安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語(日文)
한국어(韓文)
ไทย(泰文)
Български(保加利亞文)
Čeština(捷克文)
Dansk(丹麥文)
Deutsch(德文)
English(英文)
Español - España(西班牙文 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希臘文)
Français(法文)
Italiano(義大利文)
Bahasa Indonesia(印尼語)
Magyar(匈牙利文)
Nederlands(荷蘭文)
Norsk(挪威文)
Polski(波蘭文)
Português(葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙)
Português - Brasil(葡萄牙文 - 巴西)
Română(羅馬尼亞文)
Русский(俄文)
Suomi(芬蘭文)
Svenska(瑞典文)
Türkçe(土耳其文)
tiếng Việt(越南文)
Українська(烏克蘭文)
回報翻譯問題
Besides, in my opinion Napoleon was too constrained in design.
Thank you. Yeah I kind of wanted FoTS just because I much perfer the Japense setting then the Nepolionic one.
Yes!
Actually I would perfer to have much slower more realistic battles then faster more unrealstic battles. I like the idea of less people dieing because thats what would happen back then. Did you know the base casualtie numbers in battles back in the Canadian civil war where around 16 casualties per battle. Lol.
Really, if you like slower attrition combat, get napoleon. If you like carnage and blood, explosions people dropping like flies from fast reloading carbines and breech loaders, go FOTS.
Honestly I'm a fan of both, but prefer FOTS