Regarding Localized Shaking Feats

[Shmeatywerbenmanjenson]

Recently I have come to notice that the current formula for localized quakes
r < 60km: In this case the formula is (Magnitude at distance) + 0.0238*r = Richter Magnitude of Earthquake doesn't really work well with feats that only cause local shaking due to the fact that it cannot be subtractive only additive. An example would be that a character punches the ground and causes Mercalli Scale 5 shaking only within a few meters of him. This still is labeled as Multi-City Block level. We know that in real life even small tier 9 explosions can cause shaking for miles around so clearly something is wrong with the current way we calc shaking feats. Which bring me to this (Magnitude at distance) + 6.399 + 1.66*log((distance from epicenter in KM/110)*((2*pi)/360)) = Richter Magnitude of Earthquake and as you can see it gives much more believable results. Here is an example of using it in action over the old method (Shameless Self-Promotion). If this is accepted as correct then many profiles need to be changed as many use the old method.

 

[ElajRuengies]

Recently I have come to notice that the current formula for localized quakes
r < 60km: In this case the formula is (Magnitude at distance) + 0.0238*r = Richter Magnitude of Earthquake doesn't really work well with feats that only cause local shaking due to the fact that it cannot be subtractive only additive. An example would be that a character punches the ground and causes Mercalli Scale 5 shaking only within a few meters of him. This still is labeled as Multi-City Block level. We know that in real life even small tier 9 explosions can cause shaking for miles around so clearly something is wrong with the current way we calc shaking feats. Which bring me to this (Magnitude at distance) + 6.399 + 1.66*log((distance from epicenter in KM/110)*((2*pi)/360)) = Richter Magnitude of Earthquake and as you can see it gives much more believable results. Here is an example of using it in action over the old method (Shameless Self-Promotion). If this is accepted as correct then many profiles need to be changed as many use the old method.

Already brought that up here.

TL;DR: The Log in the 110km+ radius equation is for factoring in the curvature of the Earth, not for adjusting for super close proximity earthquakes. That's just coincidence that it also lessens the Magnitude for super close quakes, and has no tie to real life results.

The consensus for current super close Earthquake feats is to just have the r < 60km formula be not-allowed to use, unless the shaken area is at least 150 meters in radius.

 

[Shmeatywerbenmanjenson]

Already brought that up here.

TL;DR: The Log in the 110km+ radius equation is for factoring in the curvature of the Earth, not for adjusting for super close proximity earthquakes. That's just coincidence that it also lessens the Magnitude for super close quakes, and has no tie to real life results.

The consensus for current super close Earthquake feats is to just have the r < 60km formula be not-allowed to use, unless the shaken area is at least 150 meters in radius.

Was there any attempt to create a new formula? As of now many profiles still use invalidated earthquake calcs

 

[ElajRuengies]

Was there any attempt to create a new formula? As of now many profiles still use invalidated earthquake calcs

The Earthquake magnitude from distance calcs come from a Meteor impact simulation. They aren't invalid, more like misused.

And no a new formula hasn't been made, likely due to there not being any Seismology Majors in the Calc Group

 

[Shmeatywerbenmanjenson]

The Earthquake magnitude from distance calcs come from a Meteor impact simulation. They aren't invalid, more like misused.

And no a new formula hasn't been made, likely due to there not being any Seismology Majors in the Calc Group

Damn, really needs to be fixed but I guess there's nothing we can do