Zainstaluj Steam
zaloguj się
|
język
简体中文 (chiński uproszczony)
繁體中文 (chiński tradycyjny)
日本語 (japoński)
한국어 (koreański)
ไทย (tajski)
български (bułgarski)
Čeština (czeski)
Dansk (duński)
Deutsch (niemiecki)
English (angielski)
Español – España (hiszpański)
Español – Latinoamérica (hiszpański latynoamerykański)
Ελληνικά (grecki)
Français (francuski)
Italiano (włoski)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonezyjski)
Magyar (węgierski)
Nederlands (niderlandzki)
Norsk (norweski)
Português (portugalski – Portugalia)
Português – Brasil (portugalski brazylijski)
Română (rumuński)
Русский (rosyjski)
Suomi (fiński)
Svenska (szwedzki)
Türkçe (turecki)
Tiếng Việt (wietnamski)
Українська (ukraiński)
Zgłoś problem z tłumaczeniem
If I recall the other issue I had was with the steam trading ship and the charter routes compared to regular routes. Those had cost-effectiveness issues as well compared to the other less advanced options/charter routes.
They seem to think that just because you might make more money in the late-game that you therefore will get the more expensive options, but that's not how it works when those more expensive options are not effective enough to justify that increased cost.
Granted this means micromanaging and you could double fire with sailing ships by changing the directions they face the enemy right after they fire from one side to the other so that was something the sailing ships had with similar micromanaging.
I could see them reducing the upkeep by half, granted by the time you are making these you probably are making 20k+, and I could see then taking reduced damage from sailing ships also.
Agree with balacing but for me not have sense to build that ship if is useless.Is better to balacing more power and resistence for unbalacing too.Need advantage who for first reach the new ship for my opinion and not who build a lot of ship of the line.This unbalacing the game too.