Animals with too small Group-Size

I would like to make a List of Animals that have unrealistic Group-Sizes. If anyone has a Suggestion which Animals need to be on this List feel free to write about it and I will add it to the List. Hopefully Frontier will change it to be more realistic.

Spotted Hyena: the Group can include up to 130 Animals in the Game it's just 4

Wolf: the Group can include up to 36 Animals. In the Game it's just 2

African Wilddog: the Group can include up to 10 Animals (in Times where they weren't as threatened as today there were Reports of Packs with 40-100 Wilddogs) . In the Game it's just 6

Tapir: more than 2 possible if the Enclosure is big enough (I don't know the maximum Group-Size in Captivity)

Cheetah: females live alone but males can live in Groups that consist of 3 Animals but they can also live in Groups with up to 15 male Cheetahs (not so often as in Groups of 3 but I think in Captivity where they have enough Food, such a big Group could occur more often than in the Wild)

Indian Rhinoceros: females can live in Groups

Tigers: can live with more than 2 adult Animals if the Enclosure is big enough

Green Iguana and lesser antillean Iguana: more than 2 Animals possible (but I think bigger Terrariums would be needed)

African Lion: a Pack can have up to 4 male Lions. Often the male Lions in a Pack are related (maybe Frontier could add something like male Lions only fight other males if they are not related or if there are to many male Lions). A Pack with only one male Lion is rare
 
Last edited:
I would like to make a List of Animals that have unrealistic Group-Sizes. If anyone has a Suggestion which Animals need to be on this List feel free to write about it and I will add it to the List. Hopefully Frontier will change it to be more realistic.

Spotted Hyena: the Group can include up to 130 Animals in the Game it's just 4

Wolf: the Group can include up to 36 Animals. In the Game it's just 2

African Wilddog: the Group can include up to 10 Animals (in Times where they weren't as threatened as today there were Reports of Packs with 40-100 Wilddogs) . In the Game it's just 6
what about crocs or gharials actually dont know about them but i know other croc species you can find lots in one place where they live. in rivers you would see quiet a few of them in one area yes they are territorial and would fight half the time but only being able to have 1 male and 1 female kinda low i would think 1 male 2 at the most maybe 3 to 4 female or more.
 
100% on Hyenas and Wolves and Wild dogs. The number restrictions and fighting behavior is just unrealistic! They are known to form large groups especially when food is plentiful (which it would be in zoos) the reason they form smaller groups is because food is scarce and cannot support the large numbers.

There are lots of animals that in the wild are typically solitary but in zoos are often kept in numbers.
Tapirs are often kept with half a dozen animals in one enclosure.
Cheetahs are social and often have dogs to accompany them when a zoo doesn't have multiple.
Tigers are often kept with many animals in one enclosure (Sigfried and Roy) most zoos don't because they don't have the money/exhibit space for many animals and are trying to show you what it is like in the wild. But they often have more than on display and trade them out during the day.
Indian Rhinos are kept in groups at San Diego wildlife park, with a single male but that's just for breeding purposes to know who the dad is.

I'm sure there are more examples and I understand the restrictions. But a loosening of the reins wouldn't hurt anything.
 
I would like Sources to the Crocodiles because I can't find something about the possible Group-Sizes of Saltwater Crocodiles and I want the List as accurate as possible.
 
I'm not sure about brown bears but black bears for sure are often kept with quite a few individuals in one habitat, especially in bear conservation parks. Even though they're not in the game, I've seen polar bears even kept with 3 in one habitat (one male, two females).

Lions bother me the most I think. You should be able to have a max of 3 males, not just 1. I wouldn't even be offended if they had to be related to do that.

Either way I agree, I really wish there wouldn't be such tight restrictions on animals. That, or it should at least adapt based on habitat size (if you have exactly double or more the size of the minimum requirements for example you should be able to then double the max group size, etc.)
 
Flamingos as well, currently they only allow one male, which is bizzarre because flamingos live in huge groups and breed in pairs.

