Giga vs Rex

[General Eclectic]

Now I've already kinda posted this rant elsewhere but I need more ppl to see. The general outcome of a Rex vs Giga encounter is pretty realistic, and the devs should keep it how it is. I am saying this as someone who plays Giga more than any other dino. Tyrannosaurus Rex is supposed to have massive advantage over Giga if the two were to fight in real life. Is this not meant to be a realistic dino "game", even if it is just a videogame?

All this bickering about nerf rex, don't nerf rex, and who should come out the winner in a 1v1 between giga and rex is extremely stupid. Now I have just recently started playing this game after having it for idk 2 or 3 years don't remember... I can't argue on the game but I can argue on the reality of it, even though it's a videogame. Giga is not meant to beat Rex, not even in real life. The two dinos lived millions of years apart in their own eras, and would never come across each other. Giga is only an apex predator in the game because it was in its own timeline, but compared to Rex it would lose. Giga was built to perform hit and run tactics, and would often hunt in groups. Rex usually hunted solo, and could swallow prey whole, unlike Giga whose narrower jaw prevented that. Rex has a much greater bite force and jaw muscle mass, warranting the bone break ability. The point is the game is pretty realistic to real life, Rex overall is the real apex of the game, as it should be. It was named Tyrant King for a reason.

https://www.scienceabc.com/nature/animals/giganotosaurus-vs-t-rex-size-comparison-intelligence-body-structure.html

[Bill_Clinton_Supreme]

Originally posted by General Eclectic:

Originally posted by Krona:

wtf how? Explain what was even confusing.

I don't know what you're implying about pack hunting, but to me it seems like you're saying its rarely seen in animals of the same genus or something. You are confusing me honestly. And yes my main concern is with Trex and Giga because those dinos are what ppl keep complaining about. I don't care about the cannibal monsters, or the hypos... All I'm saying is it makes sense that they are overpowered, because they were kinda op irl too. That's the point of an apex. The reason Rex even has a bone-break ability is because it probably could easily do so irl to almost anything smaller than itself. The reason Giga has the best bleed dmg is because that's how it would kill animals like Argentinosaurus, hunt it in a pack, do some damage to the thing here or there and wait it out. Giganotosaurus had some of the sharpest teeth seen in its time, massive bleeding from a wound would indeed occur. Argentino probably moved at no more than 10 miles per hour given the thing's probable metabolism, making its speed one of its only weaknesses. A predators job is exploit weaknesses. I don't picture the Argentinian region 100 mya decorated in Argentinosaur corpses, but I believe it is possible that they could be hunted.

I'm not saying Argentinosaurus was Giga's top prey choice, but if they were hungry enough, they would attempt to kill anything that moved, even each other. Titanosaurs, big as they are, were not invincible, size isn't everything, and how long would it take Argentino to turn to position itself to defend its sides from predators, which were probably its only weak points...

No, you don't understand, argentinosaurus and pretty much all sauropod adults weren't even huntable.

A single kick from it that would take zero positioning from it would kill any giganotosaur that approached it. If it didn't kill it, it would certainly push the kicked animal over, which is fatal for any large animal, a 5 ft drop shatters all of an elephant's legbones. That's just a 3 ton animal, getting pushed over as a 6 ton carnivore would cause massive internal bleeding, tons of bone breakage.

You see, size IS EVERYTHING at that scale, explain to me how it wouldn't be. Size won't make much a difference if the animal is say, 9 tons to 8 tons, but 65 TONS vs. 6 tons? Is it even a debate at this point?

The problem is there is no evidence that can be inclusively say that they hunted in packs, mapusaurus is probably just giganotosaurus but just fossilizing together isn't evidence of pack hunting, it could've been mobbing, the result of natural disaster.

