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
basically, i suggested that Aisne works best for 1918, but not as well for 1914, so i thought perhaps the developers could present two Aisne maps. AisneA would be the current map. AisneB would have not only the shellholes flattened, but wrecked tanks and planes would not be present, sandbags would not exist, developed trenches would be replaced with mere ditches, and barbed wire would be eliminated. AisneB would simulate more of the open war situations faced in many areas for 1914 and late 1918. i assume that these changes would be cheaper in money and time than an entirely new map.
neon's idea of destructible terrain is a different story.
quote=Adolfin;133257324790214579]A sort of engineer class able to dig small foxholes etc would be quite cool, But probably would not happen because of several reasons [/quote]
Would take quite some time and be of no benefit.