Asenna Steam
kirjaudu sisään
|
kieli
简体中文 (yksinkertaistettu kiina)
繁體中文 (perinteinen kiina)
日本語 (japani)
한국어 (korea)
ไทย (thai)
български (bulgaria)
Čeština (tšekki)
Dansk (tanska)
Deutsch (saksa)
English (englanti)
Español – España (espanja – Espanja)
Español – Latinoamérica (espanja – Lat. Am.)
Ελληνικά (kreikka)
Français (ranska)
Italiano (italia)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesia)
Magyar (unkari)
Nederlands (hollanti)
Norsk (norja)
Polski (puola)
Português (portugali – Portugali)
Português – Brasil (portugali – Brasilia)
Română (romania)
Русский (venäjä)
Svenska (ruotsi)
Türkçe (turkki)
Tiếng Việt (vietnam)
Українська (ukraina)
Ilmoita käännösongelmasta
Paradox themselves write
is_shown = {
is_ruler = yes
is_landless_adventurer = yes
}
In their own files, and it should be intented, do you disagree with the option being available for both?
is "is_landed" even an option? I dont see it in the paradox files.
is_shown = {
is_ruler = yes
is_landless_adventurer = yes
}
Since there's an implied AND, this means that you have to be both a ruler and a landless adventurer to use them, i.e. a landed ruler can no longer use them.
Is this the intended behavior? Or was that meant to be an explicit OR? And was it meant to be 'is_landed' instead of 'is_ruler'? Because a landless adventurer is already a ruler, so it's double checking in that case. Overall, was the intention something more like?:
is_shown = {
OR = {
is_landed = yes
is_landless_adventurer = yes
}
}