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









Almost all deserts have some amount of soil (I hesitate to say all because world gen wonkyness but it is the norm) and the bags can be infinitely "generated" from a single tile - I suppose it'd be an issue on the "extreme" versions.
For the most part "ice sheet's" balance is covered by "terrain affordance for dirt", I guess it's applicable if you want it easier on the affordance (via choosing light) and harder on the materials - I believe, however, that this is a prime example of why the existence of the options are a good thing.
---
Still, I was mostly just throwing my hat in the ring because I saw other people asking for the option but I respect your choice on the subject.
Rimworld already has abstractions of this nature, you need not think about it as pawns "conjuring" dirt - the "work needed" should just reflect the fact that it it includes transporting dirt from somewhere else, despite the fact that the pawn will not actually move.
On a mechanical sense, the main point of this is to remove a resource that has a singular non recurrent purpose from the game - after the soil is placed at the position where the player will use it, the dirt "thing" no longer serves any purpose, however, both the resource and the workbench/bills still exist in the world and menus.
On the other hand, abstracting the "dirt" transportation makes for a "cleaner" game without balance implications that are any worse than placing soil already is and the only downside is that you will not see the pawn physically walking to pick up the dirt.