[General Eclectic]

Originally posted by Krona:

Originally posted by General Eclectic:

I don't know what you're implying about pack hunting, but to me it seems like you're saying its rarely seen in animals of the same genus or something. You are confusing me honestly. And yes my main concern is with Trex and Giga because those dinos are what ppl keep complaining about. I don't care about the cannibal monsters, or the hypos... All I'm saying is it makes sense that they are overpowered, because they were kinda op irl too. That's the point of an apex. The reason Rex even has a bone-break ability is because it probably could easily do so irl to almost anything smaller than itself. The reason Giga has the best bleed dmg is because that's how it would kill animals like Argentinosaurus, hunt it in a pack, do some damage to the thing here or there and wait it out. Giganotosaurus had some of the sharpest teeth seen in its time, massive bleeding from a wound would indeed occur. Argentino probably moved at no more than 10 miles per hour given the thing's probable metabolism, making its speed one of its only weaknesses. A predators job is exploit weaknesses. I don't picture the Argentinian region 100 mya decorated in Argentinosaur corpses, but I believe it is possible that they could be hunted.

I'm not saying Argentinosaurus was Giga's top prey choice, but if they were hungry enough, they would attempt to kill anything that moved, even each other. Titanosaurs, big as they are, were not invincible, size isn't everything, and how long would it take Argentino to turn to position itself to defend its sides from predators, which were probably its only weak points...

No, you don't understand, argentinosaurus and pretty much all sauropod adults weren't even huntable.

A single kick from it that would take zero positioning from it would kill any giganotosaur that approached it. If it didn't kill it, it would certainly push the kicked animal over, which is fatal for any large animal, a 5 ft drop shatters all of an elephant's legbones. That's just a 3 ton animal, getting pushed over as a 6 ton carnivore would cause massive internal bleeding, tons of bone breakage.

You see, size IS EVERYTHING at that scale, explain to me how it wouldn't be. Size won't make much a difference if the animal is say, 9 tons to 8 tons, but 65 TONS vs. 6 tons? Is it even a debate at this point?

The problem is there is no evidence that can be inclusively say that they hunted in packs, mapusaurus is probably just giganotosaurus but just fossilizing together isn't evidence of pack hunting, it could've been mobbing, the result of natural disaster.

Okay since I obviously can't sway you, and you can't sway me, lets just agree to disagree. Besides, there isn't enough proof to say either argument is fully correct. We both have proof, but not enough to conclude...

[Bill_Clinton_Supreme]

Originally posted by General Eclectic:

Originally posted by Krona:

No, you don't understand, argentinosaurus and pretty much all sauropod adults weren't even huntable.

A single kick from it that would take zero positioning from it would kill any giganotosaur that approached it. If it didn't kill it, it would certainly push the kicked animal over, which is fatal for any large animal, a 5 ft drop shatters all of an elephant's legbones. That's just a 3 ton animal, getting pushed over as a 6 ton carnivore would cause massive internal bleeding, tons of bone breakage.

You see, size IS EVERYTHING at that scale, explain to me how it wouldn't be. Size won't make much a difference if the animal is say, 9 tons to 8 tons, but 65 TONS vs. 6 tons? Is it even a debate at this point?

The problem is there is no evidence that can be inclusively say that they hunted in packs, mapusaurus is probably just giganotosaurus but just fossilizing together isn't evidence of pack hunting, it could've been mobbing, the result of natural disaster.

Okay since I obviously can't sway you, and you can't sway me, lets just agree to disagree. Besides, there isn't enough proof to say either argument is fully correct. We both have proof, but not enough to conclude...

You can't sway me since your stance originated from a incorrect source that says spinosaurus is 23 tons, prove to me how 1 elephant can die to a golden retriever. That's basically giga vs. argentino

[General Eclectic]

Originally posted by Krona:

Originally posted by General Eclectic:

Okay since I obviously can't sway you, and you can't sway me, lets just agree to disagree. Besides, there isn't enough proof to say either argument is fully correct. We both have proof, but not enough to conclude...

You can't sway me since your stance originated from a incorrect source that says spinosaurus is 23 tons, prove to me how 1 elephant can die to a golden retriever. That's basically giga vs. argentino

Incorrect source lol, okay mister paleontology expert... "In a 2005 study in the Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, researchers estimated Spinosaurus was 52 to 59 feet (16 to 18 m) long and weighed 7.7 to 9.9 tons (7 to 9 metric tons), based on extrapolations from skull measurements. However, other scientists took issue with the study's methods, and instead claimed the behemoth was 41 to 47 feet (12.6 to 14.3 m) long and 13.2 to 23 tons (12 to 20.9 metric tons), according to a 2007 study in the same journal."
https://www.livescience.com/24120-spinosaurus.html

Spinosaurus, something that had denser and more compact bones than its carnivorous counterparts, could very well have weighed up to 23 tons... its not out of the question.

