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









None of the cycles felt relevant in themselves beyond the degree to which avoiding the awful two wasted turns of anarchy is more or less hard in the three of them. Oligarchy, despite having the worst bonuses on every level (seriously, -25% science?) is the only one that can actually be actively maintained, as the other two key off of things that the player is already trying to maximize and still have a certain maximum threshold the player can realistically attain, compared to Oligarchy where one can just keep buying workers. It is thus the least awful.
Overall, all of them have Virtue penalties that actively punish the player for building their Civ in a game called Civilization, and thus I am unlikely to boot it back up.