Steam telepítése
belépés
|
nyelv
简体中文 (egyszerűsített kínai)
繁體中文 (hagyományos kínai)
日本語 (japán)
한국어 (koreai)
ไทย (thai)
Български (bolgár)
Čeština (cseh)
Dansk (dán)
Deutsch (német)
English (angol)
Español - España (spanyolországi spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (latin-amerikai spanyol)
Ελληνικά (görög)
Français (francia)
Italiano (olasz)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonéz)
Nederlands (holland)
Norsk (norvég)
Polski (lengyel)
Português (portugáliai portugál)
Português - Brasil (brazíliai portugál)
Română (román)
Русский (orosz)
Suomi (finn)
Svenska (svéd)
Türkçe (török)
Tiếng Việt (vietnámi)
Українська (ukrán)
Fordítási probléma jelentése
in future when its only the most dedicated players (usually spending proportionately more money) they will increase the size.
In both settings, i have 0% of lags, performance Problems.
So I stand by what I said. 700 objects are planned very economically. It may well be more. Furthermore, the fact remains that the catalog offers so many objects, but you can only use a handful of each, then you reach a limit - yawn :D
Great, you answered your own question.
Its the server computers storing and sending out the 700 pieces of hundreds of thousands of houses. if you add just one piece (lol) and make the limit 701, that means the servers are having to store hundreds of thousands of pieces extra.
IF being the opperative word there.
If you want to build this big bases go to Eternaland, there's no limit there. Simply build your castle and share your island code for anyone that want to see it.
In the playing servers we need a limit to avoid performance issues to other players.