Buff the big carnivore's appeal

[Slowpokeking]

Right now most of them only got like 900-1200. While both the big marine reptiles and Quetzalcoatlus are higher than that, but most of them don't cost more than the big carnivores. Also marine won't come out to cause trouble.

Most of the big carnivores can't be put together either, they also need big space. Thus making them not efficient choice.

The Hybrids are too tough to made and most of the challenge maps don't have them.

 

[VSSEMike]

Here are the popularity rating of the large carnivores:

3 stars: These dinosaurs are real classics

- Megalosaurus
- Tarbosaurus

4 stars: If I have to name my favorite

• Acrocanthosaurus
• Allosaurus
• Carcharodontosaurus
• Carnotaurus
• Giganotosaurus

5 stars: They're more like movie stars than dinosaurs

- Tyrannosaurus Rex

 

[Slowpokeking]

The new DLC added some good ones for 2-4 stars, but we need some huge dino for 5 star push.

 

[VSSEMike]

The new DLC added some good ones for 2-4 stars, but we need some huge dino for 5 star push.

The only large carnivore added recently is Tarbosaurus, I thought the new Concavenator is a medium-sized carnivore.

Most of the big carnivores can't be put together either, they also need big space. Thus making them not efficient choice.

It is best to have Acrocanthosaurus and Carcharodontosaurus to like each other to the point that there will be no bloodshed between them like in the following cases:

• Suchomimus and Baryonyx
• Majungasaurus and Carnotaurus
• Ceratosaurus and Allosaurus

 

[Skawt]

Realistically, the Tyrannosaurus Rex would easily be the highest appeal creature you could put in your park by a huge margin.

Dinosaur fans might deviate from that, but general public? Claire is right - "even if people don't know the difference between Carnivore and Herbivore, they know ALL about the T-Rex" (or whatever she says to that effect).

 

[James4125]

Realistically, the Tyrannosaurus Rex would easily be the highest appeal creature you could put in your park by a huge margin.

Dinosaur fans might deviate from that, but general public? Claire is right - "even if people don't know the difference between Carnivore and Herbivore, they know ALL about the T-Rex" (or whatever she says to that effect).

I've thought since the first game that appeal for the most famous Dinosaurs should be much higher. T Rex, Triceratops, Stegosaurus, Brachiosaurus. These 4 are known to pretty much every person on the planet and their appeal should reflect that.

 

[VSSEMike]

I've thought since the first game that appeal for the most famous Dinosaurs should be much higher. T Rex, Triceratops, Stegosaurus, Brachiosaurus. These 4 are known to pretty much every person on the planet and their appeal should reflect that.

Honestly, I prefer Jurassic Park: Operation Genesis' popularity rating over Jurassic World: Evolution 1 & 2's appeal system.

5 stars - They're more like movie stars than dinosaurs

• Apatosaurus
• Brachiosaurus
• Pteranodon
• Spinosaurus
• Stegosaurus
• Triceratops
• Tyrannosaurus Rex
• Velociraptor

 

[Jurassic_DX]

The large carnivores are honestly the bottom of the list for me that need appeal tweaks. The bigger problem is that many small/medium carnivores have appeal that is way too high for them which disproportionately makes the herbivores look even worse. Understandably, the herbivores largely have lower appeals since they tend to get along in large herds with no trouble, so to offset this the animals would need to be more difficult and fussy to enclose and have higher incubation costs like the large sauropods or Theri hating everything helps to balance it.

 

[VSSEMike]

The large carnivores are honestly the bottom of the list for me that need appeal tweaks. The bigger problem is that many small/medium carnivores have appeal that is way too high for them which disproportionately makes the herbivores look even worse. Understandably, the herbivores largely have lower appeals since they tend to get along in large herds with no trouble, so to offset this the animals would need to be more difficult and fussy to enclose and have higher incubation costs like the large sauropods or Theri hating everything helps to balance it.

With the exception of Velociraptor being 5 stars, the popularity rating of small carnivores range from 1 to 3 stars. Medium-sized carnivores range from 2 to 3 stars. Small herbivores range from 1 to 3 stars whereas large herbivores range from 2 to 5 stars.

