Topic: Sort of new BMR analysis

[arakish]

Hail, Rolemasters!

Long absence, and I have returned.  Intermittantly, at best.

Many apologies for my long absence, but RL threw another nastiest of curve balls.  Just let it be known that it took a while to find the ball.

During my absence, I have been working on an attempt to devise a simpler method for calculating the Base Movement Rate (BMR) for characters created with the Rolemaster system.  Although it may not be the best method, or a method welcomed by all, it is a method that is simple.  It is also a method that could solve many of the problems inherent with all flavors of RM.

For part of the analysis, I found an old CSV file that contained the data I used to propose my first treatise on the slightly flawed RM2, RMC, RMFRP BMR system.  The data are proprietary, but I do include the first 555 records (25.6%) of 2164.

My simple, and perhaps, eloquent proposal is to multiply the character's Height in inches by 0.6 to derive the character's equivalent BMR in feet per round (fpr).

Example: For a 72 inch tall character, their BMR would be 43.2fpr.

Of course, this adds a level of difficulty of having to deal with decimals.

However it does sovle the problem that is currently inherent with the current RMUS method:

BMR = 50fpr + Stride - Encumbrance

Stride = +/-1 BMR for each +/-2 inches Height.

I have eliminated the Encumbrance modifier for ease's sake and focused on only the BMR + Stride.  The table below (replicated from Sheet5 of the ODS file (wait for approval) in the attached ZIP file) demonstrates the major problem with the RMUS incarnation of the BMR.  This table only shows the lower end, for that is where the major problem lies.  I have only calculated for Heights 1 to 144 inches.  Above the 72 inch mark, I do not foresee any problems.  What about a 4800 inch tall character (40 feet, 12.192 meters)?  Well, from what I show in the ODS file (in ZIP file), such a character might would mosey faster than Usain Bolt could Dash.

Height (in)		BMR		Height (in)		BMR		Height (in)		BMR		Height (in)		BMR
72		50		54		41		36		32		18		23
70		49		52		40		34		31		16		22
68		48		50		39		32		30		14		21
66		47		48		38		30		29		12		20
64		46		46		37		28		28		10		19
62		45		44		36		26		27		8		18
60		44		42		35		24		26		6		17
58		43		40		34		22		25		4		16
56		42		38		33		20		24		2		15

However, I refuse to believe that a 2 inch tall being would have a BMR of 15fpr.  Let's do some math.

15 feet is 180 inches, meaning that a 15fpr BMR for a 2 inch tall being is 90 body lengths.

50 feet is 600 inches, meaning that a 50fpr BMR for a 72 inch tall being is 8 and one-third body lengths.

With my proposed method, this problem is solved with the ×0.6 multiplier as shown on Sheet6.

Anyway, all who feel like looking, the ZIP file contains a LibreOffice ODS and ODT file.  The files should open in OpenOffice since LibreOffice is the ODF fork.

rmfr

[markc]

 Looked at briefly and did a virus scan so it should be ok.


 But, IMHO just because you are larger/taller does not automatically mean you should move faster at a faster pace.
MDC


BTW, Welcome back.

[jdale]

Scaling realistically over such a wide range is difficult, since body shapes don't really scale that well. 2" humans and 20' humans are both equally impossible.

But that said, top speed for a mouse is 8.1 mph, or 119 ft/round. http://www.speedofanimals.com/ Assuming dash pace, BMR would be 24. I think you are giving a BMR for a 2" human as 1.2. To them, a mouse is faster than a cheetah. BMR of 15 would still make them slower than a mouse, but not by a factor of 20.

[Warl]

Agreeing with Jdale and adding a bit more to his statements.

You fail to account for Gravity and weight of object to energy used.

It takes exponentially more energy to move object of greater mass within the same gravitational force. Objects of less mass require less energy expenditure to move them. Additionally their are factors of resistance to be factored into this.

This can be seen, often, in the survival of smaller creatures falling from heights that would often injure a human, or for machinery of grater mass that a human being damaged by being dropped from shorter distances that would be considered safe for  human.

Grasshoppers often flit away at what would be considered great distances compared to their size. And Some insects travel along the ground ( like cockroaches) at speeds that would be phenomenal if you were to compare them by ratio to humans or even some large animals.

Their is a reason that, in general, Elephant and Hippos move at what might be considered a plodding gait, and yet even at their fastest (15mph), they don't  even compare to a Horse (62mph)  or a dog ( greyhound = 43mph), a domestic cat ( 29.8mph ) or even a Giraffe at 32mph.

