Biome restrictions / Dakotaraptor?

[the_british_kiwi]

First let me just say, i think that all these dinos are good suggestions, but only if creatures are limited to their natural biomes. More or less. For example a creature from the snow biome will start to lose health if it is in a climate anything less than a small snowflake. It doesnt really make sence for these creatures to have adapted to such a harsh enviroment, when they could just walk over to the nicer temp. This would really help with dino horders ( we all know one, its not pokemon dammit! Jk), and will make chosing your base location important too! As it will effect what dinos you can use.

So, now dakotaraptor. With all these threads discussing yutyrannus/siats i thought id just throw this one into the mix. A pretty recent discovery, a heavily feathered raptor. "The species was around 6 feet tall, and approximately 17 feet long, but that didn’t stop it from reaching high velocities, of around 30 to 40 mph. In speed, it was similar to ostriches nowadays, but in deadliness, it surpassed it by a large margin. Due to its strong muscles and 9.5-inch claws curved on the middle toes, it could ravage any herbivores it encountered, according to paleontologists who studied it." I reckon this could be a good alternative to the wolfs in the snow biome, and with it having some of the longest claws on any raptor, a good bleeding effect from attacking (alternating attacks- bite does more damage but claws do bleeding perhaps?), and other neat features this creature had most could be used in game.
But yeah, ill leave a link if anyone wants to read about it.

http://www.regaltribune.com/new-feathered-dinosaur-species-dakotaraptor-is-unearthed/23942/




It was Buratino who mentioned it in a thread by The Red Baron, and after looking it up ive got to say it looks pretty damn cool.

[I Want MY Burd]

The biome restriction idea just sounds annoying if you ask me. Sure, make people go to specific locales to find a creature they want. But force people to establish a base in multiple biomes to keep them? That doesn't sound like a good idea, especially with server crowding.

[the_british_kiwi]

Originally posted by I Want MY Burd:

The biome restriction idea just sounds annoying if you ask me. Sure, make people go to specific locales to find a creature they want. But force people to establish a base in multiple biomes to keep them? That doesn't sound like a good idea, especially with server crowding.

It just feels so odd that you can take say a sarco or other swamp creature and put it i the snow biome with no problems! Mabye ive got the wrong solution, but it drives me crazy.

[I Want MY Burd]

Originally posted by the_british_kiwi:

Originally posted by I Want MY Burd:

The biome restriction idea just sounds annoying if you ask me. Sure, make people go to specific locales to find a creature they want. But force people to establish a base in multiple biomes to keep them? That doesn't sound like a good idea, especially with server crowding.

It just feels so odd that you can take say a sarco or other swamp creature and put it i the snow biome with no problems! Mabye ive got the wrong solution, but it drives me crazy.

Maybe you're a little high strung about it x) lol we're in a world where punching a fully grown tree will knock it down, freedom to put your tamed creatures wherever you want doesn't bother me

[Shion]

Honestly, this is a thing where I think realism would hurt the game- the snow biome is a tiny area, and some animals, like the Mammoth, can only be found there but are VERY important. Basically, this is one break from reality I am willing to accept.

I do think that certain areas should penalize certain creatures though- slow movement for large bipeds in the swamp, vastly increased stamina drain for non-adapted creatures in the snow, eetc. Make it more of a tactical decision which mount you bring where. Sure, that Giganoto might be great everywhere else, but maybe you should ride your bear into the snow and swamp.

Just a germ of an idea here- I'm not sure how mountains, forests, and grasslands would- or indeed SHOULD- have any affect.

[the_british_kiwi]

Originally posted by Eldar Seer:

Honestly, this is a thing where I think realism would hurt the game- the snow biome is a tiny area, and some animals, like the Mammoth, can only be found there but are VERY important. Basically, this is one break from reality I am willing to accept.

I do think that certain areas should penalize certain creatures though- slow movement for large bipeds in the swamp, vastly increased stamina drain for non-adapted creatures in the snow, eetc. Make it more of a tactical decision which mount you bring where. Sure, that Giganoto might be great everywhere else, but maybe you should ride your bear into the snow and swamp.

Just a germ of an idea here- I'm not sure how mountains, forests, and grasslands would- or indeed SHOULD- have any affect.

Yeah, thats a better idea than mine lol.

[_]

I heard Dakotaraptor. I give my +1 to that. I also think Dakota may be good chance for the devs to make up for their featherless 80s monster that they call Utahraptor. I would love the ability to ride it, but I am not sure if it is big enough... Wait a second, this is ARK? I will take 2 oversized, feathered Dakotaraptors, and a large fry please!

For the biome restrictions, I think it would be interesting. I do however thing that there should be a mechanic, be it a special food, armor item, or structure that would allow creatures to resist the weather temporarily, but with enough rescources indefinitely. This way people who enjoy particular creatures and climates, would have the ability to keep what they love... They would just have to work harder for what they want.

I also think if this was implented, there should be certain creatures who can traverse multiple climates without worry (especially if the devs plan to add more). So, for example, a troodon may be able to survive both the cold and heat due to it's plumage (just an example, don't eat me for it).