I think Frontier have overdone it with the appeal system regarding marine reptiles in which their popularity range from 2 to 4 stars.

With the exception of Pteranodon being 5 stars, pterosaurs range from 1 to 3 stars.

 

[Jurassic_DX]

With the exception of Velociraptor being 5 stars, the popularity rating of small carnivores range from 1 to 3 stars. Medium-sized carnivores range from 2 to 3 stars. Small herbivores range from 1 to 3 stars whereas large herbivores range from 2 to 5 stars.

I think Frontier have overdone it with the appeal system regarding marine reptiles in which their popularity range from 2 to 4 stars.

With the exception of Pteranodon being 5 stars, pterosaurs range from 1 to 3 stars.

In other words you are worried about star rating not their actual "appeal" then. The balance of each animal's appeal and security ratings is pretty much all over the place and it isn't very logical frankly. I think we can agree that the marine/flying reptiles have horribly skewed ratings to offset their limited species rosters, but it does indeed remain an issue. For clarity I was talking about an animal's appeal hence why herbivores struggle to have high appeal.

 

[VSSEMike]

In other words you are worried about star rating not their actual "appeal" then. The balance of each animal's appeal and security ratings is pretty much all over the place and it isn't very logical frankly. I think we can agree that the marine/flying reptiles have horribly skewed ratings to offset their limited species rosters, but it does indeed remain an issue. For clarity I was talking about an animal's appeal hence why herbivores struggle to have high appeal.

Since Jurassic Park: Operation Genesis, I adhere to the star rating. Honestly, the "appeal" system of Jurassic World: Evolution 1 & 2 does not sit right with me.

 

[Slowpokeking]

The large carnivores are honestly the bottom of the list for me that need appeal tweaks. The bigger problem is that many small/medium carnivores have appeal that is way too high for them which disproportionately makes the herbivores look even worse. Understandably, the herbivores largely have lower appeals since they tend to get along in large herds with no trouble, so to offset this the animals would need to be more difficult and fussy to enclose and have higher incubation costs like the large sauropods or Theri hating everything helps to balance it.

Because they can't be put together with most of the dinos, took big ground and got low appeal compare to the other big ones.

 

[Jurassic_DX]

Since Jurassic Park: Operation Genesis, I adhere to the star rating. Honestly, the "appeal" system of Jurassic World: Evolution 1 & 2 does not sit right with me.

Appeal and Star Rating essentially amount to the same thing, I'd say its weirder than the Evolution titles have both. In some way the appeal is probably a baseline and the Star Rating is based on Infamy and other characteristics. Frankly, if the Guest Types meant anything as well it might be easier to build a Star Rating or the inverse build appeal but have a base Star Rating.

Because they can't be put together with most of the dinos, took big ground and got low appeal compare to the other big ones.

I assume you are talking about the medium carnivores, but you didn't specify. Jacking up their appeal to screw the balance with the herbivores isn't the solution. Reduce the habitat needs of medium carnivores instead and it balances itself out.

 

[VSSEMike]

Appeal and Star Rating essentially amount to the same thing, I'd say its weirder than the Evolution titles have both. In some way the appeal is probably a baseline and the Star Rating is based on Infamy and other characteristics. Frankly, if the Guest Types meant anything as well it might be easier to build a Star Rating or the inverse build appeal but have a base Star Rating.

The flaw about the "appeal system" is that it is based on size: marine reptiles and larger carnivores have high appeal whereas sauropods' are a tad lower.

The way I see the Star Rating, it is based on the species' frequency in appearing in popular culture.

 

[Slowpokeking]

Appeal and Star Rating essentially amount to the same thing, I'd say its weirder than the Evolution titles have both. In some way the appeal is probably a baseline and the Star Rating is based on Infamy and other characteristics. Frankly, if the Guest Types meant anything as well it might be easier to build a Star Rating or the inverse build appeal but have a base Star Rating.



I assume you are talking about the medium carnivores, but you didn't specify. Jacking up their appeal to screw the balance with the herbivores isn't the solution. Reduce the habitat needs of medium carnivores instead and it balances itself out.

No, the big ones.

