Steamをインストール
ログイン
|
言語
简体中文(簡体字中国語)
繁體中文(繁体字中国語)
한국어 (韓国語)
ไทย (タイ語)
български (ブルガリア語)
Čeština(チェコ語)
Dansk (デンマーク語)
Deutsch (ドイツ語)
English (英語)
Español - España (スペイン語 - スペイン)
Español - Latinoamérica (スペイン語 - ラテンアメリカ)
Ελληνικά (ギリシャ語)
Français (フランス語)
Italiano (イタリア語)
Bahasa Indonesia(インドネシア語)
Magyar(ハンガリー語)
Nederlands (オランダ語)
Norsk (ノルウェー語)
Polski (ポーランド語)
Português(ポルトガル語-ポルトガル)
Português - Brasil (ポルトガル語 - ブラジル)
Română(ルーマニア語)
Русский (ロシア語)
Suomi (フィンランド語)
Svenska (スウェーデン語)
Türkçe (トルコ語)
Tiếng Việt (ベトナム語)
Українська (ウクライナ語)
翻訳の問題を報告
Psychology
ArrestPeacefullyChance * opinionFactor (0 to 1, linear with opinion from -100 to 100 of arrester by arrested) * sameFactionFactor (50% higher for same faction, normal otherwise) * mentalStateFactor (1/5 chance if arrestee is having a mental break)
ArrestPeacefullyChance is base 0.02, increases by social 5% per level, affected by talking (90% weight)
This is not a bad approach, in my opinion. I think the base chance is a bit low, but it's a good list of factors combined in a reasonable way.
Vanilla (1.3)
ArrestSuccessChance is base 0.6, plus 7.5% per level of social, affected by manipulation (90% weight, 5% allowance before effect, 100% max).
I'm not aware of whether or not this figure is modified in the game's computations, as above with the factors. I suspect it is a simple check against a uniform variate, with opinion, faction, and mental state all ignored.
From the differences, I gather Psychology conceives of arrest as involving talking the person into coming quietly, while vanilla's implementation is partly about talking to them and partly physically subduing them. Not that my opinion really matters here, but I like Psychology's approach better. Would you consider suppressing the vanilla stat from showing up in-game? Or perhaps adapting the vanilla one to use Psychology's formula?