Zainstaluj Steam
zaloguj się
|
język
简体中文 (chiński uproszczony)
繁體中文 (chiński tradycyjny)
日本語 (japoński)
한국어 (koreański)
ไทย (tajski)
български (bułgarski)
Čeština (czeski)
Dansk (duński)
Deutsch (niemiecki)
English (angielski)
Español – España (hiszpański)
Español – Latinoamérica (hiszpański latynoamerykański)
Ελληνικά (grecki)
Français (francuski)
Italiano (włoski)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonezyjski)
Magyar (węgierski)
Nederlands (niderlandzki)
Norsk (norweski)
Português (portugalski – Portugalia)
Português – Brasil (portugalski brazylijski)
Română (rumuński)
Русский (rosyjski)
Suomi (fiński)
Svenska (szwedzki)
Türkçe (turecki)
Tiếng Việt (wietnamski)
Українська (ukraiński)
Zgłoś problem z tłumaczeniem
will have 4 times efficiency compared to other tech
Obvious problems after short overview
1.Ship Hull upgrade sounds much needed but logically has to be in engineering
2.Fleet Command sounds more suitable for sociology near Naval Cap and Starbase Cap. The game has 3 similar cap upgrades - Fleet Command, Naval Cap, Starbase Cap. So it's only logical either to put all of them into 1 tree or split them between all 3 trees.
3.Speaking of Starbase Cap +5 total is too underpowered for a lategame super-expensive tech
4.Machines and Lithoids do not benefit from endless +5% food. They need some tech swap.
And also engineering having less repeatable techs does no sound balanced to me
Engineering is intended to be the most tech-heavy tree as it should be, at least make equal number of repeatables.
Think I need a couple games to experience pros and cons to have more to say.
OMG Thanks to let me know.
Also, add a +10% defense platform health to the defense platform damage tech.
In my opinion, it should be more balanced and encourage to use defense platforms in late game more.