 

[Jurassic_DX]

The flaw about the "appeal system" is that it is based on size: marine reptiles and larger carnivores have high appeal whereas sauropods' are a tad lower.

The way I see the Star Rating, it is based on the species' frequency in appearing in popular culture.

In general, whether its appeal or star rating you are reliant on the opinion of the developer(s) that are programming it. If two people on the team disagree on the degree of appeal or a star rating for an animal it will be a mess. Might not be hard with some big names ones like Stego, Brachi, Trike, and Rex being 5 star rated animals, but what about as we explore less commonly featured species in media? Outside of the few big names I just listed, how many species do the general public know? Maybe if we played up the Guest Types so certain preferences existed for different species, but even then it seems a bit limiting. Moreover, what sets 5 star rated animals apart from one another?

Size for sauropods, pterosaurs (Quetz), marine reptiles (Mosa), and large/abnormal therapods seems to be a norm, but I wouldn't say exclusively. You still have to deal with the issue that a herd of stegos, for instance, would be perfectly happy in each other's company. If they all share a rating with Brachi of Rex which are much more expensive and picky enclosure wise, then massing Stegos is the clear solution and better than bothering with Brachi/Rex. Thus, in retrospect, I take back the appeal/star rating overlap a bit. Appeal can quantify that 5 star animal so you can compare/contrast it with another. Stegos would then have less appeal than a Rex to balance them out. Combat and Hunting are also easier for carnivores to scale their appeal up as opposed to herbivores which helps in their case.

No, the big ones.

Large carnivores have the largest appeal outside of maybe Quetz/Mosa already, they are the top of the food chain in terms of appeal already. The most common complaints are always that the carnivores are just too good compared to the herbivores. Why do you think large carnivores don't have enough appeal? Large sauropods are way more demanding in terms of space and the more Brachis, for instance, the environmental needs will outpace adding more large carnivores together. Therizinosaurus has high appeal for a herbivore, but it also hates living with practically everything and its expensive too. Mosa is probably the worst in the game in terms of space requirements and the massive costs associated with even having one, so it makes sense it has massive appeal compared to most other species.

 

[Slowpokeking]

Large carnivores have the largest appeal outside of maybe Quetz/Mosa already, they are the top of the food chain in terms of appeal already. The most common complaints are always that the carnivores are just too good compared to the herbivores. Why do you think large carnivores don't have enough appeal? Large sauropods are way more demanding in terms of space and the more Brachis, for instance, the environmental needs will outpace adding more large carnivores together. Therizinosaurus has high appeal for a herbivore, but it also hates living with practically everything and its expensive too. Mosa is probably the worst in the game in terms of space requirements and the massive costs associated with even having one, so it makes sense it has massive appeal compared to most other species.

Tylosaurus/Kronosaurus is higher as well.

T-Rex should have tier 0 attraction since he's super famous.

 

[VSSEMike]

Size for sauropods, pterosaurs (Quetz), marine reptiles (Mosa), and large/abnormal therapods seems to be a norm, but I wouldn't say exclusively. You still have to deal with the issue that a herd of stegos, for instance, would be perfectly happy in each other's company. If they all share a rating with Brachi of Rex which are much more expensive and picky enclosure wise, then massing Stegos is the clear solution and better than bothering with Brachi/Rex. Thus, in retrospect, I take back the appeal/star rating overlap a bit. Appeal can quantify that 5 star animal so you can compare/contrast it with another. Stegos would then have less appeal than a Rex to balance them out. Combat and Hunting are also easier for carnivores to scale their appeal up as opposed to herbivores which helps in their case.

Despite how large Quetzalcoatlus is, its popularity rating is 3 stars. Before the film Jurassic World: Dominion and this game; Quetzalcoatlus received attention in elementary school computer game Magic School Bus: Explores in the Age of Dinosaurs, the 3rd and 7th film instalments of Land Before Time franchise, along with ARK: Survival Evolved and its remake.

Mosasaurus looked to be 4 stars. Prior to the Jurassic World film trilogy and this game; Mosasaurus received attention in another elementary school computer game Dinosaur Adventure 3-D, Capcom's Dino Crisis 2, along with ARK: Survival Evolved and its remake.

