shoots back. To define them as weapons is thus quite a stretch.

But to make my point, in terms of delivering energy to a target, chemical propellants are unbeaten in practical terms. They are compact and a portable energy source. Light and sound dissipate too easily in comparison. Water is too heavy and not always available. And magnetism requires too much equipment. You can install rail guns on bigger platforms like ships - experimentally done -, but try to arm your infantry with them. You need portable lightweight guns for that job.

 

[dicloniuslord]

so bombs would still exist then?

probably. look at thermobaric bombs: they just have a highly pressurized fuel expand, mix with air, and ignite. just because there's no gunpowder doesnt mean there's no explosives or propellants (eg nitrocellulose or TNT would be pretty easy to discover due to the chemical process for making it being relatively simple)

 

[miyoga]

yep, sounds about right

now lets consider a paralel world where chemical reactions that result in a massive release of kinetic and thermal energy (explosions) don't work, likely we'd be seeing some weapons running on compressed air, automatic/semi automatic crossbows, stuff like Joerg's Instant Legolas, ballistas, and the likes in warfare, molotov coctails would probably replace grenades, flamethrowers would likely be really common too, vehicles would likely be all electric or steam powered as well

It's interesting that you came up with this because @QuietValerie wrote a story about this exact thing happening. Gunpowder and everything still existed, but the explosion and energy associated with them was just gone. The world was thrown back into a state of medieval-esque standards and conflicts. One of her MCs was a renn-fair actor/LARPer with custom armor and battle ready (read "lethal") weapons. The story was put on a more-than-likely permanent hiatus, but I'd love to see where she would take it if she picked it (and some of her other older works) back up.

 

[Undeadd]

Fire is redox exothermic, thus closely related to explosions in basic function. If there are no explosions possible, there also exists no fire! The implications of such a seemingly innocuous step like making explosions impossible would massive for the chemical laws of the world in question!

Yea I'm implying such a world with extremely questionable chemical laws that basically make almost any exothermic reaction work, but don't allow explosions to exist

It's interesting that you came up with this because @QuietValerie wrote a story about this exact thing happening. Gunpowder and everything still existed, but the explosion and energy associated with them was just gone. The world was thrown back into a state of medieval-esque standards and conflicts. One of her MCs was a renn-fair actor/LARPer with custom armor and battle ready (read "lethal") weapons. The story was put on a more-than-likely permanent hiatus, but I'd love to see where she would take it if she picked it (and some of her other older works) back up.

Hmmm interesting I'll probably go check it out... though the hiatus aspect sounds... yea... but sometimes one has to make sacrifices