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
War is a matter of you bearing your decision from the start of the game, and how committed you are to it
Then it was my own damn stubbornness to maintain a middle approach even though I was dead set on going to war.
Thanks, I'll go for it now
Yes, if you goes half, like following Iosef strategy on modern forces but kept conscription, it will only reduce the effectiveness of your army, lowering your chance of success.
Also no, Iosef strategy works in most scenario compared to Valken. Again, you just need to be committed to it
I guess the problem lies in my diplomatic approach, and the positioning of my allied armies.
This time I'm going to make Agnolia join my army ( I also invested on highway ),and have Lesipa go for the Doom.
Thanks for your help citizens of Sordland
I am sure there are more ways to win the war. But the main thing is, if you are going to wage war with Rumburg, you must be committed from the very beginning
I think dev already said there are no random factor im game.
Also Lespia is terrible for Valken strategy, since they are opportunistic and will pull back if the war goes on