So far, none of the marine reptiles have 5 star rating.

Letting carnivores hunt herbivorous dinosaurs will not come cheap. In Jurassic Park: Operation Genesis, if a Carcharodontosaurus hunted an Ouranosaurus, its rating would not go from 4 to 5 stars. When doing the Jurassic difficulty challenge mode of Jurassic World: Evolution 1; it is troublesome to have carnivores to kill other dinosaurs especially when dealing with aging.

Stegosaurus and Brachiosaurus having a lower appeal than the T-Rex does not sit right with me.

Therizinosaurus has high appeal for a herbivore

Therizinosaurus' popularity rating is 3 stars. Before the film Jurassic World: Dominion and this game; Therizinosaurus received attention in Capcom's Dino Crisis 1, a kiddy anime series Dinosaur King, along with ARK: Survival Evolved and its remake.

 

[Jurassic_DX]

Tylosaurus/Kronosaurus is higher as well.

T-Rex should have tier 0 attraction since he's super famous.

Sure, just giving an example and given the limited utility of marine reptiles, not a surprise they overcompensate given the stupid amount of space required. The marine species pack was a very important addition, but we still need some more species.

The only problem there would be then the Rex is clearly the best option to go for at all times puts all the other large carnivores at a huge disadvantage. The idea was probably to balance them out, so they are roughly in the same ballpark as one another even if the Rex has slightly elevated appeal. Most likely a purposeful decision and one I tend to agree with actually.

Despite how large Quetzalcoatlus is, its popularity rating is 3 stars. Before the film Jurassic World: Dominion and this game; Quetzalcoatlus received attention in elementary school computer game Magic School Bus: Explores in the Age of Dinosaurs, the 3rd and 7th film instalments of Land Before Time franchise, along with ARK: Survival Evolved and its remake.

Mosasaurus looked to be 4 stars. Prior to the Jurassic World film trilogy and this game; Mosasaurus received attention in another elementary school computer game Dinosaur Adventure 3-D, Capcom's Dino Crisis 2, along with ARK: Survival Evolved and its remake.

So far, none of the marine reptiles have 5 star rating.

Letting carnivores hunt herbivorous dinosaurs will not come cheap. In Jurassic Park: Operation Genesis, if a Carcharodontosaurus hunted an Ouranosaurus, its rating would not go from 4 to 5 stars. When doing the Jurassic difficulty challenge mode of Jurassic World: Evolution 1; it is troublesome to have carnivores to kill other dinosaurs especially when dealing with aging.

Stegosaurus and Brachiosaurus having a lower appeal than the T-Rex does not sit right with me.



Therizinosaurus' popularity rating is 3 stars. Before the film Jurassic World: Dominion and this game; Therizinosaurus received attention in Capcom's Dino Crisis 1, a kiddy anime series Dinosaur King, along with ARK: Survival Evolved and its remake.

Which makes little sense since Quetz's appeal is ridiculous for its price, space, and massing potential. I would have probably balanced it more in the direction of Mosa, but the aviaries are lacking in species, so I would expect a new flying reptile pack in the future similar to how the marine reptiles got one. I'd be very surprised if most kids even knew or cared about Quetz, for one, they'd still probably call it a dinosaur and conflate it with pteranodon without comprehending its size. Lots of media utilizing dinosaurs is still prehistoric itself and doesn't often accurately portray strides in paleontology, so it probably didn't look or behave like a Quetz well. Moreover, you have a couple of media pieces that aren't so universally prevalent as the handful of well known dinosaurs, that still isn't much exposure. The Land Before Time has an extremely ancient depiction of dinosaurs, ARK isn't exactly striving for accuracy either, and has the Magic School Bus been popular since the early 2000's? Doesn't do much to represent the animal and bring into the public consciousness.

I'll just refer back to how Frontier doesn't often balance numbers well and many are illogical and we don't know the reasoning behind them. Mosa should be 5 stars and probably Tylosaurus too.

