Steamをインストール
ログイン
|
言語
简体中文(簡体字中国語)
繁體中文(繁体字中国語)
한국어 (韓国語)
ไทย (タイ語)
български (ブルガリア語)
Čeština(チェコ語)
Dansk (デンマーク語)
Deutsch (ドイツ語)
English (英語)
Español - España (スペイン語 - スペイン)
Español - Latinoamérica (スペイン語 - ラテンアメリカ)
Ελληνικά (ギリシャ語)
Français (フランス語)
Italiano (イタリア語)
Bahasa Indonesia(インドネシア語)
Magyar(ハンガリー語)
Nederlands (オランダ語)
Norsk (ノルウェー語)
Polski (ポーランド語)
Português(ポルトガル語-ポルトガル)
Português - Brasil (ポルトガル語 - ブラジル)
Română(ルーマニア語)
Русский (ロシア語)
Suomi (フィンランド語)
Svenska (スウェーデン語)
Türkçe (トルコ語)
Tiếng Việt (ベトナム語)
Українська (ウクライナ語)
翻訳の問題を報告
If I may add my opinion about this. I'm 100% on board with the oil wells, oil wells and coal and iron are candidates that can make the map really feel overcrowded, and it's not easy to balance this without making things too easy or to cheap to achieve, but senseless definitly needs some fine tuning from 1900 onwards, really like the idea with the 2 lvl oil well.
I think slaughterhouse and forrests are fine as they are, if the slaughterhouse would get nerfed it would not sum up nicely with the livestock farms and I have no porblem with a slaughterhouse fully supporting a food processing plant, I also like that it has another feel to the food chain compared too grain and milk.
Regarding forrests, my fear is that, giving them to much production would simplify the supply of sawmills too much because you would only need one forrest for one sawmill and personally I wouldn't like that.