Buff the big carnivore's appeal

[Jurassic_DX]

@Jurassic_DX If you say Mosasaurus should be 5 stars, I will update my research records. With Mosasaurus being 5 stars, it should be the most expensive compared to the other species of marine reptiles and it should cost higher than T-Rex and Spinosaurus. The Dunkleosteus should have the same incubation costs as Nothosaurus, Shonisaurus, and Styxosaurus due to them being 2 stars.

In Jurassic Park: Operation Genesis, I start off with Dryosaurus being a 1-star species and the park can only reach 2 stars. Boosting the park's dinosaur variety will increase the park's star rating. When either 4 or 5 star species are added, the park will reach 5 stars. Due to being how popular large carnivores are, they are the most expensive to incubate. Even with Velociraptor, Triceratops, and Brachiosaurus being 5 stars; their incubation costs are lower than T-Rex and Spinosaurus. Also, the cost of incubating Velociraptor is lower than Triceratops and Brachiosaurus.

Honestly, I find Quetzalcoatlus should be cheaper than Pteranodon. Its incubation cost should be similar to Dimorphodon, Cearadactylus, and Geosternbergia due to it being a 3-star species. Jelopterus should be the cheapest as it is a 1-star species. Even if Pteranodon being a 5-star species, its incubation cost should be higher than Velociraptor but lower than T-Rex, Spinosaurus, and Mosasaurus.

I definitely think it probably would be all considering, but I also think all the species need a tuning pass on their star ratings in order to justify some of these changes, hard to do them in isolation. For instance, moving mosa to 5 stars may require making sure the other marine species remain balanced and say 2 star isn't overrepresented, I do this when it comes to the Security Ratings in my fencing thread. It's really helpful to reference and let's me visualize each creatures place in comparison to each other.

Hadn't thought about incubation times too much, but that probably is a factor as well. I could surmise the small stature of the Velociraptor is why it is quicker to incubate, but this isn't exactly consistent.

I think that a 3-star Quetz is wildly out of line with its model size, anyone that sees that would be more interested than a pteranodon. I think you should adjust other pterosaur star ratings down with Jeholpterus as your floor and Quetz as the ceiling then fill in the blanks between those ranges. I find myself thinking about my Security Ratings increasingly as it tends to correlate with what the star-ratings may be. Might make it simpler to understand all these different stats too if they can be used as a short-hand for you to know at a glance roughly what you are getting.

 

[VSSEMike]

I definitely think it probably would be all considering, but I also think all the species need a tuning pass on their star ratings in order to justify some of these changes, hard to do them in isolation. For instance, moving mosa to 5 stars may require making sure the other marine species remain balanced and say 2 star isn't overrepresented, I do this when it comes to the Security Ratings in my fencing thread. It's really helpful to reference and let's me visualize each creatures place in comparison to each other.

Hadn't thought about incubation times too much, but that probably is a factor as well. I could surmise the small stature of the Velociraptor is why it is quicker to incubate, but this isn't exactly consistent.

I think that a 3-star Quetz is wildly out of line with its model size, anyone that sees that would be more interested than a pteranodon. I think you should adjust other pterosaur star ratings down with Jeholpterus as your floor and Quetz as the ceiling then fill in the blanks between those ranges. I find myself thinking about my Security Ratings increasingly as it tends to correlate with what the star-ratings may be. Might make it simpler to understand all these different stats too if they can be used as a short-hand for you to know at a glance roughly what you are getting.

Regarding security requirements; this list might have some understatements:

Low

• All tiny scavengers
• Lystrosaurus
• All ornithomimids
• All hadrosaurs
• Jelopterus
• Tapejara
• Dryosaurus
• Homalocephale
• Oviraptor
• Ouranosaurus
• All nodosaurs
• All sauropods
• Archelon
• All ichthyosaurs

Medium

• Dimetrodon
• All medium-sized carnivores
• Nothosaurus
• Suchomimus
• Baryonyx
• Dimorphodon
• Cearadactylus
• Maaradactylus
• Tropeonagthus
• Barbaridactylus
• Dunkleosteus
• All early small carnivores
• All combat-capable pachycephalosaurs
• Iguanodon
• All stegosaurs
• All ankylosaurs
• Deinocheirus
• All ceratopsians

High

• Australovenator
• All dromaeosaurs
• All large carnivores
• Therizinosaurus
• Spinosaurus
• Pteranodon
• Geosternbergia
• Quetzalcoatlus
• All plesiosaurs
• All pliosaurs
• All mosasaurs

Once I get the Cretaceous Predator Pack DLC, I will update the list.

