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
There is weight in your proposals and arguments, mainly due to immersion and collection of statistics and data analysis. The changes proposed for the clans provide mostly what they simply lacked, if you delve into their original meaning. The same "goat" is really inclined to pacifism and economics, and "doesn't like pain, so he is going to invest everything in defense" (a reference to the manga, appropriate).
Strengthening, adding opportunities for clans to receive the same glory, lore - which do not have them, to level them in the race with other clans. And somewhere to expand the mechanics, like the wolf with "combat mastery".
I especially like the concept in the late for strengthening the warlords.
And such changes to the clans maintain a neutral position - not making the game difficult for casuals and keeping it good for veterans - everyone should enjoy it more).
The concept of changing neutral factions is really intriguing, it greatly changes the attitude of the player and the players on the map with them, this will really allow more neutral factions to be included in the game, and they will expand the possible scenarios of the game. And the two proposed factions are also wonderful according to the new expanded concept of all neutral factions.