Real World Animal Revisions

[Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan]

This was semi-brought up before, but anyway, the way we currently rate animals is rather inaccurate. First thing is that their bite force/pressure can't really be quantified meaningfully in terms of AP, hence I changed it all to "higher with piercing damage" instead (already implemented); the second thing I want to implement is that using their KE is dumb and wanks them to ridiculous levels. Most animals are far from 9-B, and certain suggestions of certain prehistoric animals being like 9-A is simple ridiculous wanking. The best example probably being the cheetah, which a strong human probably could match in a fight. Gorillas are also not wall-busting animals either, nor are lions and tigers with their normal paw strikes. What I proposed is to have 3 parts for an animal's statistics, "X via regular attacks, Y via charging/ramming at full speed, and higher via piercing damage".

I have a draft for a couple of animals but I want the general idea to be accepted before gradually implementing.

Help in finding feats for animals' regular striking strength without full speed charging/tackling is much appreciated as well.

 

[Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan]

@DarkDragonMedeus @KLOL506 @Jasonsith @SuperAPM @Antoniofer

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

These look good, and I heard Elephants might still be Wall level?

 

[Agnaa]

The general concept behind this seems good, but I don't have the expertise to verify the drafts myself.

 

[Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan]

These look good, and I heard Elephants might still be Wall level?

Yeah, given the bunch of feats listed on their profile I'm more inclined to believe they should stay at 9-B.

 

[AKM sama]

I agree with the proposal.

 

[Gilad_Hyperstar]

Isn't the "X with normal attacks, Y via charging/ramming at full speed" applies tp Humans too? Since the average human has 10-B attacks normally but can reach 9-C by charging at full speed

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Yeah, something like that.

 

[Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan]

We have to take into account whether that animal does that kind of attack though. Humans don't literally run into people when fighting because it doesn't cause that much damage (in real life, it isn't linear and surface area matters).

 

[Gilad_Hyperstar]

The same goes to animals too. Surface area matters a lot to them too since these are all real world profiles

 

[Cropfist]

Most animals are far from 9-B, and certain suggestions of certain prehistoric animals being like 9-A is simple ridiculous wanking. The best example probably being the cheetah, which a strong human probably could match in a fight. Gorillas are also not wall-busting animals either, nor are lions and tigers with their normal paw strikes.

Is there proof of this?

 

[Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan]

Cheetah is definitely not 9-B. That comes form the kinetic energy of them running at top speed, but they don't attack by charging into people by running. It has thin legs and a slender body, and has much less brute strength than other big cats. They only weight 21-72 kg from a quick Google, and hence a strong human can probably be a good match.

Lions, while much stronger, aren't especially known for punching strength and mostly due damage via claws and such. The force of their paw strikes are just 400 pounds from a quick Google.

Gorilla's 9-B justification is damaging protective glass lions can't break, but it's pretty clear there's no way that a lion can exert force as focused as gorillas can, and again, surface area matters irl.

Prehistoric therapods aren't 9-A, even with KE, people rating T. rex as 9-B+ in the past just wank.

 

[AKM sama]

I think these changes should be good to go. But if you want to wait for more opinions from the people you pinged, we can wait a bit more.

Btw, can you try to ping me here. I want to check if I receive notifications from your ping and if it is working correctly.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Our system doesn't really take penetration into account, such as sharp pointy objects striking vs Giant soft fuzzballs being thrown. I mean, those details become somewhat less relevant for high tiers and not all fictions take this into account. But the real world is realistic. So yeah, body slams are often Tier 9 but don't really damage specific parts as much as a Tier 10 punch or kick. Hence why the thread was made regarding animals tiers.

 

[Agnaa]

@AKM sama

 

[AKM sama]

Oh, I meant Spino to ping me lol. Notifications are not sent if regular members ping someone. I wanted to check if it's working for calc members. Should have made it clear who I was addressing in my comment lol. My bad.

 

[Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan]

@AKM sama testing

 

[AKM sama]

Great. It works.

 

[Mariogoods]

I think these more detailed profiles are OK. (But these change may significantly change some versus result and certain characters who are scaling to real life animal such as Wu Song)

 

[Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan]

You shouldn't scale to 9-B for fighting animals unless they literally ram into you at full speed. That can be gradually corrected, although I assume most have other feats.

 

[Antvasima]

I also agree with this.

@DontTalkDT @Ugarik @Executor_N0 @Antoniofer

Are you willing to help out with input here?

 

[Agnaa]

You shouldn't scale to 9-B for fighting animals unless they literally ram into you at full speed. That can be gradually corrected, although I assume most have other feats.

Uhh, I actually have a character with no other feats. tl;dr she's empowered against immortals, the only non-anti-immortal feat she has is training against polar bears off-screen.

 

[Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan]

Then she should probably be 9-C instead of 9-B

 

[Antvasima]

I will try to notify the calc group members again:

@DontTalkDT @Executor_N0 @Mr._Bambu @Therefir @Ugarik @DMUA @Damage3245 @KGiffoni @Dargoo_Faust @TheRustyOne @DemonGodMitchAubin @Jasonsith @Wokistan

 

[DMUA]

Was this not already applied?

I still agree with it

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I think we have enough approvals.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

What you have currently is the natural conclusion of people trying to apply our battlebording logic to reality, which doesn't follow battleboarding logic but just biology and physics.

Animals "harming other animals" with given blunt durability through claws and teeth does not mean that those claws and teeth are actually hitting with the same force needed to do stuff like break an animal's bones via a fist, it just means they're hitting on a smaller surface area where not nearly as much force is needed to pierce flesh.

Obviously I agree to this.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for the evaluations. I think that we should wait a bit for more calc group members to comment though.

 

[Damage3245]

This looks fine to me.

 

[TheRustyOne]

Of course I agree with this as well.

 

[Antvasima]

It seems like this has likely been accepted then.

 

[Wokistan]

Seems fine.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you. So is somebody willing to help out with applying these revisions?

 

[Gilad_Hyperstar]

Would that also mean that all 9-Bs who are liated as 9-Bs because they're superiir to real world animals be revised too?

 

[Antvasima]

I suppose so, yes.

 

[Gilad_Hyperstar]

Then I think there also need to be a list of verses where characters get their 9-B ratings for scaling to or above animals

 

[Antvasima]

It might have to be a gradual revision for practical reasons.

 

[Gilad_Hyperstar]

Yes. But a list will still be good regardless. I mean, there's no rush to complete it asap

 

[Agnaa]

A list sounds extremely difficult to compile.

I guess the only way would be looking at the "What Links Here" for all the RL animal pages. And even then we might miss some of them...

 

[Antvasima]

Agnaa is correct.

"What Links Here" would be useful though.