Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213 LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 181

Thread: Carnivore AI / Ecosystem Balance

  1. #121
    Originally Posted by Winterwalker View Post (Source)
    I knew I shouldn't have added Ranger Jeep DNA ... ! What I'm saying is, "Jeep finds a way!"

    Thought on the thread, if there's a carnivore AI tweak to do, then I'd probably look at a carnivore with less than 100% health being more attracted to goats and feeders, and only attack large herbivores when feeling 100% unless attacked first of course. Though that does concentrate carnivores at the feeders, so now it's a dominance/territory thing? (tldr; Complicated business but actually a "care-bear" DNA sequence not a terrible idea for me).
    I would go for that. Seems like a reasonable idea mate.

  2. #122
    Originally Posted by MarcWP View Post (Source)
    I would go for that. Seems like a reasonable idea mate.
    And a pink skin option ... bwahaha.

  3. #123
    Originally Posted by Winterwalker View Post (Source)
    And a pink skin option ... bwahaha.
    Hahahahha. Dead.

    But if we think about it, there might have been some pink dinosaurs. A flamingo lookalike. Why not?

  4. #124
    Then I thought .. would that be a good image for the game? (Probably not)

    Just arguing with myself really. I don't know about anyone else but I was quite surprised Ceratosaurus deals with Triceratops as easily as it did in early game. Not only is Ceratosaurus a bit bigger than I thought, I wonder if that's one of those Victorian terrible lizard hang-overs and actually Trikes et al really were Rex fodder and their best bet was basically 'hide'. Jack Horner would know better than I do.

  5. #125
    Originally Posted by Winterwalker View Post (Source)
    Then I thought .. would that be a good image for the game? (Probably not)

    Just arguing with myself really. I don't know about anyone else but I was quite surprised Ceratosaurus deals with Triceratops as easily as it did in early game. Not only is Ceratosaurus a bit bigger than I thought, I wonder if that's one of those Victorian terrible lizard hang-overs and actually Trikes et al really were Rex fodder and their best bet was basically 'hide'. Jack Horner would know better than I do.
    I found that really weird as well... But they got alot of sizes and strengths wrong in this game from a paleontology standpoint.

  6. #126
    Originally Posted by MarcWP View Post (Source)
    I found that really weird as well... But they got alot of sizes and strengths wrong in this game from a paleontology standpoint.
    Yeah, Spinosaurus being small (?) and Struthiomimus vs concrete wall being quite big ones. Not sure that changes the thread ofc - and while I do get both people want to make mixed enclosures. Even if that's a romantic view it's not unreasonable request. However I think it probably is a romanticised view and that even if dinosaurs being quite antisocial as a rule makes JWE more difficult, does seem to me it's probably true. You do get flocks of birds for eg. but flocks don't tend to be of mixed species (high difficulty).

  7. #127
    Originally Posted by Winterwalker View Post (Source)
    Yeah, Spinosaurus being small (?) and Struthiomimus vs concrete wall being quite big ones. Not sure that changes the thread ofc - and while I do get both people want to make mixed enclosures. Even if that's a romantic view it's not unreasonable request. However I think it probably is a romanticised view and that even if dinosaurs being quite antisocial as a rule makes JWE more difficult, does seem to me it's probably true. You do get flocks of birds for eg. but flocks don't tend to be of mixed species (high difficulty).
    Agreed. And I think the possibility of making it work would be highly enchanced if we had the entire Nublar to work with. IMO space is an issue here.

  8. #128
    Originally Posted by MarcWP View Post (Source)
    Well you tried to correct me numerous times about it not being for "fun", so I ask again, how do you know and what is it then? If you can just conclude that, then you must obviously have some insights to the mind of animals, that none of us have...
    No, I was criticizing your assumpton that they were doing it out of "fun", it's a subtle but important distinction.

  9. #129
    Originally Posted by MarcWP View Post (Source)
    Uhhhmm.... You don't understand when I write "domesticated" there's a reason these "" are there. Because it's not the actual term I'm going for, but they have only been in captivity and raised by humans. They have no contact with other animals, before they are released into the paddock. Therefore they don't know how to behave around other animals, like stated in the JP franchise.
    And yes of course domesticated cats still have instincts from there forefathers. I never claimed otherwise. You're just putting words in my mouth now. They wouldn't have the need to kill if it wasn't for instinct...
    And again "kill in fun" is the term I used because no human will ever know, why they play around with prey, pretty much torture it to death without eating it. What would you call it then, since you're the biologist here and all?
    So like what i said before in my other post 'you need to think again about term of 'killing for fun'. Cz even animal in captivity don't kill for fun and and for sure, they not go berserk and wiped out the entire same nor other species in the same cage like back in the game.
    Also Domestic and Captive animals are different terms.
    For example, Cats are domestic animal, even tho you keep it as pet or not. Otherwise, Reticulated python are wild animals. Even you keep them as a pet it still wild animal but wild animal in captivity.
    I'm no biologist, I'm graphic designer but i love about nature things so i had some knowledge about it.
    What i call it about the habit?? Go check again in my previous post.

