安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文(繁体中文)
日本語(日语)
한국어(韩语)
ไทย(泰语)
български(保加利亚语)
Čeština(捷克语)
Dansk(丹麦语)
Deutsch(德语)
English(英语)
Español-España(西班牙语 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希腊语)
Français(法语)
Italiano(意大利语)
Bahasa Indonesia(印度尼西亚语)
Magyar(匈牙利语)
Nederlands(荷兰语)
Norsk(挪威语)
Polski(波兰语)
Português(葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙)
Português-Brasil(葡萄牙语 - 巴西)
Română(罗马尼亚语)
Русский(俄语)
Suomi(芬兰语)
Svenska(瑞典语)
Türkçe(土耳其语)
Tiếng Việt(越南语)
Українська(乌克兰语)
报告翻译问题



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_G4SjjZse7w
I got it covered, hold my borsch!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXqKkYYALMU
Interesting consideration.
Would be pretty crazy, I don't think 1 government could rule a piece of land that large for a long period of time, when nations control so much territory, it usually results in fragmentation. Although for the US+Canada it might work because there's no ocean separation which makes a "united country" feel more united.
Most of it is inhabitable, just that it's not worth inhabiting at the moment because they don't have enough population to warrant it. Yakutsk for example is built on an actual ice shelf so people living there are constantly melting the land below them and so their houses are constantly sinking and it has an average temperature of 18(-8C) degrees and can get as low as -84(-64C), and it still houses 300,000 people.
Or from the west coast to the indian ocean like Biden promised :D