Установить Steam
войти
|
язык
简体中文 (упрощенный китайский)
繁體中文 (традиционный китайский)
日本語 (японский)
한국어 (корейский)
ไทย (тайский)
Български (болгарский)
Čeština (чешский)
Dansk (датский)
Deutsch (немецкий)
English (английский)
Español - España (испанский — Испания)
Español - Latinoamérica (испанский — Латинская Америка)
Ελληνικά (греческий)
Français (французский)
Italiano (итальянский)
Bahasa Indonesia (индонезийский)
Magyar (венгерский)
Nederlands (нидерландский)
Norsk (норвежский)
Polski (польский)
Português (португальский — Португалия)
Português-Brasil (португальский — Бразилия)
Română (румынский)
Suomi (финский)
Svenska (шведский)
Türkçe (турецкий)
Tiếng Việt (вьетнамский)
Українська (украинский)
Сообщить о проблеме с переводом
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
}
}