Animals should have variations in size, strength, and/or other visual indicators based on their respective qualities.
Deer and moose could have larger antlers, or just antlers with more or less points. More points, higher quality.
Boars come in various sizes, 90kg on the high end of average weight. But once in a blue moon be found in the wild weighing over 200 kg, being slower, but much more powerful.
The same goes for bears along with other animals, including some fish.
Along with variations in size should come variations in quantity of meat. A large catfish, for example, should give meat proportionally to how much space it takes in your inventory.
And instead of variations to physically indicators for each point in quality, it would probably be easy to have, say, 3 "levels" per animal.
Base Quality to 50% better than BQ could be your normal sizes. (ie Boars q 30 - 45)
51% higher than BQ to 150% could have a noticeable increase or indicator (46-75)
151% and up will be their largest size (76+)
Of course the numbers are up for debate, but the concept could make hunting more interactive. A hunter can see game and can typically tell if its of better quality by sight alone, and we should be able to as well!
It's an alternative to inspecting that makes sense.
Add more details if you wish community!
-
CSPAN
- Posts: 885
- Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:10 am
Animal quality relative to size/other indicators
LS of Twin Lakes BIG TRUCKS
-
zebratul
- Posts: 438
- Joined: Sun May 08, 2016 9:15 am
- Location: Moscow
Re: Animal quality relative to size/other indicators
Sounds pretty sweet, i'm up for any change that makes animals more unique to each other, instead of copy-pasted clones
-
CSPAN
- Posts: 885
- Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:10 am
Re: Animal quality relative to size/other indicators
I am not at all savvy in this field, but I imagine it's not something TOTALLY difficult to do or implement.
LS of Twin Lakes BIG TRUCKS
-
isdel
- Posts: 179
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 12:53 am
Re: Animal quality relative to size/other indicators
A lazier way to do this that doesn't require extra modeling would be to scale the animal's model up or down like Wurm does.
-
Granger
- Posts: 9255
- Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2010 2:00 pm
Re: Animal quality relative to size/other indicators
This. As they do with growing trees...isdel wrote:A lazier way to do this that doesn't require extra modeling would be to scale the animal's model up or down like Wurm does.
⁎ Mon Mar 22, 2010 ✝ Thu Jan 23, 2020
-
CSPAN
- Posts: 885
- Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:10 am
Re: Animal quality relative to size/other indicators
That alone could be neat, I wouldn't call it lazy though, it's more less just simple. It's manageable.
Basic quality lynx can still keep its current animation, but better quality lynx animations are entirely redone to look like a lynx!
Basic quality lynx can still keep its current animation, but better quality lynx animations are entirely redone to look like a lynx!
LS of Twin Lakes BIG TRUCKS
-
ErdTod
- Posts: 577
- Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 7:53 pm
Re: Animal quality relative to size/other indicators
+1, trolls are already unique. Other animals could hace this too )
-
ven
- Posts: 1120
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 12:17 am
Animal model size scaling with quality
It would be nice if wild land animal size scaled proportionally to their quality.
Looking forward to baby deer and 4m bears.
Looking forward to baby deer and 4m bears.
Venator
-
CSPAN
- Posts: 885
- Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:10 am
Re: Animal model size scaling with quality
Homie....viewtopic.php?f=48&t=53972
LS of Twin Lakes BIG TRUCKS
-
ven
- Posts: 1120
- Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2016 12:17 am