I hope Frontier addresses this ASAP. Pretty unacceptable just how many animals have things wrong, when the game is supposed to be realistic
According to the Zoopedia there can be up to 500 male Flamingos and I think my Flamingos also hadn't Problems in the Enclosure with more than one male
 
You can have the whole map as an exhibit,if you place for example 6 animals instead 5 animals,then they will all start fighting,injuring and killing each other,because the (inaccurate) group size is not right.Frontier seriously needs to rework this system.I really appreciate the effort Frontier put into the game,but there are A LOT of inaccuracies or just simply wrong behavior,appearences etc. regarding the animals.
 
Pretty much all the animals I have right now have the problem where regardless of group size, they all accept only one male in the group. Otherwise they all start constantly fighting for alpha status and never stop. This happens even with animals like antelopes, which live in herds of hundreds and really don't mind mixing of genders. In fact they prefer it. But in the game they will only tolerate one male in the herd.
 
I also really dislike the mechanic of them fighting and injuring each other over having more than one male. Males will fight for dominance during breeding season of course but they don't aim to kill one another. Typically the loser knows when they've been beat and will back down before major injuries can occur.

They really should only be causing injuries when they have low moods, have no space, etc. Otherwise occasional fights for dominance aren't a bad thing and shouldn't be treated in-game like "OH MY GOD YOUR ANIMALS ARE GOING TO KILL ONE ANOTHER"
 
I also really dislike the mechanic of them fighting and injuring each other over having more than one male. Males will fight for dominance during breeding season of course but they don't aim to kill one another. Typically the loser knows when they've been beat and will back down before major injuries can occur.

They really should only be causing injuries when they have low moods, have no space, etc. Otherwise occasional fights for dominance aren't a bad thing and shouldn't be treated in-game like "OH MY GOD YOUR ANIMALS ARE GOING TO KILL ONE ANOTHER"
Exactly. If I saw two animals fighting randomly without the game screaming at me and one of them being carried off by the vets every 5 minutes I would have just thought oh cool, look they're fighting. It would have been just another cool behaviour simmed in the game. But noooo. God forbid your wolf pup grows up or you have two male Bisons. then you have a free for all to the death on your hands.
 
Serious fights are actually quite rare in the animal kingdom.Nature is all about showing off and intimidation and animals will avoid fights,because fights cost ressources,they cost a lot of energy.They "fight" each other through scents,fake charging,fake fights,urine markings,different sounds etc. and that is enough for another male to back up for example.If it comes to a physical fight,then the goal is not to kill your rival,but just showing him that you are stronger.Fights rarely end with serious injuries or deaths and one fight is enough to determinate the stronger one - they won't fight a hundred times.It can happen,that the loser initiates a revanche after some time,but after the second fight they won't fight anymore for quite a long period.
 
I'm not sure about brown bears but black bears for sure are often kept with quite a few individuals in one habitat, especially in bear conservation parks. Even though they're not in the game, I've seen polar bears even kept with 3 in one habitat (one male, two females).
But the Formosan Black bear seems to live alone
 
Yeaah, all of this. Frontier NEEDS to acknowledge this and actually work on communicating with us and fixing issues. Otherwise, this is going to start to look like blatant false advertising and lying, seeing as there are a ton of things already we were promised and didn't get, add onto that the issues with animal behavior despite the ""realism"" being advertised...
 
I agree about the communication. I feel a lot of the frustration on this forum comes from the lack of communication... And I know they don't owe us anything but at the end of the day, players really prefer transparency from developers.
 
I agree about the communication. I feel a lot of the frustration on this forum comes from the lack of communication... And I know they don't owe us anything but at the end of the day, players really prefer transparency from developers.
Actually, they DO owe us this. We paid for their game. We are customers, and as it stands right now, we have been lied to about this game and its features. They DO owe their customers something- they owe us truthful advertising without blatant lying, and at the very least some transparency when it comes to severe issues with the game that makes it look like they straight up lied in the game's description.

As developers, they owe their customers a good quality game with the features they advertised.
 
What I meant is they don't owe us a response to every thread on the forum. People want and expect it, but there's no requirement for them to directly acknowledge they've gotten our feedback. Does it look more trust worthy? Of course. Do I want more communication? Yes. But I recognize also they're not obligated to respond to anything until they're ready to.
 
Top Bottom