Where'd you get the elephant to golden retriever vs argentinosaurus to giganotosaurus calculation from?? Argentino maxed out at 110 tons to Giga's average 10, thats an 11 to 1 ratio. An African bush elephant weighs 6.5 tons, a golden retriever weighs 71 pounds (.0355 tons), that's a 183 to 1 ratio. Please correct my math if Im wrong... but, where even did you find that comparable?? Here let me do the math again for you. A male lion can weigh around 400 pounds, and compared to an elephant, that's a 32 to 1 ratio. Now, if lions have been known band together to kill something 32 times their weight out of desperation... what makes you think Giganotosaurus wouldn't do the same with something only 11 times its weight?

Any other "incorrect" claims of mine you want to point out because again I've done the fact checking, I've done the math, I've done the corrections for you. So if you ever want to give me proof on your side of the argument, let me know...

[SotvānZander]

Originally posted by Krona:

Originally posted by General Eclectic:

Okay since I obviously can't sway you, and you can't sway me, lets just agree to disagree. Besides, there isn't enough proof to say either argument is fully correct. We both have proof, but not enough to conclude...

You can't sway me since your stance originated from a incorrect source that says spinosaurus is 23 tons, prove to me how 1 elephant can die to a golden retriever. That's basically giga vs. argentino

Technically they didnot had to kill it, it could of been dead already and they were eating the dead body.
I know for fact many claim even biggest carnisours of the time scavenged for dead body even if they were apex of their territory.

[SotvānZander]

Originally posted by General Eclectic:

Now I've already kinda posted this rant elsewhere but I need more ppl to see. The general outcome of a Rex vs Giga encounter is pretty realistic, and the devs should keep it how it is. I am saying this as someone who plays Giga more than any other dino. Tyrannosaurus Rex is supposed to have massive advantage over Giga if the two were to fight in real life. Is this not meant to be a realistic dino "game", even if it is just a videogame?

All this bickering about nerf rex, don't nerf rex, and who should come out the winner in a 1v1 between giga and rex is extremely stupid. Now I have just recently started playing this game after having it for idk 2 or 3 years don't remember... I can't argue on the game but I can argue on the reality of it, even though it's a videogame. Giga is not meant to beat Rex, not even in real life. The two dinos lived millions of years apart in their own eras, and would never come across each other. Giga is only an apex predator in the game because it was in its own timeline, but compared to Rex it would lose. Giga was built to perform hit and run tactics, and would often hunt in groups. Rex usually hunted solo, and could swallow prey whole, unlike Giga whose narrower jaw prevented that. Rex has a much greater bite force and jaw muscle mass, warranting the bone break ability. The point is the game is pretty realistic to real life, Rex overall is the real apex of the game, as it should be. It was named Tyrant King for a reason.

https://www.scienceabc.com/nature/animals/giganotosaurus-vs-t-rex-size-comparison-intelligence-body-structure.html

What is the point of this thread? The hypothetical outcome of whatever is not a fact I can easily rehash some ♥♥♥♥ and claim giga can win who can prove me wrong? Half assed dino fossils? Or so called experts that do not even have DNA of these dinos nor do they know what they even looked like, funny enough even in your source the estimates on speed and how exaggerated they are should show you that you can not make a hypothetical scenario on a hypothetical information... It is all a guess work.
To the point this is a game and is meant to be fun and balance for dinos of the same tier. Anyhow all will be revealed after the recode...

[bigmoe808]

Originally posted by Krona:

WTF is the point of this post?

Also there is zero evidence of any giganotosaurus hunting in packs, that's a paleomeme at best, and an awesomebro idea at worst.

Also the whole "theropod vs. theropod" debate is wrong
Iguanodon kills both t.rex and giga.

I pissed him off in another, guess he couldn't leave things be.

[Madkou]

The rexes bone break makes that fight retarded lol. Giga is a bleeder, if you get crippled by something with an insanely higher bite force...Well, it's just imbalanced. Give bone break to pachys or other blunt weapon dinos. At least it would make sense.

If you think I'm smok'n ♥♥♥♥ for thinking this, imagine what would happen if utahs could bone break dilos, and how that would change a near 50-50 outcome, to a certainty.

