I would really like it if some large rivers could be navigable by some small chips, such as curraghs. Rivers should not just be for irrigation/food production... they should be useful for transportation as well, or at least the large ones should.

Thoughts?

I agree, there should be lots more chips :) no seriosuly, I agree totally. All rivers should be open for small ships (eg all ancient era ships, and some special ships later on) ... I mean, come on, history in Europe would not be the same without the Vikings using the rivers as a quick get in and loot roadway ...

yeah but the rivers appear so small on the map.It would look like the curagh is traveling on land

I've seen this suggested in other places, like the canal (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=86090) thread. I really like this idea. A large river could go down the middle of the tile, and then smaller rivers like the ones we have now would lead into the big ones. It would be a big boon to commerce (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=101545) and you could have the earlier ships able to sail up them.

yeah but the rivers appear so small on the map.It would look like the curagh is traveling on land

Not if your playing on a customised map - such as europe only. Or a American Civil War scenario, etc etc. :)

The problem is that rivers currently run between tiles rather than through them. It's hard to have units between tiles. ;)

Not if your playing on a customised map - such as europe only. Or a American Civil War scenario, etc etc. :)
The problem is the graphical representation, not the size of the map. The maps will still LOOK the same and rivers will still be small lines between tiles, which won't look right if you have large unit graphics over the top of them.

Well, I think there should be much more rivers in Civ3. I always see continents or great island without a single river. It's very unrealistic. As far as I know, Lybia is the only country that doesn't have a single river. All forests/jungles have several rivers, it could be in the game.

Back to the original idea of the topic, I think it's a good idea. There are some river that even a caravel can navigate. Maybe adding thickness to the rivers could be great, but I know it's hard to implement now.

I think the rivers in Civ games are designed to be major rivers, such as the Rhine, Danube, Volga, etc. They're not trying to model EVERY single river in the world. Besides, gameplay balance has to come before realism.

I understood your point of view, but all continents have some large rivers. You just mentioned some European rivers, and Europe is smaller than other continents. America, Africa and Asia also have large rivers.

I mean that every continent (and big islands) should have at least one river. Also, forests, jungles and marshes must have their own rivers.

Yes to navigable rivers, yes to canals, and yes to being able to build bridges across them.

@Ramalhão
I believe Malta has no rivers too.

@thestonesfan
I don't want canals. Industrial England style canals don't move anything faster than the existing road network, and Suez/Panama style canals require so many resourcs to realistically model that it would in game terms be cheaper to build a city there instead. The number of workers who *died* building the panama canal would amount to a small city anyway in civ terms.

The problem is that rivers currently run between tiles rather than through them. It's hard to have units between tiles. ;)


The problem is the graphical representation, not the size of the map. The maps will still LOOK the same and rivers will still be small lines between tiles, which won't look right if you have large unit graphics over the top of them.

So for graphical representation you have two river types.

1. Non-navigable - which are small lines between tiles. As it is now.

2. Navigable - a larger river graphic that goes through the middle of the tile.

So for graphical representation you have two river types.

1. Non-navigable - which are small lines between tiles. As it is now.

2. Navigable - a larger river graphic that goes through the middle of the tile.

That sounds like a good idea to me. Maybe navigable rivers should be treated as any other terrain tile?

Good idea. It would be like the Ancient Egyptians and the Nile.

Theres still a gtraphical representation issue with a navigable river. Either the ship will look like it is on land, or the land units will look like they are floating on the river. This issue is unavoidable.

I'd just have navigable rivers give a civ style movement bonus.