Navigable Rivers?

[Ludens]

The exact same question was asked on the TWC EB2 forum five days ago. The answer was that the team hasn't decided yet, but probably won't since it interferes with land-trade routes.

[XSamatan]

ooops, I do not ues TWC so often, so sry!

Thanks Ludens!

BTW:Yes you will loose the land-trade routes, but you gain the sea routes, is there a difference?

XSamatan

[Ludens]

BTW:Yes you will loose the land-trade routes, but you gain the sea routes, is there a difference?

Not sure about M2:TW, but in R:TW both use different mechanisms. Land trade is automatic, sea trade depends on the presence of a port. You could give every river province such a port of course, but then they would be able to trade overseas as well. In R:TW the number of sea trade routes is also limited to three per city.

[XSamatan]

hmm, yes that is a good point.

Maybe these navigable rivers should not have a connection to the ocean, so you could control the trade routes.

I have to admit that I do not know if some cities/regions nearby these rivers had maritime trade connections to cities/regions on the costal. So that would not be ahistorical, but I have to

XSamatan

[IrishHitman]

You might as well add the Liffey, the Thames, the Loire, the Seine and the Tiber to the list of prospectives..

[Hax]

Those rivers were nothing, compared to the scale of the Indus, the Danube and the Nile.

[General Appo]

Indeed. Only those rivers which were very hard to cross and were traded extensively upon should even be considered for this.

[Cartaphilus]

Some navigable rivers could be great, Danube, Rhin and Eufrates, for example.

Remember how the Augustus Julianus aka the Apostate made his (failed) invasion of Parthian Empire.