Make a giga for pack fights.

[General Eclectic]

Originally posted by Red Solo Cup:

The rexes bone break makes that fight retarded lol. Giga is a bleeder, if you get crippled by something with an insanely higher bite force...Well, it's just imbalanced. Give bone break to pachys or other blunt weapon dinos. At least it would make sense.

If you think I'm smok'n ♥♥♥♥ for thinking this, imagine what would happen if utahs could bone break dilos, and how that would change a near 50-50 outcome, to a certainty.

Make a giga for pack fights.

I agree with most of this, especially what you've said about Giga needing to be a bleeder/pack hunter. But I still think Rex's bonebreak should stay because of its immense bite force. Rex is imbalanced true, but if Giga was meant to be a pack hunter, then why do ppl keep fighting Rex 1v1?

[General Eclectic]

Originally posted by Ostovar Hossein:

Originally posted by General Eclectic:

Now I've already kinda posted this rant elsewhere but I need more ppl to see. The general outcome of a Rex vs Giga encounter is pretty realistic, and the devs should keep it how it is. I am saying this as someone who plays Giga more than any other dino. Tyrannosaurus Rex is supposed to have massive advantage over Giga if the two were to fight in real life. Is this not meant to be a realistic dino "game", even if it is just a videogame?

All this bickering about nerf rex, don't nerf rex, and who should come out the winner in a 1v1 between giga and rex is extremely stupid. Now I have just recently started playing this game after having it for idk 2 or 3 years don't remember... I can't argue on the game but I can argue on the reality of it, even though it's a videogame. Giga is not meant to beat Rex, not even in real life. The two dinos lived millions of years apart in their own eras, and would never come across each other. Giga is only an apex predator in the game because it was in its own timeline, but compared to Rex it would lose. Giga was built to perform hit and run tactics, and would often hunt in groups. Rex usually hunted solo, and could swallow prey whole, unlike Giga whose narrower jaw prevented that. Rex has a much greater bite force and jaw muscle mass, warranting the bone break ability. The point is the game is pretty realistic to real life, Rex overall is the real apex of the game, as it should be. It was named Tyrant King for a reason.

https://www.scienceabc.com/nature/animals/giganotosaurus-vs-t-rex-size-comparison-intelligence-body-structure.html

What is the point of this thread? The hypothetical outcome of whatever is not a fact I can easily rehash some ♥♥♥♥ and claim giga can win who can prove me wrong? Half assed dino fossils? Or so called experts that do not even have DNA of these dinos nor do they know what they even looked like, funny enough even in your source the estimates on speed and how exaggerated they are should show you that you can not make a hypothetical scenario on a hypothetical information... It is all a guess work.
To the point this is a game and is meant to be fun and balance for dinos of the same tier. Anyhow all will be revealed after the recode...

Nobody said Giga can't win, I just said Rex has a better chance of winning. What makes the speeds exaggerated, because YOU say they are? What experience do you have in paleontology exactly, or frankly anything close to it? Its not hypothetical information, its a declared science for a reason. This isn't astrology, which isn't even really an actual science, this paleontology and it isn't made up. But we do know what they looked like lol, we have their skeletal structures. The point of the post was to suggest a solution while we wait idk another 3 or 4 months for this recode. Gigas need to hunt in packs, as they were probably pack animals, thus the devs designed them to such a degree... If you want a better chance of beating Rex while we wait on change, group up.

[.Terror.]

Just so you know, Giganotosaurus carolinii might've reached 8.1 tons, according to a jaw fragment, which is not far behind to the LARGEST T. rex found. So in general, Trex was larger by a tad bit, but not considerably.

And tell me how a bigger bite force is an instant win for Rex? If you can't get the animal to the back of your teeth, you can't apply that said force. And I would argue Giga should be fodder for a Rex, even in a face to face fight. Giga was still a massive predator. Bite force is not everything, not by a longshot. A Giga's bite was probably just as nasty, just in a different manner.

At the end of the day, a face to face fight between two fully grown adults should mean the certain death for both ingame. It's not okay, imho, that Trex can do whatever it wants with Giga. We should forget this 'Trex is the king of dinosaurs' mentality already.

