Steam 설치
로그인
|
언어
简体中文(중국어 간체)
繁體中文(중국어 번체)
日本語(일본어)
ไทย(태국어)
Български(불가리아어)
Čeština(체코어)
Dansk(덴마크어)
Deutsch(독일어)
English(영어)
Español - España(스페인어 - 스페인)
Español - Latinoamérica(스페인어 - 중남미)
Ελληνικά(그리스어)
Français(프랑스어)
Italiano(이탈리아어)
Bahasa Indonesia(인도네시아어)
Magyar(헝가리어)
Nederlands(네덜란드어)
Norsk(노르웨이어)
Polski(폴란드어)
Português(포르투갈어 - 포르투갈)
Português - Brasil(포르투갈어 - 브라질)
Română(루마니아어)
Русский(러시아어)
Suomi(핀란드어)
Svenska(스웨덴어)
Türkçe(튀르키예어)
Tiếng Việt(베트남어)
Українська(우크라이나어)
번역 관련 문제 보고
u can start rebellion alone
It took me three attempts, and sometimes it went really badly, but here's what I did.
With the maximum number of clan groups and a lot of influence, I create an army. I enlist everyone except my groups. And I put the miserable soldiers in my group and go with recruitable prisoner forces.
I head to an enemy city and... I crash the huge army against the defending machines.
Another option is to approach an enemy siege of a friendly fortress. And gradually leave the groups from my army. They go to fight confident that the rest will help them... and... that's what I don't do.
It's really not something I like to do, it doesn't tie in with the "role" of my character, a pretty honest guy. But I can't think of anything else.
After the military disaster, I disband the army. All the groups are decimated. I recruit prisoners, so as not to be attacked by hostile groups that are nearby. The rest... they pass.
With this I have managed to start a succession rebellion alone. But, as I said, it breaks my character role. Although I understand that the game cannot do it, I would have preferred that the player could start a rebellion without this 50% of the military weight.
You'll have to take that up with the mod authors.