Prehistoric Marine Species Pack appeal ratings & Nothosaurus skin naming

[aubreykitsune]

Hello! So first off, I'm excited for the release of the Prehistoric Marine Species Pack. The animals in it are totally gorgeous. That being said, in the pre-release videos from YouTubers I noticed a few minor things that in my opinion should be updated. They are minor adjustments which would be easy to make, but would go a long way!

The main thing I wanted to bring up was the appeal ratings of the new animals, mostly Dunkleosteus. The poor Dunk ended up having an appeal rating of 156 in BestInSlot's video! To put that in comparison, the other three marine superpredators- Mosasaurus, Tylosaurus, and Kronosaurus- have appeal ratings from 1625 to 2500. Despite being one of the most popular prehistoric species, if its rating isn't increased, it would take over ten Dunkleosteus to match the appeal of one Kronosaurus. 156 is absurdly low enough for such a famous animal that many people on Discord have speculated that a 0 was accidentally left out of its value in the code. 1560 is certainly a much more reasonable appeal rating for Dunkleosteus and this is what I would personally suggest.

Shonisaurus' rating also feels low, although not to the extent that Dunkleosteus' is. At 369 its appeal is lower than almost all of the plesiosaurs despite being a much larger (and ostensibly much more impressive) animal. Personally I think it's fine if its appeal isn't increased- but it would still honestly make more sense if its appeal was doubled or tripled. We're talking about a creature comparable to a whale in sheer size so I don't think that is unreasonable for me to say. Being so large, you'd probably expect it to be below only the superpredators within the marine popularity hierarchy.

Lastly, the other thing I wanted to bring up was the naming of Nothosaurus' canon skin. In videos it was seen listed as "Nothosaurus 2022." While this isn't wrong going off of real world release dates, in-universe it would have been seen in 2015 or 2016. Many of the existing canon skins from Camp Cretaceous- Scorpios Rex, Ouranosaurus, Kentrosaurus, and Monolophosaurus- are already labelled 2015. As such it only makes sense that Nothosaurus' skin should be renamed to "Nothosaurus 2015" as a matter of consistency with the other species from its series. This shouldn't be difficult seeing as the Jurassic Park Pteranodon was previously mislabeled as being from 1997 before being renamed to 2001.

Hopefully this thread will be taken the way I intended. I don't mean to downplay the work that went into this DLC or update by any means!

 

[VSSEMike]

Here are the ratings of the marine reptile species:

2 stars - I'm sure I've read about them somewhere:

• Attenborosaurus
• Dunkleosteus
• Nothosaurus
• Shonisaurus
• Styxosaurus
• Tylosaurus

3 stars - These dinosaurs are real classics

• Archelon
• Elasmosaurus
• Ichthyosaurus
• Kronosaurus
• Liopleurodon
• Plesiosaurus

4 stars - If I had to name my favorite

- Mosasaurus

 

[Pixelated Sparkster]

I want to try it out soon when the patch launches, but I think the low rating has more to do with how many of these lagoon creatures you could place in, and how compatible they are with other animals.

I was surprised to see the Shonisaurus at first be at 369 as well, which is relatively small in terms of appeal. But if they could cohabit with other animals like the ichthyosaurus, Elasmosaurus, and Attenborosaurus, without fighting due to uncomfort, then it would make sense for the lower rating. Combined lagoon exhibits could yield way more than a mosasaurs exhibit, and since the Mosasaurus, Tylosaurus, and Kronosaurus would hunt and fight everything else in their enclosure, they would have the high rating to make up for it.

But I do agree that some rebalancing should be made for the lagoon appeal now that we have a variety of compatible animals to choose from, I am still shocked with how the Styxosaurus has a high appeal of 789 as you could incubate so much and they are compatible with so many other animals in a lagoon, it is rather busted how many individuals you could incubate with such a high appeal.

Lastly, the other thing I wanted to bring up was the naming of Nothosaurus' canon skin. In videos it was seen listed as "Nothosaurus 2022." While this isn't wrong going off of real world release dates, in-universe it would have been seen in 2015 or 2016.

I did not know that! It is cool that there is a skin for the Camp Cretaceous Nothosaurus, I just saw the species viewer section in the video. I agree! It looks to be an oversight with the naming as it makes canonical sense for it to be 2015 at least, this is similar to how they labeled the 2001 pteranodon as 1997, I hope it would be addressed soon in a similar manner!

 

[aubreykitsune]

I want to try it out soon when the patch launches, but I think the low rating has more to do with how many of these lagoon creatures you could place in, and how compatible they are with other animals.

Sure the compatibility with other species makes sense as justification for Shonisaurus, but not for Dunkleosteus given its high attack stats.
Also Liopleurodon is highly gregarious in this game. You're likely to mix more Liopleurodon together than Shonisaurus or Dunkleosteus, yet it has a higher appeal despite that and despite being an ostensibly much less impressive animal.

Another thing to add to my main post, if I may:
Mosasaurus and Tylosaurus being the only lagoon creatures without social animations, is practically equivalent to T. rex and Spinosaurus being the only dinosaurs without social animations. As the "biggest ticket" species they're the worst ones to not have as much... depth (pun intended) as the others. I understand that it would take a lot of work, but I think it's worth revisiting them to add in their missing social animations. Would be awesome if you could add shark feeder compatibility to Tylosaurus at the same time!

 

[valuedcustomer]

Honestly, I'm a bit puzzled by how the dino ratings and combat stats are designed in this game. You'd expect iconic dinosaurs like the Triceratops to have a higher rating than just 108 (ONLY ONE STAR). It's also quite surprising that the Ankylosaurus has only half the attack power of the Stegosaurus. But what really doesn't make sense is that the game depicts small raptors hunting down massive Sauropods. It's all a bit confusing, to be honest.

 

[Pixelated Sparkster]

I finally got around to incubating and housing 4 Dunkleosteus in my custom challenge mode, and I agree that the rating for this fish is too low, especially with how much space it needs and how it kills everything else around it.

I have it in this enclosure setup that could house a tylosaurus and a humble mosasaurus, which consists of 4 lagoon modules with one sticking out as a shark feeder attraction. This setup holds 4 dunks to a total appeal of... 624.

For the time and effort setting up this enclosure, it is rather low. The ichthyosaurus and plesiosaurus you unlock in the same research could do with less space, and could even be housed with other marine creatures comfortably. This is especially noticeable with the plesiosaurus having a higher appeal of 238 compared to Dunk's appeal of 156.

I think the Dunkleostus should have the appeal bumped up to 300-350. It is such a dangerous medium lagoon animal, yet one that could be unlocked very early. That way when housing by themselves, they would be worth the effort and resources preparing the lagoon, while the player still has a healthy roster of marine creatures with higher appeal or better compatibility to choose from.