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








The main point I'd make is that the most common way to estimate ideal player ranges for maps doesn't take into account the degree to which highly connected maps effectively reduce map size and make them much more cramped. Most assumptions about players-per-province ratios seem to be aimed at maps w/avg connections per prov of 3-4 - when you get over that pure number-based estimates lead to ugly, uneven starts. The actual metric which seems most useful here - but that I don't have a great rule-of-thumb to use with - is shortest path between any two points, but especially capitals.
The other thing I'd say is that snakey seas - especially ones never more than 2 wide - hurt UW nations a lot.
I am planning on building a map eventually, are there any guides about optimal or suggested map balancing, idealy also relevant to what you have here?