Steam'i Yükleyin
giriş
|
dil
简体中文 (Basitleştirilmiş Çince)
繁體中文 (Geleneksel Çince)
日本語 (Japonca)
한국어 (Korece)
ไทย (Tayca)
Български (Bulgarca)
Čeština (Çekçe)
Dansk (Danca)
Deutsch (Almanca)
English (İngilizce)
Español - España (İspanyolca - İspanya)
Español - Latinoamérica (İspanyolca - Latin Amerika)
Ελληνικά (Yunanca)
Français (Fransızca)
Italiano (İtalyanca)
Bahasa Indonesia (Endonezce)
Magyar (Macarca)
Nederlands (Hollandaca)
Norsk (Norveççe)
Polski (Lehçe)
Português (Portekizce - Portekiz)
Português - Brasil (Portekizce - Brezilya)
Română (Rumence)
Русский (Rusça)
Suomi (Fince)
Svenska (İsveççe)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamca)
Українська (Ukraynaca)
Bir çeviri sorunu bildirin
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
}
}