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
Love the comments in the margins of the script about the Clausewitz engine, a nice chuckle, I feel your pain.
@Kepos Yes, if a world is taken which takes you below the level, it will remove a level from your cap. However, as Peter34 said, it won't remove a leader, just make it so if you lose a leader you won't be able to hire another until you gain another slot again.
There's no penalty for being above cap, because it's a *hard* cap. One you can't actively go over, unlike the cap on Systems, or Navy Size or Starbases where you *can* go over but there's a *scaling* *penalty* for doing so.
I think the Leader cap being hard is stupid. Paradox should strive to employ soft caps whereever possible.
BTW, what if an enemy captures one or more worlds...does the mod calculate downwards too?
Thats if you built a full ringworld in every single system. Which you cannot. But taking Habitats, some systems would provide more pops than a ringworld, especially if they take the Master Builders perk as well.
7 Habitats in one system (quite easy!) would be 105 pops (Master Builders). Or 8 Habitats (Not as easy) without Master Builders for 104 Pops.
Basically, 1800 seems like a very small amount. Maybe have it scale on map size?