    Of course predators and prey can live inside the same territory. A territory span is wider than the animal. A tiger doesn't have a 100 km wingspan to grab everything inside. LOL

    So what i supposed to think about your statement in your other post like this one:
    'A regular male tiger has a territory of about 100 km. A T-Rex would probably double that at least. So it would roam and kill other animals within a range of 200 kilometers.
    And there's plenty of evidence, of animals today acting like the dinosaurs in the game. Surplus killings are found regularly in wolf packs for example, where they kill everything in sight without eating the corpses. This is usually to stay sharp hunting wise or just mark territory.'


    So with your argument above, i taught that no other species will can live inside some species of animals territory cz they will get kill by this A hole as soon as it see them in the first place just like back in the game. So if this wrong then it's my bad.
    Also There no such think like Surplus killings in animals kingdom especially in the wild, but it depend on the terms itself.
    If you think that surplus killings mean wild animals will go 'overkill' their prey out of their needs capacity and without any reason at all (without any reason including stay sharp hunting wise or just mark territory.') just like in the game, you need to think again.
    after all, i just knew little thing about the wolf then you do..So i can't tell much bout it but i still stand with my opinion about 'surplus killings'.

    'So the describtion from IMDB and what the producers write about what's in the movie about the lions are a lie and doesn't prove anything? And yes I've watched it twice. Not recently, but I would never point anything out if I didn't watch it. And how would I even know about it if I didn't? Not like documentaries like that get any marketing exposure. And they even write it's filmed over 16 years, and that's a lie as well apparently.
    "In their quest to dominate their first area, they killed approximately 40 other lions which included lots of cubs, females and adult males.". Again quote from the movie. And of course they didn't take on everything. That's suicide. Some dinosaurs in JWE also runs away if they can't win a fight... And there's no way an animal can kill all food sources by itself. There's no animal that's that fast and can live that long. LOL'


    Again, you just copas the synopsis from this film. Now, You even said you have watched this film twice but it seem you still doesn't completely understand why i said that the their largest territory weren't last for long. Even after i have mentioned about conflict between Mr. T and Makhulu.
    For the note, i watched this film only once in late 2017 (around Oct-Nov) but i still remember it from very beginning to the last.
    And why on earth you mention about ' ... And there's no way an animal can kill all food sources by itself.'.
    I already knew that!
    In fact there no animals in group can do that even for the mapogos..but still, it's not explained why you mention it after you said the otherwise in your other post??
    So this will stop our debate bout this film once for all cz it's really wasted my time.

    'Well the lions didn't kill because they had to. That's a straight fact. Everyone can agree on that. If you want to call it something else than fun, be my guest. You overinterpreted everything I wrote.'

    No, Animals like lions only kill if they had to and had always reasonable purpose with their act and not just 'for fun' (like you said all the time). That's a fact!
    So pls stop make your opinion and labelled as fact! Beside not 'everyone has agreed with your 'fact'!
    im not 'overinterpreted' everything you wrote, I just bring some of your statement from your previous post which are i feel it wrong!
    So no need to debate this furthermore cz other time will get wasted.

    "No one" ever said the dinosaurs were hybrid.'. No, not in this post. That's why I wrote NO ONE. You brought up something completely irrelevant to this discussion. I don't care what people write in other topics?

    Yes, In this thread 'No one' have mentioned it. That's why i replied with 'No one ever said the dinosaurs were hybrid, huh?? cz i seen it a lot from other threads in this forum who said all dinos...'.
    So i hope this make it clear to you also no furthermore debate about it.

    I never ONCE said animals doesn't live side by side. I even wrote the exact oppisite with the Hippos and Crocs. It's hard to keep a civilized conversation, when you put words in my mouth all the time, that I never said (wrote. Guess I had to state that too or you wouldn't understand).

