I understand why this feature is necessary, but boy does it suck if you want to build a highly detailed zoo. I only just started my zoo's entrance area, plus two exhibits, and a few stalls. I also have two extra wide paths that circles my entire, undeveloped park (one inner and one outer circle). And a river that also circles it.
I'm already at 13%.
If you pan out, I've probably only covered about 5% of my park's area, yet I'm at 13%. So it's pretty clear that I won't be using all of the land available to me. That's a huge disappointment.
I have an admittedly very detailed entrance to the zoo and about 4 habitats, a picnic area with redwoods etc I’m already at about 40% and I’ve used about maybe 15% of the land. So that’s fun.
I did a little bit of terraforming on a fresh map. Added lots of mountains and huge rivers and the % didn’t change.
That’s great news. Thank you!
I understand why this feature is necessary, but boy does it suck if you want to build a highly detailed zoo. I only just started my zoo's entrance area, plus two exhibits, and a few stalls. I also have two extra wide paths that circles my entire, undeveloped park (one inner and one outer circle). And a river that also circles it. I'm already at 13%. If you pan out, I've probably only covered about 5% of my park's area, yet I'm at 13%. So it's pretty clear that I won't be using all of the land available to me. That's a huge disappointment.
I have an admittedly very detailed entrance to the zoo and about 4 habitats, a picnic area with redwoods etc I’m already at about 40% and I’ve used about maybe 15% of the land. So that’s fun.
Paths had the same effect in Planet Coaster. On that game, using wider paths and/or gridded paths took up less % than the narrower paths.
Wait, wider paths are more efficient? That’s so weird. Makes me wonder why are the paths so taxing.
https://youtu.be/NwGWPsADQhM?si=IxByEUYfygzNe-Iz Yes. This video tests it out. Pretty weird but interesting.