Here is a site that gives you the speeds of Various animals and what those Speeds would "Feel like" if you were their size.

http://www.speedofanimals.com/

[arakish]

Guess I should have noted that it was for anthropogenic hominids.  Two arms, two legs.  It is a known fact that running, sprinting, dashing on four legs is faster than the two legged method.

I also admit I threw out a lot of factors and basically focused on Height with Qu Stat Bonus.

I know there are better methods, but I did not really have the amount of time I wanted to spend on the spreadsheet.  Although I worked on it over  two and a half month period, I'd guarantee that I spent a total of just a few days.  I would take an hour here, an hour four days later, another hour five days after that...

Not the best.  But it works for me.

rmfr

[Warl]

whether your working with Tow legs or 4, the same theories apply.

Look at the variation between a Dog, a Mouse and an Elephant on the Page link I gave you.

If Large/taller means faster, wouldn't the Giraffe be quite a Bit faster than a Dog, horse or Elephant?
Wouldn't the elephant be at least fast than a Dog or Cheeta?
Shouldn't an Elk be able to easily outdistance an african wild dog?
Shouldn't a Pig be able to out run a Six Lined racerunner?
A Mouse can Nearly go as fast as that pig.

Even if 4 legs are better than 2 for movement purposes, Should the same Size vs speed rules apply to some degree by your theories? Yet when you compare these creatures size to speed in ratios? That House Mouse is the Fastest creature on that lists compared to it's size.

My point is that just because something is Smaller than what is considered normal, does not mean it's relative speed is hindered. Typical examples show (with a few exception like the snail and Turtle) that the smaller they are, the faster they move in relation to their size. And on the other spectrum, the larger they are the Slower they are in relation to their size.

The African Bull Elephant moves like a human moving at 6.5mph at it's top speed. The feels like giraffe at 11.2mph at top speed. Yet the House mouse Moves at what would be 161mph at its top speed relative to it's size. (relative meaning that if it were  Human, a human would have to reach 161mph to reach the same speed relative to it's size and mass.) This is why their is such an cartoon character as Speedy Gonzales. The character was an exaggeration of reality in that MICE MOVE SUPER FAST for their size.

So would a "human" form 2" tall have a BMR of 1.2? I don't think so. I think they would be much faster than that relative to their size. They have a much smaller profile thus having less resistance applied to them by the air and much less Mass to move or slow them down physically. Their energy to Move mass consumption would be exponentially lower, not equal to just a human reduced to that size.

[jdale]

Guess I should have noted that it was for anthropogenic hominids.  Two arms, two legs.  It is a known fact that running, sprinting, dashing on four legs is faster than the two legged method.

My point wasn't that mouse-sized humans should have the speed of a mouse. But you are proposing a linear relationship between height and speed. If that held true, then there should be a similar relationship between the speed of a mouse-sized human and a mouse as there is between a human-sized human and a similarly sized quadruped. Similarly sized quadrupeds have speeds maybe in the range 30-50 mph, and humans top out around 28. So, quadrupeds are roughly twice as fast. At the mouse scale, you are suggesting the mouse is 20 times faster. So either scaling works totally differently for quadrupeds, or the linear relationship doesn't hold up.

In fact it's the latter. Size does affect speed but it's not a linear relationship.

[Warl]

In fact it's the latter. Size does affect speed but it's not a linear relationship.

Not to mention that Larger/taller does not equate to faster with quadrupeds.

[Justin]

Scaling realistically over such a wide range is difficult, since body shapes don't really scale that well. 2" humans and 20' humans are both equally impossible.

Then maybe there shouldn't be only one formula or conversion.

[Cory Magel]

I think this is too complicated a topic to be realistically represented in a game (let alone balance some of it properly at the same time).  For humanoids a, relatively, simply calculation is fine (although even that can be problematic at times), but for anything else I think it just needs to be 'eyeballed' when creating the critter.

[arakish]

I think this is too complicated a topic to be realistically represented in a game (let alone balance some of it properly at the same time).  For humanoids a, relatively, simply calculation is fine (although even that can be problematic at times), but for anything else I think it just needs to be 'eyeballed' when creating the critter.

And that sums it all up.

For the most part, I was only playing around with the spreadsheet during the rare offtimes we have had while doing the 3-D mapping we are doing.  We mostly work in mountain valleys, almost always cutting us off.  Lots of camping!

When we take off with leave, I come home.  Oftentimes, too much to catch up on.  Most times I move on to other projects.  Grow bored with the old ones.

rmfr

[Hurin]

If one wanted to move from a 10-second to a 6-second or 5-second round, how would that affect the calculations?

[arakish]

Reduce them by 60-50%?

rmfr