Buildings & Attractions More green Houses needed

[Flint2025]

Meat is meat, don't think there's any reason to add stats for that.
What's the difference if the carnivores are fed goat or cow meat?

They could take it in many different directions.... For example carnivores could have quantity of food requirements added. In a modern zoo a tiger would eat more than a lynx for example. A Rex would req more meat than a raptor.... So if they added cows to live feeders a cow would keep a Rex more well fed and boost its nutrition and happiness. 1 cow is equal to 10 goats lets say.

The wetland dinos preferred diet is fish but it isnt required so why not give them a boost for giving it to them. The paleo plants are optional just like fish feeders.

Then what if they offer paleo meat that is butchered dinos to give carnivores a boost? Like say a herra that is so old no mammals existed so it has a hard time digesting modern meat and would need a paleo meat to eat...

Or how about dilos that have weak jaws which is why they kill with the help of venom....maybe you give a diced or hamburger style meat from a slaughter house so it's easier for them to consume...

You could add a fishery building in order to supply fish and a slaughter house building for carnivores...

There are just a few different ways they could go about it. A slaughter house or butcher shop for paleo meat could offer dino selections as well based on time periods and fossil sites... Rex prefers edmontadaurus and trike meat etc...

Like yeah meat is meat but maybe a leaner meat like chicken adds to quickness, higher immunity and lifespan bonus... But hardier meats like cow add to defense and attack stats... They could do something with it...

 

[Indoraptor27]

I can see a building that clones prehistoric fiish being added.

 

[Hykelion]

Animals are no different.

Animals in "general", as in, as a general term.
It's easy to know what a tiger or lion, or a cheetah prefers to eat, since they're alive & we can observe them, unlike dinos. How do we know if a T-Rex prefers goat over cows? We simply dont, considering we can only assume that it hunted other dinos that lived the time as it did. Spinosaurids are the exception since they're known to eat fish, thats why we have the fish feeder implemented.
Don't get me wrong, I don't mind having cows as an alternative to the goat for the live feeder, its a good way to make varied food choices, but adding stat boosts for eating a different kind of meat kind of holds no purpose.

For example carnivores could have quantity of food requirements added. In a modern zoo a tiger would eat more than a lynx for example. A Rex would req more meat than a raptor.... So if they added cows to live feeders a cow would keep a Rex more well fed and boost its nutrition and happiness. 1 cow is equal to 10 goats lets say.

Ofc the Tiger eats more than a Lynx, & the Rex more than a Raptor, since they're bigger. They need more to sustain their bodies. Additionally, there's a line between being well-fed & being overfed. You're stepping more into the latter. Animals dont eat more than they already should.

Then what if they offer paleo meat that is butchered dinos to give carnivores a boost? Like say a herra that is so old no mammals existed so it has a hard time digesting modern meat and would need a paleo meat to eat...

I doubt this will happen.

 

[MarcWP]

Animals in "general", as in, as a general term.
It's easy to know what a tiger or lion, or a cheetah prefers to eat, since they're alive & we can observe them, unlike dinos. How do we know if a T-Rex prefers goat over cows? We simply dont, considering we can only assume that it hunted other dinos that lived the time as it did. Spinosaurids are the exception since they're known to eat fish, thats why we have the fish feeder implemented.
Don't get me wrong, I don't mind having cows as an alternative to the goat for the live feeder, its a good way to make varied food choices, but adding stat boosts for eating a different kind of meat kind of holds no purpose.

But how do we know which plants the herbivores preferred? We don't. Nothing about Jurassic World is realistic, so why should the carnivores diet suddenly be? We have no clue about these animals. 90% are stuff we've made up. It's just weird to have different foods for the herbivores and not the carnivores...

 

[Hykelion]

But how do we know which plants the herbivores preferred? We don't. Nothing about Jurassic World is realistic, so why should the carnivores diet suddenly be? We have no clue about these animals. 90% are stuff we've made up. It's just weird to have different foods for the herbivores and not the carnivores...

How do we know which plants the herbivores preferred? We can ask the scientific community for that. If FD hadn't known to ask the scientific community & check scientific findings, they wouldn't have implemented the Paleofeeders in the first place. The scientific community makes the assumptions on what the herbivores usually eat, then FD follows that. That is, IMO, how we got the paleofeeders.
Here's an example for the Hadrosaurs:
https://www.fossilera.com/pages/about-hadrosaurs

Lets not also forget that the reason why there is a primary & secondary preferred plant & a harmful plant for the herbivores may be connected to game balance.