Depends, with automated hatcheries feeding struthis, its actually not that costly once you got things up and running. However, I was also thinking of more dinosaur combat where you purposefully create arenas for that purpose. It would be a trade off, to attract Adventure Guests you eat the cost of the herbivore losses. Doesn't take a ton to build infamy, so its not a constant flow of carnage either, but this does boost the carnivore's appeal something the herbivore have a harder time doing by the mere fact their combat stats are garbage compared to the carnivores as infuriating as it is.

What do you even propose to address the Appeal & Star Rating issue? I see you lean towards tossing out Appeal, but then what. Just make them 5 stars and then what? What makes them different from one another and how do you address the problem that the cost, territory requirements, and small social tolerance of the Rex far outstrip a Stego? For the price to bump up the genetic modifications and to accommodate the Rex you would be better of just making a ton of Stegos. If you spike the price of the Stego, then you are chronically screwing yourself due to its social requirements and you are displacing carnivores all the same.

Brachi I will agree with, however, as it has limitations much like the Rex being costly, small batch size/social tolerance, and massive environmental needs, and equally iconic.

Also, just rattling off a bunch of random pieces of media the animals crop up in does not mean they are popular and well understood. Just re-emphasizing my above point, the fact they showed up doesn't mean we got that public awareness surrounding the animal like the instant recognition and appeal of a Triceratops, for instance.

 

[VSSEMike]

Sure, just giving an example and given the limited utility of marine reptiles, not a surprise they overcompensate given the stupid amount of space required. The marine species pack was a very important addition, but we still need some more species.

The only problem there would be then the Rex is clearly the best option to go for at all times puts all the other large carnivores at a huge disadvantage. The idea was probably to balance them out, so they are roughly in the same ballpark as one another even if the Rex has slightly elevated appeal. Most likely a purposeful decision and one I tend to agree with actually.



Which makes little sense since Quetz's appeal is ridiculous for its price, space, and massing potential. I would have probably balanced it more in the direction of Mosa, but the aviaries are lacking in species, so I would expect a new flying reptile pack in the future similar to how the marine reptiles got one. I'd be very surprised if most kids even knew or cared about Quetz, for one, they'd still probably call it a dinosaur and conflate it with pteranodon without comprehending its size. Lots of media utilizing dinosaurs is still prehistoric itself and doesn't often accurately portray strides in paleontology, so it probably didn't look or behave like a Quetz well. Moreover, you have a couple of media pieces that aren't so universally prevalent as the handful of well known dinosaurs, that still isn't much exposure. The Land Before Time has an extremely ancient depiction of dinosaurs, ARK isn't exactly striving for accuracy either, and has the Magic School Bus been popular since the early 2000's? Doesn't do much to represent the animal and bring into the public consciousness.

I'll just refer back to how Frontier doesn't often balance numbers well and many are illogical and we don't know the reasoning behind them. Mosa should be 5 stars and probably Tylosaurus too.

Depends, with automated hatcheries feeding struthis, its actually not that costly once you got things up and running. However, I was also thinking of more dinosaur combat where you purposefully create arenas for that purpose. It would be a trade off, to attract Adventure Guests you eat the cost of the herbivore losses. Doesn't take a ton to build infamy, so its not a constant flow of carnage either, but this does boost the carnivore's appeal something the herbivore have a harder time doing by the mere fact their combat stats are garbage compared to the carnivores as infuriating as it is.

What do you even propose to address the Appeal & Star Rating issue? I see you lean towards tossing out Appeal, but then what. Just make them 5 stars and then what? What makes them different from one another and how do you address the problem that the cost, territory requirements, and small social tolerance of the Rex far outstrip a Stego? For the price to bump up the genetic modifications and to accommodate the Rex you would be better of just making a ton of Stegos. If you spike the price of the Stego, then you are chronically screwing yourself due to its social requirements and you are displacing carnivores all the same.

Brachi I will agree with, however, as it has limitations much like the Rex being costly, small batch size/social tolerance, and massive environmental needs, and equally iconic.

Also, just rattling off a bunch of random pieces of media the animals crop up in does not mean they are popular and well understood. Just re-emphasizing my above point, the fact they showed up doesn't mean we got that public awareness surrounding the animal like the instant recognition and appeal of a Triceratops, for instance.

@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.