    Again, What i supposed to think with your quote like this:
    'A regular male tiger has a territory of about 100 km. A T-Rex would probably double that at least. So it would roam and kill other animals within a range of 200 kilometers.
    And there's plenty of evidence, of animals today acting like the dinosaurs in the game. Surplus killings are found regularly in wolf packs for example, where they kill everything in sight without eating the corpses'


    And that's me who bring Hippos and Crocs relation here as exams to you, not the otherwise. you just responded at it.
    for note, If it's hard to you to keep civilized conversation, just let it out! cz i don't want to make you go berserk like my Sue did.

    'And no I don't compare wild animals to animals in captivity. THAT'S MY WHOLE POINT. The dinosaurs are in CAPTIVITY. Never in the wild. So their heads are messed up, like they say in the JP franschise time and time again.'

    I never seen nor heard in the lore mentioned that all dinos head in JP got their head 'messed up'. Only the hybrid act like that, but for sure not all the dinos act the same way as hybrid does .
    That's why they try to build theme park like JW or JP. They will not doing it after all, if all of their main attractions got their head messed up.
    Even in real life, That's true 'sometimes' (but not all the time) animals in captivity doesn't work properly like it used to be, (Hyper aggressiveness, Paranoids syndrome, lost their wild abilities,etc..)
    but still not close to what we have seen in the lore with the Hybrids.

    So now i have simple question for you,
    'Are you think the AI are broke and need to be fix and improve by Devs, ASAP??
    or you think it's no need cz you already satisfied with what we have so far??'

    Cz so many contradiction between your previous post in here that make me so confused.
    At one point, It seem you happy with we have so far (i talk about the AI oc)
    but another point, you agreed with us that the AI are broke and need to be fix and improve (Oc with improvement on the space of area itself so it will be more realistic as you said in your last post to me).

  10. #130
    Originally Posted by Dino droppings? Droppings? View Post (Source)
    No, I was criticizing your assumpton that they were doing it out of "fun", it's a subtle but important distinction.
    But why criticize something you don't know anything about? Then you're just criticizing for no reasons, which makes it even worse. You have no proof that they do it out of anything other than "fun" or "amusement". It's like criticizing a guy with a broken leg, sayin' "you can clearly walk on it. It doesn't hurt", when you can't have the slightest clue if it's right or wrong...

  11. #131
    Originally Posted by MarcWP View Post (Source)
    But why criticize something you don't know anything about? Then you're just criticizing for no reasons, which makes it even worse. You have no proof that they do it out of anything other than "fun" or "amusement". It's like criticizing a guy with a broken leg, sayin' "you can clearly walk on it. It doesn't hurt", when you can't have the slightest clue if it's right or wrong...
    What are you talking about!

  12. #132
    Originally Posted by Winterwalker View Post (Source)
    I think I probably agree that 'for fun' is maybe not quite right adjective (though it's not ridiculous language imo because of the 'learn through play' idea).

    Killing when not hungry is completely natural behaviour though because the instinct is literally to overpower ANYTHING smaller than you (that you can catch hold of) because 'predator' (and eg. fox in the chicken coop = no survivors). Of equal size to establish dominance .. and if it's bigger than you it's still not that weird; attack is a completely valid form of defense for quite a few species.

    Arctic Skua defending territory;
    I don't disagree with you. I havent argued the contrary either.
    Read my earlier comments and I'm sure you'll understand where I'm coming from.

  13. #133
    Originally Posted by Sukribo View Post (Source)
    So like what i said before in my other post 'you need to think again about term of 'killing for fun'. Cz even animal in captivity don't kill for fun and and for sure, they not go berserk and wiped out the entire same nor other species in the same cage like back in the game.
    Also Domestic and Captive animals are different terms.
    For example, Cats are domestic animal, even tho you keep it as pet or not. Otherwise, Reticulated python are wild animals. Even you keep them as a pet it still wild animal but wild animal in captivity.
    I'm no biologist, I'm graphic designer but i love about nature things so i had some knowledge about it.
    What i call it about the habit?? Go check again in my previous post.

    Of course predators and prey can live inside the same territory. A territory span is wider than the animal. A tiger doesn't have a 100 km wingspan to grab everything inside. LOL[/B]

    So what i supposed to think about your statement in your other post like this one:
    'A regular male tiger has a territory of about 100 km. A T-Rex would probably double that at least. So it would roam and kill other animals within a range of 200 kilometers.
    And there's plenty of evidence, of animals today acting like the dinosaurs in the game. Surplus killings are found regularly in wolf packs for example, where they kill everything in sight without eating the corpses. This is usually to stay sharp hunting wise or just mark territory.'


