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
I'm sure I'm not the only player of the history games that's looking on to see how it goes, who likes it/doesnt like it and why, so cheers for sharing
Lots of people that have ACTUALLY PLAYED THE GAME are enjoying it.
I don't care for ships and Cavalry as much. In Three Kingdoms I felt Cavalry could be used too easily to turn the tide of battles.
It was a bit of a joke. I mean I obviously couldn't lol
I felt battles here were Harder simply because Cavalry couldn't be exploited. Honestly if I fought very hard battles in Three kingdoms I would just use cavalry to do constant hit and run attacks to bring the enemy down. The Ai isn't smart enough to protect it's flanks against Cavalry. Of course In earlier games because the Cavalry was heavier armored I found them to he much slower and not able to do hit and run attacks as easy
Almost as if those people need to convince themselves more of something than other people.
I like a TW game that's about strategy for once and not about brainless mappainting and pressing the AR button a dozen times a turn.
So not like Total War Warhammer.
What's a zoomer?
Well I'm in my 30's so would be older than a good few on here. I've been playing Since Medieval 2 so would easily describe myself as a veteran of the series. I remember the old games quite well and the way people romanticize them is ridiculous. Perhaps it's the fact that battle themselves still largely haven't been revolutionized. Many want an entirely new engine which I understand