Total War: PHARAOH DYNASTIES

Total War: PHARAOH DYNASTIES

44 个评价
Rewarding and logical building progression
   
奖励
收藏
已收藏
取消收藏
标签: mod, campaign
文件大小
发表于
更新日期
133.665 KB
2024 年 7 月 25 日 下午 1:05
2024 年 7 月 28 日 上午 10:22
2 项改动说明 ( 查看 )

订阅以下载
Rewarding and logical building progression

描述
This makes it so minor settlement buildings provide +1/2/3 building slots per tier, as is in warhammer 3, the same is true for major settlements.

The scaling or resources generated by buildings is also more logical and dynamic, being +20/40 for tier 1/2 for example. Making building buildings more rewarding.

I did this because empire building feels terrible in pharao, with little to no reward for making investments in upgrading or developing your settlements. A pretty major oversight by the developers imo.
8 条留言
HungryBat  [作者] 7 月 6 日 下午 9:03 
no can do sir
hsaIV 7 月 6 日 下午 8:11 
Can you make a mod that adds building slots to the minor settlements?
jeinsgon 2024 年 11 月 2 日 上午 7:06 
Como es eso de que 1,2,3 espacios de construccion por nivel?? no entiendo
AwwHEEEALNaw 2024 年 8 月 8 日 下午 10:51 
thanks for doing this, I have made myself basically the same mod in previous historical total war games where there was the same issue (Attila Charlemagne being the main one). I don't know why CA design it the way they do
HungryBat  [作者] 2024 年 7 月 28 日 下午 2:15 
This is adapted to the high influence mechanic so no issues there
AutarchSpar09 2024 年 7 月 28 日 下午 1:47 
@Nothing does this mod also factor in Agamemnon high influence resource mechanic?
Haldier 2024 年 7 月 28 日 上午 8:05 
Amen man, when I tested the game it was one of my biggest complains. Also many buildings in theory give a percentage extra that sounds really good until you realise the bonus you get is ridiculous. Thanks for doing this mod
888 2024 年 7 月 28 日 上午 1:44 
@Nothing:
perhaps you want build up on this idea:
Main settlemnts have %copper/gold ... increase buildings altough there are not such resources in the province anyways. I those buildings would have a numerical amount of gold income instead of % that would make more sense. (not sure if this is an oversight of CA).