    So with your argument above, i taught that no other species will can live inside some species of animals territory cz they will get kill by this A hole as soon as it see them in the first place just like back in the game. So if this wrong then it's my bad.
    Also There no such think like Surplus killings in animals kingdom especially in the wild, but it depend on the terms itself.
    If you think that surplus killings mean wild animals will go 'overkill' their prey out of their needs capacity and without any reason at all (without any reason including stay sharp hunting wise or just mark territory.') just like in the game, you need to think again.
    after all, i just knew little thing about the wolf then you do..So i can't tell much bout it but i still stand with my opinion about 'surplus killings'.

    'So the describtion from IMDB and what the producers write about what's in the movie about the lions are a lie and doesn't prove anything? And yes I've watched it twice. Not recently, but I would never point anything out if I didn't watch it. And how would I even know about it if I didn't? Not like documentaries like that get any marketing exposure. And they even write it's filmed over 16 years, and that's a lie as well apparently.
    "In their quest to dominate their first area, they killed approximately 40 other lions which included lots of cubs, females and adult males.". Again quote from the movie. And of course they didn't take on everything. That's suicide. Some dinosaurs in JWE also runs away if they can't win a fight... And there's no way an animal can kill all food sources by itself. There's no animal that's that fast and can live that long. LOL'


    Again, you just copas the synopsis from this film. Now, You even said have watched this film twice but it seem you still doesn't completely understand why i said that the their largest territory weren't last for long. Even after i have mentioned about conflict between Mr. T and Makhulu.
    For the note, i watched this film only once in late 2017 (around Oct-Nov) but i still remember it from very beginning to the last.
    And why on earth you mention about ' ... And there's no way an animal can kill all food sources by itself.'.
    I already knew that!
    In fact there no animals in group can do that even for the mapogos..but still, it's not explained why you mention it after you said the otherwise in your other post??
    So this will stop our debate bout this film once for all cz it's really wasted my time.

    'Well the lions didn't kill because they had to. That's a straight fact. Everyone can agree on that. If you want to call it something else than fun, be my guest. You overinterpreted everything I wrote.'

    No, Animals like lions only kill if they had to and had always reasonable purpose and not just 'for fun' (like you said all the time) with their act. That's a fact!
    So pls stop make your opinion and labelled as fact! Beside not 'everyone has agreed with your 'fact'!
    im not 'overinterpreted' everything you wrote, I just bring some of your statement from your previous post which are i feel it wrong!
    So no need to debate this furthermore cz other time will get wasted.

    "No one" ever said the dinosaurs were hybrid.'. No, not in this post. That's why I wrote NO ONE. You brought up something completely irrelevant to this discussion. I don't care what people write in other topics?

    Yes, In this thread 'No one' have mentioned it. That's why i replied with 'No one ever said the dinosaurs were hybrid, huh?? cz i seen it a lot from other threads in this forum who said all dinos...'.
    So i hope this make it clear to you also no furthermore debate about it.

    "first, you think that animals, especially predators live in territorial area which no other species animals can live inside it (including their prey) cz it will get wipe out soon just like in the game. " Can you please quote where I wrote this, because I can't find it. I never ONCE said animals doesn't live side by side. I even wrote the exact oppisite with the Hippos and Crocs. It's hard to keep a civilized conversation, when you put words in my mouth all the time, that I never said (wrote. Guess I had to state that too or you wouldn't understand).

    Again, What i supposed to think with your quote like this:
    'A regular male tiger has a territory of about 100 km. A T-Rex would probably double that at least. So it would roam and kill other animals within a range of 200 kilometers.
    And there's plenty of evidence, of animals today acting like the dinosaurs in the game. Surplus killings are found regularly in wolf packs for example, where they kill everything in sight without eating the corpses'


    And that's me who bring Hippos and Crocs relation here as exams to you, not the otherwise. you just responded at it.
    for note, If it's hard to you to keep civilized conversation, just let it out! cz i don't want to make you go berserk like my Sue did.

    'And no I don't compare wild animals to animals in captivity. THAT'S MY WHOLE POINT. The dinosaurs are in CAPTIVITY. Never in the wild. So their heads are messed up, like they say in the JP franschise time and time again.'

    I never seen nor heard in the lore mentioned that all dinos head in JP got their head 'messed up'. Only the hybrid act like that, but for sure not all the dinos act the same way as hybrid does .
    That's why they try to build theme park like JW or JP. They will not doing it after all, if all of their main attractions got their head messed up.
    Even in real life, That's true 'sometimes' (but not all the time) animals in captivity doesn't work properly like it used to be, (Hyper aggressiveness, Paranoids syndrome, lost their wild abilities,etc..)
    but still not close to what we have saw in the lore with the Hybrids.

