I don't know what it is now, but it should be at least the same as the lion/African elephant/gorilla. At leastPanda appeal rating
I don't know what it is now, but it should be at least the same as the lion/African elephant/gorilla. At leastPanda appeal rating
Technically they are. All the tigers, except for the Sumatran, belong to the same subspecies, Panthera tigris tigris. The Sumatran is Panthera tigris sondaica.As far as tigers go, again, you're just asking for an entirely new animal. Bengal tigers and Malayan or South Chinese tigers are not the same.
Right now it’s 5625 it should be atleast 7500 like the lion polar bear and African Bush Elephant but honestly it should be way higher than them too. The crowds pandas draw in zoos are ridiculousThe alligator size group is in there but I like the Panda appeal rating. Any idea what it is now and what it should be? I play sandbox so appeal rating isn't something I consider.
Love this!
I'd consider adding this but there may or may not be some codes found in the files that allude to more lighting objects being added
I agree! Given their political status and rarity they should definitely be one of the biggest draws for crowds.Right now it’s 5625 it should be atleast 7500 like the lion polar bear and African Bush Elephant but honestly it should be way higher than them too. The crowds pandas draw in zoos are ridiculous
Sri Lankan elephants are actually the largest living subspecies of Asian elephant. The Indian subspecies are a middle-ground between Sri Lankan and Sumatran.The other two are the Sri Lankan and Sumatran subspecies, which are considerably smaller than the Indian one.
I apologize the lion polar bear elephant and gorilla are tied for the highest with 6750 not 7500 but the panda should definitely be at that number or higher to be more popular than they areI agree! Given their political status and rarity they should definitely be one of the biggest draws for crowds.
I found it! Its the last campaign map with the small island. Sad, that this is such a small map.Maybe, I'm wrong here but I swear one of them has a city background
Out of curiosity, does the IUCN differentiate between subspecies? Because based on other things I've seen, it looks like the moose was intended as being Alces alces gigas, the Alaskan moose, but was later changed to just be the generic Alces alces. So I wonder if, like the habitat information board, the conservation status is left over from that original designation.The moose conservation status in-game is currently set to "near threatened" but on the PZ website and IUCN has them as Least concerned
The Redlist usually doesn't involve subspecies, though there's roughly 2,700 subspecies pages on their websiteOut of curiosity, does the IUCN differentiate between subspecies? Because based on other things I've seen, it looks like the moose was intended as being Alces alces gigas, the Alaskan moose, but was later changed to just be the generic Alces alces. So I wonder if, like the habitat information board, the conservation status is left over from that original designation.
Yeah the Alaskan subspecies is near threatened. I don't know if they would change it to Alaskan moose, because the model might need to be sized up a bit for that to be true (they are the largest subspecies) and it seems clear here they wanted it to be used as a European and Asian animal too. I've said before I dislike using generic species names in place of specific subspecies, but it is what it is. Given that we've found Alaskan moose references in the old game code, it seems obvious this was retroactively made as a conscious decision so I don't see it changing.Out of curiosity, does the IUCN differentiate between subspecies? Because based on other things I've seen, it looks like the moose was intended as being Alces alces gigas, the Alaskan moose, but was later changed to just be the generic Alces alces. So I wonder if, like the habitat information board, the conservation status is left over from that original designation.
I think for this, I'll just add North American prairie to the list of new appropriate backgrounds to create. Temperate and grassland maps are really the only ones that are bad for this.Having plants match map biomes. I'm over the moon stoked with the new sculpted maps (especially the little ruin hidden in the desert!) but it's still weird to start a new grasslands map for north America and have a yellow savanna covered in umbrella acacia trees.
I like the first QoL idea. As far as the movie theaters go, with the new guest stands and custom billboards you can just build your own, I don't think it's worth having that as a new type of attraction or feature, especially if it's just a shell building and you can't see what's going on inside.Love these threads!
Quality of life request: Have a toggle on exhibits and habitats to send newborns and/or newly matured animals to the trading center automatically (to help with those high birthrate animals you need for conservation credits). I dont believe this would take away from the management aspect as it is replacing something that is brainless and tedious and would actually open up time better spent on building and monitoring guests.
New Feature Request: Theaters would make a great guest activity to watch nature documentaries and could be handled by simple 8x8(or 16) meter sized buildings that guests could enter and exit after a short while. No need to even have animations, just have the guests pop in and out like bathrooms.
Bug Fix Request: Animals frequently register as escaped when climbing even though they are still smack dab in the middle of the habitat. This kills zoo performance when its a "dangerous" animal sending 25% of guests running out of the zoo in terror.
I like this, I'll add these and if I can think of any more that might be appropriate (or if anyone else does)When it comes to swimming and deepdiving I would also like to see some more interactions in the water that aren't just a form of locomotion.
Tigers play-fighting, hippos and crocodiles sleeping underwater (not sure if hippos do the first, haven't played long enough with them to know), stuff like that.
Yes, the IUCN will even deal with Evolutionary Significant Units (ESU's). Which are basically populations. Like Bornean Pygmy Elephant a ESU of the Sumatran Elephant subspecies.Out of curiosity, does the IUCN differentiate between subspecies? Because based on other things I've seen, it looks like the moose was intended as being Alces alces gigas, the Alaskan moose, but was later changed to just be the generic Alces alces. So I wonder if, like the habitat information board, the conservation status is left over from that original designation.
Lol, are you saying this because they were already leaked?How about enrichments that behave like Jacuzzis? Like a hot tub? Prefect for Japanese macaques and any other animal that hangs out in warm/hot water
Unfortunately, as you alluded to, I don't think they'd do this. None of the exhibit animals have any color variations besides the ones that have albinism, which is mostly the snakes plus a few others.Hi @Bearcat9948, I have another suggestion. What about bringing color variations to the Lehmann's Poison Frog (and maybe also the Golden Poison Frog)? In the Zoopedia, they mention the fact that they come in different colormorphs in the wild. I guess it should not be too much work for the devs to do that and we would then have more frog diversity without the need to add new species (even though I'm not opposed to the inclusion of more frog species).
What, they were?!Lol, are you saying this because they were already leaked?