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
Game balance is always, ALWAYS going to be a matter of perspective and personal preference. That's why game difficulty choice is (or at least was) a thing. And that's part of the reason why mods are so popular - because they help players to customize the difficulty to their playstyle and preference. Unless we're talking about quality of life mods, I'd say roughly half of RimWorld mods are things that Tynan would consider bad for game balance.
So... no. I do not agree that the insanely high chance of cancer is a way of balancing it, especially since a way of fixing cancer does not even exist aside from cutting off the limb or body part or resorting to a mod. (Heck, there are barely any mods that can fix cancer. I know because I've really, really looked for a solution.) But then, that's my opinion. And the way it currently works does not fit my playstyle or preference.