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
Also it should probably just be named F-100D and not F-100D (SEAD) since dynamic pylons makes this naming obsolete.
Thanks as always, Ace! The silver scheme was intended; labelling it "tan" was the error. I just forgot to update the texture's displayName parameter after a cut-and-paste. I've fixed this for my next update.
w.r.t. F-100D (SEAD), that vehicle displayName is inherited from the original class that I used as a base. Tacking on the "intended role" like that, based on default pylon loadout is something SOG devs have done with all their planes. With SOG's F-4, I decided that the AT role was generic enough and I over-wrote SOG's displayName in keeping with vanilla naming conventions. However, with F100-D, I decided to use the SEAD loadout as my default (I think I read somewhere that this was a common mission for the F-100 towards the end of service life with the USAF). And then I decided not to overwrite SOG's displayName in order to head off a barrage of complaints like, "Why is this plane spawning in with anti-radiation missiles?" For now, I'm going to leave it as-is.
Although also, F-100D generic variant doesn't show up in Zeus.