|
Somarinoa
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: May 14, 2007, 03:55:09 PM » |
|
It would also be nice to be able to see when a creature went extinct as opposed to still surviving, as well.
The only way I could figure this working "easily" though would just be a red border around those creatures who died out, though. But it would certainly be interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Hydromancerx
|
|
« Reply #16 on: May 14, 2007, 11:09:28 PM » |
|
I see what you mean. It's become nearly impossible to see what evolved from what with all these lines. There must be an easier way.
There is an easier way, but it's very hard. We can break all of the organisms into ten charts. Each chart would represent one of the original organisms from the 2nd generation, and all of said organisms descendants. This would hopefully serve as a decent remedy (for awhile at least. Eventually, further divisions will need to be made as the population of Sagan 4 grows). This would be alot of work for just one person, so it would be best to split the task amongst a few dedicated individuals. This is of course just a suggestion. Anyone want to help? Cause i think the current cladogrm needs to be retired with the 10 smaller ones. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Somarinoa
|
|
« Reply #17 on: May 15, 2007, 03:26:22 AM » |
|
I'm down with it being broken into 10 shards, I think it's a good idea.
I'd help, but I still use MSPaint, and couldn't figure out how to download Gimp properly, for I are stupid at techsavvies.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Russ1
|
|
« Reply #18 on: May 18, 2007, 10:16:01 AM » |
|
I just wondered, why has my Were Shrew had a name change? I havn't been on the computer since I posted it so I didn't see any explanation.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 Sagan 4 must be one of the best and most inventive World Builders out there. |
|
|
|
Oviraptor
|
|
« Reply #19 on: May 18, 2007, 10:22:16 AM » |
|
Because Hydro wanted you to change the name (as a part of being approved), but he was anxious to get the creatures on Wiki. Just tell him what you want it to be named and he can change it, since Wiki is easily changed.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Russ1
|
|
« Reply #20 on: May 18, 2007, 10:43:19 AM » |
|
What was it about 'Were Shrew' that needed to be changed to become 'acceptable'?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Sagan 4 must be one of the best and most inventive World Builders out there. |
|
|
|
Oviraptor
|
|
« Reply #21 on: May 18, 2007, 10:45:23 AM » |
|
Hydro didn't like the word "Were," he said it didn't fit.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Russ1
|
|
« Reply #22 on: May 18, 2007, 11:33:49 AM » |
|
I havn't heard from Hydro yet, but that sounds a bit harsh. It doesn't fit? Did the word Potato fit with the vegatable? If it isn't already in the rules I propose a new rule is made that says as long as a creatures name isn't completely stupid, it is the creators choice. What difference does the name make?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Sagan 4 must be one of the best and most inventive World Builders out there. |
|
|
|
Oviraptor
|
|
« Reply #23 on: May 18, 2007, 11:36:44 AM » |
|
That's a question for him, not me. As long as you have an account at SporeWiki, you can go in and edit that yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Russ1
|
|
« Reply #24 on: May 18, 2007, 11:39:57 AM » |
|
O yeah, forgot I could do that. As long as it's ok then I'll do that later. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 18, 2007, 12:17:55 PM by Russ1 »
|
Logged
|
Sagan 4 must be one of the best and most inventive World Builders out there. |
|
|
|
Ichthyostega
|
|
« Reply #25 on: May 18, 2007, 01:12:56 PM » |
|
I'm not trying to protest or anything, but in my opinion, I think members should be able to name their creations whatever they want.
However, a better name would be "Fat Shrew", "Mountain Shrew", or "Killer Shrew", etc. Those are some of my suggestions.
If something is "Were", that means it's a shape shifter (for example a man transforms into a werewolf). Russ might of named it the "Were Shrew" because it is as ferocious as a werewolf.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 18, 2007, 01:16:49 PM by Ichthyostega »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Russ1
|
|
« Reply #26 on: May 18, 2007, 02:34:11 PM » |
|
Yep, that's what I was thinking when I named it. I do understand the meaning of were might lead to misunderstandings, but I deffinantely agree with the 'name rule' idea.
The other names for the shrew are good by the way Ichthyo.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 18, 2007, 02:39:17 PM by Russ1 »
|
Logged
|
Sagan 4 must be one of the best and most inventive World Builders out there. |
|
|
|
Hydromancerx
|
|
« Reply #27 on: May 19, 2007, 01:23:06 AM » |
|
I PMed you back. See your PM on why. EDIT: I just noticed that Krakow Temperate Forest has not trees. All it has is Stickyballs, Carnoferns and Nidbin. In short we need some more flora here! Plz make some you guys!  |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 19, 2007, 02:00:03 AM by Hydromancerx »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
clayren
|
|
« Reply #28 on: May 19, 2007, 08:44:19 AM » |
|
I just noticed that Krakow Temperate Forest has not trees. All it has is Stickyballs, Carnoferns and Nidbin. In short we need some more flora here! Plz make some you guys! Done and done, say hello to the southern crystal tree. Edit: Wow...I really didn't plan on making three organisms today. Oh well, when inspiration strikes, you gotta go with the flow. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 19, 2007, 04:09:25 PM by clayren »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Somarinoa
|
|
« Reply #29 on: May 19, 2007, 08:05:45 PM » |
|
What was it about 'Were Shrew' that needed to be changed to become 'acceptable'?
I think it's because "were" generally refers to lycanthropes such as werewolves, which your wereshrew obviously wasn't. That's how I see Hydro seeing it at least. Someone else I see said the same, but I wanted to throw my two cents in anyways. I'm curious though -- what was the Wereshrew's name changed to? Cuz last I checked, it looked like Wereshrew on the wiki to me...I think. Maybe not, I'll have to check when I hypertext tonight. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
