Major and minor rivers

aimeeandbeatles

aimeeandbeatles

watermelon
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
20,112
How about have two kinds, major and minor?

Land units can cross both of them (maybe the major ones take an extra turn) and you can put some smaller boats (e.g. galleys, caravels) into the major ones and sail them up and down.

The minor ones always feed into major ones. E.G. think of the million-and-one small rivers feeding into the Mississippi

Perhaps a special promotion to cross major rivers faster, and some sort of defense bonus.
 
Is a good idea, but for a game of less proportion than civilization.

What I telling is that generally, the maps of civilization representes a world. It's included in that idea, that the rivers shown in the map are actually major rivers.

In a scenario of less scale (battle scenario, or maybe one nation scenario) the use of the two different rivers can be usefull.

Apart of this, I love the idea, of navegable rivers. Something diferent of simply coast squares to make a river inland (creating a map). But well, Is a thing to see when designing a game.
 
Alarconte said:
Is a good idea, but for a game of less proportion than civilization.

What I telling is that generally, the maps of civilization representes a world. It's included in that idea, that the rivers shown in the map are actually major rivers.
Click to expand...
Thats true, for world maps at least, where the width of Italy takes up only one tile. But if there's a civ map that only shows limited regions, like France, I don't think it would be too difficult to have large and small rivers.
 
Maybe a new terrain feature, rivers, in addition to hills and forests. The major rivers still wind between tiles, while minor rivers are represented by these multiple branching rivers that appear on tiles. You could build this feature on tiles using Irrigation, as well.
 
There should be maps that are 1000*1000+ big for people that have huge proccesors and RAM. This would allow for a longer (like a 2-3 month :eek:), but more realistic proportionaly game.
 
Gamemaster77 said:
There should be maps that are 1000*1000+ big for people that have huge proccesors and RAM. This would allow for a longer (like a 2-3 month :eek:), but more realistic proportionaly game.
Click to expand...

There are mapscripts which let you do that.
 
Gamemaster77 said:
There should be maps that are 1000*1000+ big for people that have huge proccesors and RAM. This would allow for a longer (like a 2-3 month :eek:), but more realistic proportionaly game.
Click to expand...

I assume the rivers would be represented by one-tile (or even 2 tiles) water tiles?
 
I actually think there should be major and minor rivers. (Both should be considered substantial, were not talking glorified creeks here). The reason why I think this is because some rivers were not able to be bridged before very sophisticated bridge building techniques came about (i.e. San Fransisco). Although, I must admit it would be a bit of a mute point - because there would be few major rivers in the world. This also allows for a canal type situation, one which will allow big ships through.
 
Good idea, but not really feasible for civ. It just adds a layer of complexity to the game that would, IMO, be more of a nuisance than an enjoyment. Rivers are not the focus of the game, and whilst terrain is an important aspect, drastically changing rivers too much is most likely to make the game more confusing and annoying.
 
Rivers might not be the focus of the game, but exploration and colonization is. And one of the ways to explore a land is to navigate its rivers, eg. the "Lewis and Clark Expedition". Thinking about how this country (US) has prospered because of its vast river network (not to mention two oceans) is to turn away from any thread of realism. Geography has so much influence on why people do what they do and go where they go that the whole game is flawed without a better model representation of it. Of course, as a geography major, I could be biased... ;)
 
I don't think the focus of the game is exploration and colonisation, although it is an important aspect of the game. True though, that it would perhaps be realistic to allow exploration along rivers, but this could be achieved through simply allowing scouts and explorers double movement along tiles adjacent to rivers more easily than through creating different categories of rivers.
 
TRoosevelt said:
Rivers might not be the focus of the game, but exploration and colonization is. And one of the ways to explore a land is to navigate its rivers, eg. the "Lewis and Clark Expedition". Thinking about how this country (US) has prospered because of its vast river network (not to mention two oceans) is to turn away from any thread of realism. Geography has so much influence on why people do what they do and go where they go that the whole game is flawed without a better model representation of it. Of course, as a geography major, I could be biased... ;)
Click to expand...

Very true. In Civ 2, my first warrior unit was often sent out to explore. He could move one tile in any direction, but he could move 3 tiles up or down a river. Rivers made it easier to beat the AI to goody huts, discover bonus resources, discover good city sites, see the dimensions of one continent, etc.
 
I think there should be three types of river

1-Fordable river
As existing Civ 4

2-Navigable River
Can be crossed except by bridge, or galley or ferry improvement.
when you build a bridge it could retrict travel along the river to units
Cities could build harbors etc

3- Estuaries (and very large river ie Amazon)
As above plus
Would require a late game tech to build bridge that would restrict movement to naval units.
And another tech that would allow you to build Golden Gate type bridges that allow naval units to pass under.
Any naval unit could enter them but would have penalties

A river could start as fordable then may become navigable then maybe hav an estury (or become a very large river)
Further dowstream they could have sections that were fordable again.

Many cities grew at fords or at the start of estuaries and were of strategic importance
 
Silurian said:
I think there should be three types of river
3- Estuaries (and very large river ie Amazon)
As above plus
Would require a late game tech to build bridge that would restrict movement to naval units.
And another tech that would allow you to build Golden Gate type bridges that allow naval units to pass under.
Any naval unit could enter them but would have penalties
Click to expand...

Why a penalty?
 
Rivers are narrow and have rocks and sand bars in them.
This restricts the movement of ships.
A destroyer steaming out of your estuary would not be able to zig zag to avoid aircraft tring to bomb it or if it was attacking out into a coast tile the enemy vessel would have a big advantage because it would know where you were coming from
 
Silurian said:
I think there should be three types of river

1-Fordable river
As existing Civ 4

2-Navigable River
Can be crossed except by bridge, or galley or ferry improvement.
when you build a bridge it could retrict travel along the river to units
Cities could build harbors etc

3- Estuaries (and very large river ie Amazon)
As above plus
Would require a late game tech to build bridge that would restrict movement to naval units.
Click to expand...

1 and 2 make sense, however 3 seems to me unnecissary.
 
The Vikings ships travelled from the Baltic to the Black Sea via the rivers of Russia
This would be impossible with a destroyer but it could get a long way up the Amazon or the Yantze etc
 
Silurian said:
The Vikings ships travelled from the Baltic to the Black Sea via the rivers of Russia
This would be impossible with a destroyer but it could get a long way up the Amazon or the Yantze etc
Click to expand...

Very large rivers could be represented by sea tiles. I suggest that ships able to navigate rivers be the same as are unable to navigate oceans.
 
I was thinking that say 60% would be navigable and 20% fordable and 20% very large. With fordable sections sometimes in navigable sections.

I agree that the units should be restricted to coastal units

Very large rivers could be fired across but not moved across apart from marines
I think that very large rivers should be able to be bridged in the late game but not one tile coast

If very large rivers are repesented by coast tiles you should not be able to bridge them just have ferries to cross them,
Also a long very big river such as the Amazon which is a few km wide a thousand km inland would look stange if shown as a coast tile
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Navigable river ideas, synergies and wish list
Replies
2
Views
606
Lazy sweeper
Lazy sweeper
Isca Dumnoniorum
Navigable rivers
2 3
Replies
40
Views
2K
Phrozen
P
L
Quality of Life proposals and other small suggestions
Replies
2
Views
711
99-percent-sure
99-percent-sure
H
Combat mechanics overhaul tied with the three eras
Replies
4
Views
958
wolverine2112
W
D
Civ 7 idea about units and geography
Replies
0
Views
1K
DeckerdJames
D
Back
Top Bottom