As for the carnivores, whats the difference feeding it live goat or cow? Nothing actually, other than being fed. We already have gene modding to boost their stats & rating, & that carnivores already have higher base ratings than their herbivore counterparts of the same size.
Here's an example:
Small Dinos
Velociraptor w/ 100% genome = base rating of 74
Pachycephalosaur w/ 100% genome = base rating of 39

Large Dinos at 100% genome w/ no gene mods
T-Rex - 234
Indominus Rex - 273
Spinosaurus - 240
Brachiosaur - 140
Camarasaur - 128
Apatosaur - 135
Ankylodocus - 168

See the trend?

 

[MarcWP]

How do we know which plants the herbivores preferred? We can ask the scientific community for that. If FD hadn't known to ask the scientific community & check scientific findings, they wouldn't have implemented the Paleofeeders in the first place. The scientific community makes the assumptions on what the herbivores usually eat, then FD follows that. That is, IMO, how we got the paleofeeders.
Here's an example for the Hadrosaurs:
https://www.fossilera.com/pages/about-hadrosaurs

Lets not also forget that the reason why there is a primary & secondary preferred plant & a harmful plant for the herbivores may be connected to game balance.

As for the carnivores, whats the difference feeding it live goat or cow? Nothing actually, other than being fed. We already have gene modding to boost their stats & rating, & that carnivores already have higher base ratings than their herbivore counterparts of the same size.
Here's an example:
Small Dinos
Velociraptor w/ 100% genome = base rating of 74
Pachycephalosaur w/ 100% genome = base rating of 39

Large Dinos at 100% genome w/ no gene mods
T-Rex - 234
Indominus Rex - 273
Spinosaurus - 240
Brachiosaur - 140
Camarasaur - 128
Apatosaur - 135
Ankylodocus - 168

See the trend?

Everything is assumptions. Nothing is proven. Not with the herbivores either... The difference could be, how long until the animal is hungry again, there could be some meats they wouldn't eat or would lead to bad welfare penalties. What's the difference between eating two different kind of plants, rather than two types of meat?

I don't see how gene manipulation has anything to do with diet. Frontier made the ratings. That has nothing to do with this.

 

[Hykelion]

Everything is assumptions. Nothing is proven. Not with the herbivores either... The difference could be, how long until the animal is hungry again, there could be some meats they wouldn't eat or would lead to bad welfare penalties. What's the difference between eating two different kind of plants, rather than two types of meat?

What bad welfare penalties would that be then? How would we know this dino prefers goats over cows & vice versa? or prefers neither?

I don't see how gene manipulation has anything to do with diet. Frontier made the ratings. That has nothing to do with this.

That was my response to someone asking meat to have a stat boosting effect for carnivores, since the paleobotany system is only catered to herbivores. We already have gene mods, so why add a stat boost caused by meat. It's pointless.

 

[MarcWP]

What bad welfare penalties would that be then? How would we know this dino prefers goats over cows & vice versa? or prefers neither?


That was my response to someone asking meat to have a stat boosting effect for carnivores, since the paleobotany system is only catered to herbivores. We already have gene mods, so why add a stat boost caused by meat. It's pointless.

Frontier would implement what kind of meat the different carnivores would prefer. Just like they did with the fish feeder and the paleobotany system. They decided what plants are good for the herbivores. They decide what meats are preferred for the carnivores. Just the same...

We already have gene mods for herbivores as well, but they still added the paleobotany system. That was pointless too, but they did it. And it's a nice feature, to make them feel more like real animals...

 

[Hykelion]

Frontier would implement what kind of meat the different carnivores would prefer. Just like they did with the fish feeder and the paleobotany system. They decided what plants are good for the herbivores. They decide what meats are preferred for the carnivores. Just the same...

And how would they know what meat the carnivores prefer? Other than they ate meat when they still existed. The paleobotany feature was added considering the scientific community had been uncovering findings what certain plants the herbivores prefer. So what about the carnivores? Whats the difference between eating a specific meat over another when there weren't any findings regarding that.