[General Eclectic]

Originally posted by .Terror.:

Just so you know, Giganotosaurus carolinii might've reached 8.1 tons, according to a jaw fragment, which is not far behind to the LARGEST T. rex found. So in general, Trex was larger by a tad bit, but not considerably.

And tell me how a bigger bite force is an instant win for Rex? If you can't get the animal to the back of your teeth, you can't apply that said force. And I would argue Giga should be fodder for a Rex, even in a face to face fight. Giga was still a massive predator. Bite force is not everything, not by a longshot. A Giga's bite was probably just as nasty, just in a different manner.

At the end of the day, a face to face fight between two fully grown adults should mean the certain death for both ingame. It's not okay, imho, that Trex can do whatever it wants with Giga. We should forget this 'Trex is the king of dinosaurs' mentality already.

Why do people keep coming up with these strawman assumptions every time I saw something. Where did I say bite force was everything? I just said it was a significant factor, other factors that paleontologists say made Rex a better contender was a larger brain cavity, stronger bones, more muscle mass, more weight, more advanced dental records, etc. They say that
Giga was simply outmatched but that doesn't mean it couldn't beat Rex. Giga still probably had speed and agility on its side. But yes a 1v1 between Giga and Rex should mean certain death for the two, and while we wait on this recode, Gigas should start pack hunting more. I see more Rex groups than I see Giga groups...

[Shot'em]

Originally posted by General Eclectic:

Originally posted by .Terror.:

Just so you know, Giganotosaurus carolinii might've reached 8.1 tons, according to a jaw fragment, which is not far behind to the LARGEST T. rex found. So in general, Trex was larger by a tad bit, but not considerably.

And tell me how a bigger bite force is an instant win for Rex? If you can't get the animal to the back of your teeth, you can't apply that said force. And I would argue Giga should be fodder for a Rex, even in a face to face fight. Giga was still a massive predator. Bite force is not everything, not by a longshot. A Giga's bite was probably just as nasty, just in a different manner.

At the end of the day, a face to face fight between two fully grown adults should mean the certain death for both ingame. It's not okay, imho, that Trex can do whatever it wants with Giga. We should forget this 'Trex is the king of dinosaurs' mentality already.

Why do people keep coming up with these strawman assumptions every time I saw something. Where did I say bite force was everything? I just said it was a significant factor, other factors that paleontologists say made Rex a better contender was a larger brain cavity, stronger bones, more muscle mass, more weight, more advanced dental records, etc. They say that
Giga was simply outmatched but that doesn't mean it couldn't beat Rex. Giga still probably had speed and agility on its side. But yes a 1v1 between Giga and Rex should mean certain death for the two, and while we wait on this recode, Gigas should start pack hunting more. I see more Rex groups than I see Giga groups...

Gee, I wonder why? Could it be that one of them is an overall oppressive force that keeps hunting down the adult Gigas they see, grouping up to prevent others from usurping their throne?

[General Eclectic]

Originally posted by Shot'em:

Originally posted by General Eclectic:

Why do people keep coming up with these strawman assumptions every time I saw something. Where did I say bite force was everything? I just said it was a significant factor, other factors that paleontologists say made Rex a better contender was a larger brain cavity, stronger bones, more muscle mass, more weight, more advanced dental records, etc. They say that
Giga was simply outmatched but that doesn't mean it couldn't beat Rex. Giga still probably had speed and agility on its side. But yes a 1v1 between Giga and Rex should mean certain death for the two, and while we wait on this recode, Gigas should start pack hunting more. I see more Rex groups than I see Giga groups...

Gee, I wonder why? Could it be that one of them is an overall oppressive force that keeps hunting down the adult Gigas they see, grouping up to prevent others from usurping their throne?

They hunt down adult Gigas because they are alone lol

[Shot'em]

Originally posted by General Eclectic:

Originally posted by Shot'em:

Gee, I wonder why? Could it be that one of them is an overall oppressive force that keeps hunting down the adult Gigas they see, grouping up to prevent others from usurping their throne?

They hunt down adult Gigas because they are alone lol

So, the Gigas are alone, and as such the Rexes hunt them. This prevents the Giga from meeting up with another Giga to pack hunt the Rexes, maintaining the throne they hold. As such, would it not make sense that the problem isn't Gigas not packing up, but rather the fact that Rex is too oppressive for its own good?