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
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.