 

[Jurassic_DX]

Regarding security requirements; this list might have some understatements:

Low

• All tiny scavengers
• Lystrosaurus
• All ornithomimids
• All hadrosaurs
• Jelopterus
• Tapejara
• Dryosaurus
• Homalocephale
• Oviraptor
• Ouranosaurus
• All nodosaurs
• All sauropods
• Archelon
• All ichthyosaurs

Medium

• Dimetrodon
• All medium-sized carnivores
• Nothosaurus
• Suchomimus
• Baryonyx
• Dimorphodon
• Cearadactylus
• Maaradactylus
• Tropeonagthus
• Barbaridactylus
• Dunkleosteus
• All early small carnivores
• All combat-capable pachycephalosaurs
• Iguanodon
• All stegosaurs
• All ankylosaurs
• Deinocheirus
• All ceratopsians

High

• Australovenator
• All dromaeosaurs
• All large carnivores
• Therizinosaurus
• Spinosaurus
• Pteranodon
• Geosternbergia
• Quetzalcoatlus
• All plesiosaurs
• All pliosaurs
• All mosasaurs

Once I get the Cretaceous Predator Pack DLC, I will update the list.

Here my Security Ratings can be found for all terrestrial species:

Iterative Fencing Design Improvements

 

[VSSEMike]

Here my Security Ratings can be found for all terrestrial species:

Iterative Fencing Design Improvements

Regarding security requirements, it is hard to say which is accurate.

The list I made preliminarily is based on Jurassic Park: Operation Genesis. Low-security fence is the most basic whereas the other two are to be researched. Medium-security fencing is recommended for carnivores (especially the ones that require prey), but dangerous dinosaurs (including Velociraptor, Tyrannosaurus Rex, and Spinosaurus) have to be kept behind high-security fencing.

 

[Jurassic_DX]

Regarding security requirements, it is hard to say which is accurate.

The list I made preliminarily is based on Jurassic Park: Operation Genesis. Low-security fence is the most basic whereas the other two are to be researched. Medium-security fencing is recommended for carnivores (especially the ones that require prey), but dangerous dinosaurs (including Velociraptor, Tyrannosaurus Rex, and Spinosaurus) have to be kept behind high-security fencing.

The fencing from JPOG are pretty simplistic and seem to be more based on size. Now, with my list, admittedly it is a bit of a mixed bag. I didn't want to make all the small carnivores be contained within the light fencing, I had to consider some sort of balance in gameplay and a few surprises. For instance, the Dilophosaurus having a Security Rating 2 is deceptive if paired with my thread on it where it can spit venom through gaps in fencing making it a decisively higher security risk animal. I used Frontier's Security Rating system as a basis and then just rebalanced many of the species, so they come off as more logical even if there are a few outliers here like Velociraptors being Security Rating 5 which is just kind of a given on account of the JP lore.

By having 6 separate security levels and corresponding fences for most of these, it actually gives us more ease to balance and move around species accounting for size, strength, etc. It also gives the herbivores more of a chance to shine and let's you think about carnivores you can have fairly early on and have a progression curve as you build and improve your park. I like to take things like that into consideration and hope by not messing with things too much Frontier would look into the feedback and consider some of the changes.

 

[VSSEMike]

The fencing from JPOG are pretty simplistic and seem to be more based on size. Now, with my list, admittedly it is a bit of a mixed bag. I didn't want to make all the small carnivores be contained within the light fencing, I had to consider some sort of balance in gameplay and a few surprises. For instance, the Dilophosaurus having a Security Rating 2 is deceptive if paired with my thread on it where it can spit venom through gaps in fencing making it a decisively higher security risk animal. I used Frontier's Security Rating system as a basis and then just rebalanced many of the species, so they come off as more logical even if there are a few outliers here like Velociraptors being Security Rating 5 which is just kind of a given on account of the JP lore.

By having 6 separate security levels and corresponding fences for most of these, it actually gives us more ease to balance and move around species accounting for size, strength, etc. It also gives the herbivores more of a chance to shine and let's you think about carnivores you can have fairly early on and have a progression curve as you build and improve your park. I like to take things like that into consideration and hope by not messing with things too much Frontier would look into the feedback and consider some of the changes.

In Jurassic World: Evolution 2, having more security rating seemed more complex compared to Jurassic Park: Operation Genesis. My list is not limited to dinosaurs, but it also extends to pterosaurs and marine reptiles.

It does not matter which game, the same principle still stands: carnivores (including Proceratosaurus and Monolophosaurus) are to be housed behind medium-security fencing whereas dangerous dinosaurs (especially Giganotosaurus) are to be kept behind high-security fencing. However in Jurassic World: Evolution 2, I have to use the fencing matching their security rating. When it comes to dinosaurs with security rating being 6, there is no fencing for those.

