商店页面
Crusader Kings III
全部 讨论 截图 艺术作品 实况直播 视频 创意工坊 新闻 指南 评测

Crusader Kings III

商店页面
Crusader Kings III >  创意工坊 > Robmart 的创意工坊
47 个评价
Elf Destiny: Elven Superiority 2.0
描述 讨论0 留言7 改动说明
   
奖励
收藏
已收藏
取消收藏
Alternative History, Balance, Culture, Gameplay
文件大小
发表于
更新日期
177.065 KB
2024 年 4 月 5 日 上午 6:34
2024 年 6 月 1 日 下午 11:00
7 项改动说明 （ 查看 ）
创建者
Robmart
离线
查看所有 508 个合集（也许有些被隐藏了）
9,679 不重复访客数
3,172 当前订阅者
139 当前收藏人数

订阅以下载
Elf Destiny: Elven Superiority 2.0

描述
Prevents elves with Elven Superiority from getting married and becoming lovers with humans.

Optional game rule:
* Human Marriage Aversion: Adds a malus to marriage acceptance between elves and humans
* Small Aversion: -50
* Large Aversion: -100
* Extreme Aversion: -250

* Human Lovers:
* No Change
* Illegal: Having human lovers is a crime for elves with Elven Superiority
* Impossible: Having human lovers is impossible for elves with Elven Superiority
7 条留言
< >
The LoreMaster 6 月 20 日 下午 12:37 
Getting the same issue Seelenschwarz has.
I think it is because the -250 only applies when humans want to do a marriages but not when elf characters look for marriage.
一杯浊酒一份孤独 2024 年 12 月 9 日 上午 1:20 
Does this still work?
Seelenschwarz 2024 年 7 月 17 日 上午 10:29 
Does not work, tried some things, removed better AI marriage, More Courtier Marriages And Guardians, to remove the effects, also changed the extreme aversion value to - 2500 , human lovers is on impossible, but after short time ingame ai elves got a random human partner.
wkql4415 2024 年 7 月 8 日 上午 2:43 
Dear Robmart
Is it valid on latest ver.?
Dragow 2024 年 5 月 9 日 上午 8:26 
Human Lovers:
* No Change
Even on that setting the seduction scheme is completely blocked
PBMKZXY 2024 年 4 月 20 日 上午 5:51 
@M it's fairly easy, I just did that in under 1 minute hehe. But for author, it might make it easier for all of us when there's an update so we don't have to keep editing our local files hehe
T 2024 年 4 月 18 日 下午 1:48 
Could you make this compatible with gamerule gadget? I.e.
elf_no_aversion= {
flag = GG_can_change_rule
}
for all of them?