[MrFubar]

I am all for the enviroment affecting tames, Not only does it add realism, but it gives a reason to use one creature over another. For example using raptors in the south instead of just using wolves or sabers that have very similar roles.

Same with the new Bear they are introducing and Rex's spinos, a rex would freeze in the snow biome. Argents should be the bird of choice for cold and Pteras for cold, not sure on Quetz.

That said people could still keep creatures out of their enviroment by using air conditioned buildings that would let a mammoth survive in the south, or rex survive in the north etc. The health loss or stamina or food loss cant be too harsh that its not survivable, but why shouldnt the bioms affect tames the same way it does us with food/water comsumption, torpor and health loss. I cant run into the snow with no clothes on and survive for long why should a cold blooded creature that would have a much harder time of it.

[the_british_kiwi]

Well heres hoping. Craftable items would be a great way to allow biome specific animals to enter other biomes. Good idea, just a quick question though, does enduro stew work on creatures? Becase that could be a part time solution right there

[MrFubar]

The stews work on animals as far as i know. We had people use battle tar tar on animals to fight the dodo rex.

[AndromedaX1]

Maybe there could be special Dino skins like non fluff mammoths that could live in heat

Originally posted by the_british_kiwi:

Originally posted by I Want MY Burd:

The biome restriction idea just sounds annoying if you ask me. Sure, make people go to specific locales to find a creature they want. But force people to establish a base in multiple biomes to keep them? That doesn't sound like a good idea, especially with server crowding.

It just feels so odd that you can take say a sarco or other swamp creature and put it i the snow biome with no problems! Mabye ive got the wrong solution, but it drives me crazy.

[Dank Bean's]

the biomes affecting stamina and health and speed of creature that shouldn't be there is a good idea but that's whaere it shoule stop if you ask me. remember the devs have to code all this and some of it would be a little ridiculus, and I would prefer more dinos and a larger map with moderate details then the tiny map a small selection of dinos and extreme environment detail

[Player-13]

I think the more often Dakaraptor is mentioned then the more it will get noticed and perhaps the more chance of devs taking notice. I hear all the arguments about scaly raptors looking more ferocious, and to an extent agree, but I'm sure many people have seen at least one of the documentaries about dinosaurs made in the last ten or fifteen years that show them feathered, as do all new books. There is an opportunity here for the devs to introduce a really ferocious looking feathered raptor, but I think as Utahraptor is in the game there is probably no room for another large raptor filling the same niche, unfortunately, but we can hope.

Troodon. Well, this is science fiction fantasy game essentially, so while we have this mix of animals that never existed at the same time as each other in reality, and in the case of raptors not looking as they did in reality, why not introduce an "evolved" Troodon. Back in the days some guy imagined how dinosaurs would have evolved if the non avian ones had not died out, and as Troodon has the largest dino brain in relation to it's size, "evolved" it to how it may look today and looking like a politician, oops, reptilian I mean. What if the aliens controlling ARK are evolved Troodons....

[the_british_kiwi]

Originally posted by Buratino:

I think the more often Dakaraptor is mentioned then the more it will get noticed and perhaps the more chance of devs taking notice. I hear all the arguments about scaly raptors looking more ferocious, and to an extent agree, but I'm sure many people have seen at least one of the documentaries about dinosaurs made in the last ten or fifteen years that show them feathered, as do all new books. There is an opportunity here for the devs to introduce a really ferocious looking feathered raptor, but I think as Utahraptor is in the game there is probably no room for another large raptor filling the same niche, unfortunately, but we can hope.

Troodon. Well, this is science fiction fantasy game essentially, so while we have this mix of animals that never existed at the same time as each other in reality, and in the case of raptors not looking as they did in reality, why not introduce an "evolved" Troodon. Back in the days some guy imagined how dinosaurs would have evolved if the non avian ones had not died out, and as Troodon has the largest dino brain in relation to it's size, "evolved" it to how it may look today and looking like a politician, oops, reptilian I mean. What if the aliens controlling ARK are evolved Troodons....

Illuminate confirmed

[irondune]

Why would it make sense for a deer to lose health in a normal forest?!?
why would it make sense for a phiomia to lose health in slighly colder regions?

yep, it doesn't

[Tal]

Originally posted by irondune:

Why would it make sense for a deer to lose health in a normal forest?!?
why would it make sense for a phiomia to lose health in slighly colder regions?

yep, it doesn't

This is an awful way to combat this.

The OP isn't saying "Deers lose health in South, pigs die in cold, erp"

It's simplying implying that with the current circumstances it takes away parts of the realism, especially if you were to go into the heart of the snow biome and find a collection of Sarcos waiting for you, it just breaks a lot of the immersion.

I do agree however with most of the points in this topic, in that they shouldn't lose health in new biomes but instead have drastically different effects on them depending. If a dino is hot blooded it should not be able to be at it's peak in the snow. With that in mind I think if you fed a hot blooded creature focal chili every once in a while that it might feel a little more at home though, for example feeding a raptor chili to run through the snow.