 

[Jurassic_DX]

In Jurassic World: Evolution 2, having more security rating seemed more complex compared to Jurassic Park: Operation Genesis. My list is not limited to dinosaurs, but it also extends to pterosaurs and marine reptiles.

It does not matter which game, the same principle still stands: carnivores (including Proceratosaurus and Monolophosaurus) are to be housed behind medium-security fencing whereas dangerous dinosaurs (especially Giganotosaurus) are to be kept behind high-security fencing. However in Jurassic World: Evolution 2, I have to use the fencing matching their security rating. When it comes to dinosaurs with security rating being 6, there is no fencing for those.

It's not complex in the slightest, you just have a corresponding # rating fence that matches or exceeds the # for the animal(s) being housed and they won't be able to break out without assistance from a sabotage or storm. Same Security Ratings apply to pterosaurs/marine reptiles already, I just don't have them on the same page as the terrestrial species list. Biggest problem is honestly that there aren't enough pterosaurs/marine reptiles to create a healthy balance of different ratings and likes/dislikes for the animals especially the lagoons. For all intents and purposes the game already does this through the use of different naming conventions even more so in the first JWE.

All this would do is homogenize fencing into 3 categories so its quicker to pick one, but dilute the requirements for each animal to be housed. I'll have to agree to disagree with you on this one. Invisible Fencing is Security Rating 6, I disagree with Frontier making virtually all the large carnivores Security Rating 6 though just feels like a quick and dirty way to ensure breakouts and I dislike it.

 

[VSSEMike]

It's not complex in the slightest, you just have a corresponding # rating fence that matches or exceeds the # for the animal(s) being housed and they won't be able to break out without assistance from a sabotage or storm. Same Security Ratings apply to pterosaurs/marine reptiles already, I just don't have them on the same page as the terrestrial species list. Biggest problem is honestly that there aren't enough pterosaurs/marine reptiles to create a healthy balance of different ratings and likes/dislikes for the animals especially the lagoons. For all intents and purposes the game already does this through the use of different naming conventions even more so in the first JWE.

All this would do is homogenize fencing into 3 categories so its quicker to pick one, but dilute the requirements for each animal to be housed. I'll have to agree to disagree with you on this one. Invisible Fencing is Security Rating 6, I disagree with Frontier making virtually all the large carnivores Security Rating 6 though just feels like a quick and dirty way to ensure breakouts and I dislike it.

@Jurassic_DX You hit a bull's eye on the Invisible Fencing being 6. However, the Invisible Fencing is not available to use in a park. BioSyn had no intention of making a park, but sought to be leader in paleo research.

 

[Jurassic_DX]

@Jurassic_DX You hit a bull's eye on the Invisible Fencing being 6. However, the Invisible Fencing is not available to use in a park. BioSyn had no intention of making a park, but sought to be leader in paleo research.

What are you talking about? Did this shift into a discussion on canonical lore or something? If we are going by that logic, there shouldn't even be a Biosyn building set to begin with as the intention wasn't to build a park, but a preserve to experiment with for their profit making schemes. Insofar as JWE2 is concerned, so long as you own the Biosyn expansion you have access to the Invisible Fencing that or your use mods (PC only).

 

[VSSEMike]

What are you talking about? Did this shift into a discussion on canonical lore or something? If we are going by that logic, there shouldn't even be a Biosyn building set to begin with as the intention wasn't to build a park, but a preserve to experiment with for their profit making schemes. Insofar as JWE2 is concerned, so long as you own the Biosyn expansion you have access to the Invisible Fencing that or your use mods (PC only).

The drawback on invisible fencing is that they do not keep pterosaurs in one spot. There was this time when Quetzalcoatlus hunted down Pteranodon when they were released outside of the DFW aviary.

In Sandbox gameplay, there are both BioSyn building set with DFW structures.

 

[Jurassic_DX]

The drawback on invisible fencing is that they do not keep pterosaurs in one spot. There was this time when Quetzalcoatlus hunted down Pteranodon when they were released outside of the DFW aviary.

In Sandbox gameplay, there are both BioSyn building set with DFW structures.

Lagoons and Aviaries as they stand are kind of their own thing, so I didn't acknowledge those. Trying to make some sort of barrier to contain something that is aerial is going to be a tough challenge in how you implement that, for marine reptiles its simple. Just add sea walls and aquatic fencing for natural lagoons and let marine reptiles escape and de-spawn if the lagoon is attached to a large body of water like a sea/ocean.

Frontier just tossed the 2 building sets together to try and plug the holes, but it isn't exactly a perfect fit. A lot of these building sets fuse different functions into a single building or have unique mechanics that aren't applicable elsewhere. JP & JW are what I'd consider the core building sets with the Malta/Biosyn/DFW closer to supplemental ones.