Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
If you make a companion with that perk a party leader, I think it applies to the troops they are leading, the same way your perk applies to your party.
gosh i need to do some testing soon to see if it works like im thinking.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3270086729
It can´t affect all parties - again for the same reason.
But You can test it - then we have clear results. While i still think that in practice, and with normal play - You would rather end the campaign before two people would reach 275 medicine. I for myself ended the playthrough either shortly before, or shortly after i got that perk, and it´s usually Your 240 max tier units, vs the AI recruits, so they would outperform them without any of these perks anyways, while You on top have the captains...
I guess that the wording of the perk is misleading.
well my dream of fielding an army of super peasants in a vanilla campaign is dead, but at least we know not to bother going all in on medicine for party members.
Just asking, because the perk would be totally pointless in that case for anyone but the player character. Which is then even worse than i thought. They should then rename it from "personal" to "player character", which would be simple to do, so people wouldn´t need to spend time to figure that out.