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






在 Youtube 上 



Personally i'd like this restriction removed, since it allows room for larping. or atleast not be as unreasonable as it currently is, i'd like joining wars to be positive too than outright being a flat no right now, even as they're getting destroyed they refuse the help, which has lead me to resurrect the faction as a vassal or alliance and then i run into the issue of not being able to give them any land. i feel this part of the mod surely was poorly thought out. XD
The continued negative relation since i cant build it up any other way, not even able to join their wars for more positive relation. will lead to a eventual war i cannot avoid, this is so badge and terrible. this also double down when you have vassals and certain alliances unable to give them back land they lost, just to be nice to them and be kept on positive.
Relationships were slightly negative ( around -60), i wanted to sign nap and offer them settlement in the neighboring province. They were ok with signing nap for money, but settlement proposal added huge negative modifier to the deal. I understand the current logic, but it still feels strange that instead of just greatly reducing positive modifier from the settlement offer, mod turns it into the negative one. Still much better than vanilla, though.
The mods should work together. In that other mod, most of the changes seem to be focused on lore-based aversion, so it should be fine and they shouldn’t conflict in a major way. 🙂
It all depends on whether you have positive relations with the AI you’re offering the settlement to. If you don’t, then it’s completely normal.
Also, if the settlement is basically worthless, the AI won’t want it anyway.
Let me know what your relationship level with that AI was (how much + or - you had).
after reading each mod description i'm still unable to decipher if they would overwrite the same tables.
LST seems to focus on removing strategic threat and implements race specific aversions, centered mostly around territories.
this mod says it also plays off lore/culture based aversion but then leans into dynamic alliances and whatnot after that. the changes to settlement trading and trade deals interest me the most.
will the dynamic relationship mechanics and the changes to diplomacy values of this mod and the territory mechanics/threat calculation of loreful strategic threat work together?
appreciate your work, and insight. thanks