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










Please fix this, we really want to use it in our playthrough since it is a great concept, just horribly broken right now.
All 3 of us are now pretty sure having a cap on Menace is a major factor in this problem.
The epitome of WTFery was 2 people at cap Menace, and one of them somehow passing the other Highest Menace by attacking an enemy... I don't even ;3
You might also want to use the in game adjustments offered by LeaderLib, for the Menace system- Set an attribute to decrease Menace, increase decay rates ETC.
It is my understanding that DarkAssassiaN is considering several ways to approach the issue.
Wits because for example in my head it's like... Thinking tactically, not presenting your self as a target to the enemy ETC ETC in a role play sense. It's your "Smarts" but not your intelligence or wisdom let's say. So you'd not be attracting too much attention, striking surgically and methodically - It is even supported by how Wits do increase Crit.
And of course Sneaking because it means you know how to be... Sneaky. IE, not attract attention, be stealthy ETC.