Sure fish feeders were added, but does it improve a spinosaurids rating if it ate from there? It doesnt. The paleobotany system sure is a nice feature, & its added to give herbivores a boost in their ratings as they're way behind to those of the carnivores. Honestly, I don't care much if FD decides to add varying meats for carnivores to consume. The bottomline to what I've been saying is about the rating, in that if that feature (Eating this meat boost xxx stat) is added, as there's no point in having various meats provide some boosts to their stats.

 

[MarcWP]

And how would they know what meat the carnivores prefer? Other than they ate meat when they still existed. The paleobotany feature was added considering the scientific community had been uncovering findings what certain plants the herbivores prefer. So what about the carnivores? Whats the difference between eating a specific meat over another when there weren't any findings regarding that.

Sure fish feeders were added, but does it improve a spinosaurids rating if it ate from there? It doesnt. The paleobotany system sure is a nice feature, & its added to give herbivores a boost in their ratings as they're way behind to those of the carnivores. Honestly, I don't care much if FD decides to add varying meats for carnivores to consume. The bottomline to what I've been saying is about the rating, in that if that feature (Eating this meat boost xxx stat) is added, as there's no point in having various meats provide some boosts to their stats.

I just don't get the double standard. Herbivores boost their ratings through food. Why shouldn't the carnivores as well. They are all dinosaurs here... To be honest I think boosting stats through food are totally weird, but Frontier implemented it, so they think it works. But why is it only plants that boost. Meat has just as many lifeboosting qualities as plants.

And what findings are you referring to? The assumptions again? I haven't heard anything about a dinosaur which had their stomach intact. :/

 

[Hykelion]

I just don't get the double standard. Herbivores boost their ratings through food. Why shouldn't the carnivores as well. They are all dinosaurs here... To be honest I think boosting stats through food are totally weird, but Frontier implemented it, so they think it works. But why is it only plants that boost. Meat has just as many lifeboosting qualities as plants.

I only possibly got 2 words for that: Game Balance. Considering the carnivores have higher base ratings than the herbivores.

And what findings are you referring to? The assumptions again? I haven't heard anything about a dinosaur which had their stomach intact. :/

You can blame the scientists & paleontologists for that, considering FD is following their findings, ofc with Universal's approval.

 

[MarcWP]

I only possibly got 2 words for that: Game Balance. Considering the carnivores have higher base ratings than the herbivores.


You can blame the scientists & paleontologists for that, considering FD is following their findings, ofc with Universal's approval.

I'm pretty sure most people in today's zoo's also comes primarily to watch the carnivores. They are rated higher in real life as well. So what does game balance have to do with anything... All animals aren't equal.

And why should I blame scientists? They're not fighting against other meattypes for the carnivores. Hahah. I think they would do quite the opposite. Make it as realistic as possible...

 

[Darc Man]

There's a flaw in Claire's sanctuary. You can only have one green house per Island and it sucks. You gotta change the plants constantly every time a feeder runs out. There needs to be an update that fixes that.

Yeah, should build two Greenhouses in Challenge Mode too.

 

[Hykelion]

Yeah, should build two Greenhouses in Challenge Mode too.

Nope. It's called Challenge Mode for a reason. Asking for a 2nd Greenhouse in Challenge mode is like asking for Easy Mode.

 

[spruce56]

I'd like to build more greenhouses - they're a pretty building, and it's annoying to have to keep changing the plants. It's not difficult, it's just not much fun - it takes the original 1-step process for restocking feeders and makes it into a 2-step process with a time delay. But I do love the planning aspect for choosing what plants best suit an enclosure.

 

[Aramus418]

The greenhouse and its effects are a bonus- not a requirement. Constantly changing the plants is purely extra work a player creates for themselves. Your're already permitted 2 in the sandbox to grow everything. The game doesn't have to change anything. Keep it the way it is.

 

[Darc Man]

Nope. It's called Challenge Mode for a reason. Asking for a 2nd Greenhouse in Challenge mode is like asking for Easy Mode.

well, waste all the money in Challenge Mode by switch the plants and it will be game over (out of cash) and start all over again if you're playing on Jurassic Difficulty.

 

[STARKILLER04]

well, waste all the money in Challenge Mode by switch the plants and it will be game over (out of cash) and start all over again if you're playing on Jurassic Difficulty.

Like Aramus418 said, its a bonus, not a requirement. If we had more than one Greenhouse, it would make 5 starring your dinosaur rating easy, thus reducing the challenge ofhaving a greenhouse in the game.

If the Devs are reading this, don't change a thing about greenhouses. (Or do, it's up to you)