Unpopular Animal You Really Want
- Thread starter DarthQuell
- Start date
Where is it?
The zoo he is talking about?
I believe there are over a dozen species of giant flying squirrel. The one mentioned in that post, Petaurista tetyukhensis, is apparently only known from fossils.
I have nothing against the Amur (I have the DLC which adds it), but, as I've said before, I really would like to see the African subspecies added as well. I don't care at all if it's less popular with zoos than the Amur in the real world due to being less endangered, as if a subspecies's worthiness of being included in a zoo game depended on its popularity with real zoos. It's one of the iconic Big Five, so any African-themed zoo without it would feel incomplete (especially since the other Big Five are already in the game), and it's the apex predator of the African rainforest, so any African rainforest-themed zoo without it would definitely feel incomplete. Plus, I've had a sentimental attachment to African leopards ever since I saw Disney's Tarzan as a kid.
I know there are mods from Nexus Mods that are supposed to add the African leopard, but they don't seem to be working for me.
The joke and main argument is that in many zoos with leopards in their african section, they arnt actually african leopards
If only one could simply place an Amur leopard among African tropical or savanna vegetation and pass it off as an African leopard in the game...
Just do it.
All that stuff has a not higher then 5% impact on their welfare and even that can be overwritten with stuff like enritchment, space and food quality
Genuinely unsure if this is sarcasm?
Not really. It was more of a "is it possible after all?"
Yes… just place it (as koenigderkaffeebohnen said) - plants etc. have very little effect on welfare. If you want a different sign it’s pretty easy to do, even in something like PowerPoint.
As someone who uses cross-biome foliage a lot, I can say that it usually ends up being 1-3%, rarely pushing those limits. You need to get like 100% coverage with the wrong foliage type to approach the 5-6% negative effect threshold. Even then, some species like the black wildebeest cap out at like 2-3%. Thus appears to differ between species, which led me to think the threshold is around 2-3% last year due to my limited testing.
One more thing I've noticed lately is that coverage or lack thereof seems to not affect welfare at all as long as there are no issues with biome type. Not entirely sure if this is intentional or a bug. Might warrant a thread or issue report.
If its a bug, its honestly a bug id like to keep.
Simply gives more freedom in franchise and challange mode + it simply makes more sense for realistic builds that you have local foliage instead of foliage based on the animals home continent.
Simply gives more freedom in franchise and challange mode + it simply makes more sense for realistic builds that you have local foliage instead of foliage based on the animals home continent.
I also think the maximum negative effect shouldn't really be more than it is now, but the bug might be about the breakdown of the existing negative effect pool. If this is the case, then most animals would instead be limited to a 2-3% negative effect on welfare (instead of the current 5-6%) when "wrong" biome plants are used. That being said I would have preferred a system where foliage type would affect guest education more than animal welfare.
I thought that the black rhino is part of that, not the white rhino
If black or white, african or asian, big or small, in the end we can all agree that any bird would prove superior over any semi clone or downright clone.
Lets be honest, if i got the choice to get a free black rhino, african leopard and sumatran tiger or pay 10 bucks for a mallard duck i would totally pay the 10 bucks
Lets be honest, if i got the choice to get a free black rhino, african leopard and sumatran tiger or pay 10 bucks for a mallard duck i would totally pay the 10 bucks