Nainstalovat Steam
přihlásit se
|
jazyk
简体中文 (Zjednodušená čínština)
繁體中文 (Tradiční čínština)
日本語 (Japonština)
한국어 (Korejština)
ไทย (Thajština)
български (Bulharština)
Dansk (Dánština)
Deutsch (Němčina)
English (Angličtina)
Español-España (Evropská španělština)
Español-Latinoamérica (Latin. španělština)
Ελληνικά (Řečtina)
Français (Francouzština)
Italiano (Italština)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonéština)
Magyar (Maďarština)
Nederlands (Nizozemština)
Norsk (Norština)
Polski (Polština)
Português (Evropská portugalština)
Português-Brasil (Brazilská portugalština)
Română (Rumunština)
Русский (Ruština)
Suomi (Finština)
Svenska (Švédština)
Türkçe (Turečtina)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamština)
Українська (Ukrajinština)
Nahlásit problém s překladem
Like say 'Anti-Feminist' to Androcentric (Male Focus) and 'Anti-Meninist' to Gynocentric (Female Focus)
I see you changed the description... but you applied Gynocentric and Androcentric to the wrong effects
Gynocentrist means women are more important/dominant
Androcentrist means men more important/dominant
Maybe 20-25%? I already have enough problems, with half of my factions being a pacifist, even those I am militarist.
Should I change the other to -25 governing ethics aswell?
What about the happiness buff/debuff?
I don't know if I want the two options to be just opposite of eachother, but I also don't want one to accedentally be obviously better
I'll reduce it to 25%, is that ok?
Thats fair.
Actually, that's not true. Since you would only be accepting candidates for certain roles, they would be just as many people. It makes no sense for them to cost more unless it would be a new policy since then you would be flushing out half of them. Even then you would not really lose candidates. Personally, I never see a bunch of new ones unless you use or remove one of the candidates.