    So now i have simple question for you,
    'Are you think the AI are broke and need to be fix and improve by Devs, ASAP??
    or you think it's no need cz you already satisfied with what we have so far??'

    Cz so many contradiction between your previous post in here that make me so confused.
    At one point, It seem you happy with we have so far (i talk about the AI oc)
    but another point, you agreed with us that the AI are broke and need to be fix and improve (Oc with improvement on the space of area itself so it will be more realistic as you said in your last post to me).
    Well foxes does actually go in henhouses and kill everything without eating them. And I also posted a link to the leopards killing 51 animals without reason, so yes it happens. And of course it doesn't happen in captivity, because you don't mix predators and prey. But if you did, they would def die over time.

    And yes a T-Rex probably had a territory of over 200 kilometers, but again it can't REACH all animals inside this zone without walking around alot. It takes time. No one can kill anything in a 200 km radius in an instant. But again we're talking about limited space here, where they CAN actually get to the other animals right away. The point you're making about it killing everything in sight, well there's very little inside as no animal can look 200 kilometers. Makes sense doesn't it? You think it can spot everything in a 200 km radius?

    But then please explain why animals do surplus killings? And why cats kill without being hungry and play around with their victim not killing it. You seem to know, but never told me.

    Can you please quote where I said, that animals could kill everything inside their territory? I never did mate. It's impossible to kill everything inside such a big amount of space... A paddock or limited space on the other hand is a different story. Like in the game.

  14. #134
    Originally Posted by MarcWP View Post (Source)
    Well foxes does actually go in henhouses and kill everything without eating them. And I also posted a link to the leopards killing 51 animals without reason, so yes it happens. And of course it doesn't happen in captivity, because you don't mix predators and prey. But if you did, they would def die over time.

    And yes a T-Rex probably had a territory of over 200 kilometers, but again it can't REACH all animals inside this zone without walking around alot. It takes time. No one can kill anything in a 200 km radius in an instant. But again we're talking about limited space here, where they CAN actually get to the other animals right away. The point you're making about it killing everything in sight, well there's very little inside as no animal can look 200 kilometers. Makes sense doesn't it? You think it can spot everything in a 200 km radius?

    But then please explain why animals do surplus killings? And why cats kill without being hungry and play around with their victim not killing it. You seem to know, but never told me.

    Can you please quote where I said, that animals could kill everything inside their territory? I never did mate. It's impossible to kill everything inside such a big amount of space... A paddock or limited space on the other hand is a different story. Like in the game.
    I've explained precisely why they engage in these behaviours. How about you respond to that?

  15. #135
    Originally Posted by MarcWP View Post (Source)
    I agree that it's not common behavior, I'm just saying it happens. And as you said, these are not animals, so how can you have the sligthest idea, of how they would behave? The chances of them doing surplus killings are just as possible as it is they behave like non aggressive animals. This is just subjective opinions.

    And surplus killings happen pretty often in the wild. It's not an uncommon phenomenon. It's well known and has been going on for hundreds of years, and will continue to happen. But it's alright if you don't want to call it "fun". Let's just call it weird uncalled for behavior, if that suits better. Still doesn't change that it happens.

    I'll post some links:

    https://www.ranker.com/list/animals-...on/laura-allan
    http://www.botswana.co.za/Botswana_W...g-for-fun.html
    http://scribol.com/environment/anima...kills-for-fun/

    Just because you don't think it's for "sport" or "fun" doesn't mean it's right. We both have different views on this, but no human will EVER know why they do this. So it's a discussion without a conclusion anyway. And it's also not even relevant to discuss what to call it, when we both know for a fact that it takes place. That's the only thing that matter.

    And to be fair my natural response would NEVER be to eat myself to death. I'm very passionate about what I eat and what portions, counting calories and all that... Because some people are dumb enough to do this (no offence to anybody) doesn't mean this is the norm. This is a persons mindset. Alot of people live healthy and care about what "fuel" they put in their body. It's not nature telling us to do this. It's exactly greed, because it's not necessary at all, so it's not for fundamental needs. If we lived by what we "need" we would eat nothing but meat, vegetables and fruit. But we manufacture all kinds of B S, just because it tastes "good". Def not because we need it.
    Debating you is truly a painful experience.

Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213 LastLast