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









Honestly, the naming conventions here are primarily for military stuff, so if you're doing something else yeah it'll be different.
Keep in mind that that different nations use different classification systems. So customizing yours as fits your needs makes perfect sense.
The ship types break into different types of modified ship from 1 single ship that is based on mining ship that is capable of spaceflight and atmosphere flight.
Also, the fleet type I am doing is industry based, not military, not sure if this changes anything.
The armed variations of the ship is lightly armed for self defence rather than for offensive objectives. Not sure if that changes anything.
The ship types I got:
Ship type 1:
Cockpit, Remote Control, Unarmed.
US-01
Ship type 2:
Cockpit, Remote Control, Armed.
QUS-01A
Ship Type 3:
Cockpit, Remote Control, Unarmed.
(Instead of 3x3 connector it will have 1x1 connector when update releases)
US-01B
Ship Type 4:
Cockpit, Remote Control, Armed.
QUS-01C
Also why some games use Mk1, Mk2 etc, is that realistic or nah?
Would I add Q to ship type 1 even if it has remote control, it was not modified, but instead it comes with it.
Apologies if it gets you on a wild goose research chase, I figured you already know this, but if not, let me know so then I can do my own research instead of you wasting your time.
Just fascinated by this naming / classification system that is based on real world.
BRUH 1000 character limit.
So there aren't multiple meanings of M or G for any given ship.