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
5 
举报此帖
What startles me is, that the food import edict seems to ad food to the main food income.
To me it would make much more sense, if the amount of food I import to one of my provinces would be taken from the main food income (the imported food has to come frome somewhere, doesn't it?). And so the provinces with high fertility, would actually be as important as they realy were.
overall I think the seasonal drop in food production only makes sense if we can store food. without that, having a food drop in winter is actually unrealistc. A constant food income is more realistic than a seasonal one without storage, because the former simulated the reality of fluctuation+storage better.
Adding more realism isnt always about more complexity, unless you model the complexity in all its complexity, which is difficult. So less can be more...