Navigable Rivers?

[Tellos Athenaios]

I was under the impression that shipping troops via major rivers was a fairly common practice.

Yes but there's a small difference in having some ferry going up & down and having a *war* fleet sailing up & down. Navigable rivers would be navigable by even the heavies kind of warships we'd include. The Tiber (for instance) definitely does not qualify: in this context it's not a mere triviality that the Romans preferred to unload the large mercantile ships elsewhere and ship the cargo to Roma using lighter vessels.

The question with navigable rivers (if it would be implemented because navigable rivers also mean 'no roads for you' AFAIK) is: what provinces have rivers that are so deep even heavy warships can sail up & downstream safely?

[XSamatan]

As we can learn from the romans:
The Rhine, Danube and Nile

I think these rivers were in history used to ship whole armies, others like Euphrat&Tigris, Themse and Loire only in very few cases.

A thought about the trading:

Could it be implemented, that these rivers (and a very small area of coast) belong to Terhazza?
This would allow to use not trading ports but instead markers which give the regions a bonus of trading?

XSamatan

[Gatalos de Sauromatae]

As we can learn from the romans:
The Rhine, Danube and Nile

I think these rivers were in history used to ship whole armies, others like Euphrat&Tigris, Themse and Loire only in very few cases.

A thought about the trading:

Could it be implemented, that these rivers (and a very small area of coast) belong to Terhazza?
This would allow to use not trading ports but instead markers which give the regions a bonus of trading?

XSamatan

Yeah! That is right.
The Rhine, Danube, Nile, Euphrates and Tigris would be navigable in EB but the lesser and shorter rivers would be only the obstacle in the map.

[Ludens]

I think these rivers were in history used to ship whole armies, others like Euphrat&Tigris, Themse and Loire only in very few cases.

But where these armies shipped in sea ships or in smaller ferries? If the latter, it would be just as well simulated by a ford.

A thought about the trading:

Could it be implemented, that these rivers (and a very small area of coast) belong to Terhazza?
This would allow to use not trading ports but instead markers which give the regions a bonus of trading?

I don't think I quite understand what you are proposing. What would the difference be with the river port building of EB1?

[XSamatan]

But where these armies shipped in sea ships or in smaller ferries? If the latter, it would be just as well simulated by a ford.

They were shipped in special ships, build only to sail on these specific rivers. But it would be a waste to create a ship for every river, maybe one for all? And then a blockade at the delta, so other ships cannot enter the river? In this case we could represent that only residents of the river could built some ships.

A ford can only be used to cross a river (this should be like it is) but these ships could be used to travel alongside the river to carry troops from the delta to the origin e.g., and to blockade some fords.

I don't think I quite understand what you are proposing. What would the difference be with the river port building of EB1?

Forget it, a crazy idea, i even can't express to myself

XSamatan

[Elmetiacos]

Shipping armies is one thing, but if you make the rivers navigable in the RTW sense, that means you'd get big fleets of triremes battling each other on the Rhine or the Nile, which would be silly.

[Ludens]

They were shipped in special ships, build only to sail on these specific rivers. But it would be a waste to create a ship for every river, maybe one for all? And then a blockade at the delta, so other ships cannot enter the river?

That could work, except that this would cut off the city at the delta from either river or sea trade (as it can have only one port, which has to be in either the river or the sea, and the two are separated by the blockade in the delta). I also think it would make the campaign map ugly if most rivers were to be one map-square wide.

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

Rivers will most likely not be navigable, especially if they look weird/ugle, like a deep narrow bay.

[oudysseos]

If the issue is that Armies/Merchants/Travellers could (in the real world) move long distances quickly by river, then could that not be simulated by making the routes of large rivers easier to move along? What I mean is, armies move further per turn on roads than across open country. Could this be applied to river courses? Essentially you'd put roads (invisible roads?) alongside the important rivers, allowing units to move along them quickly, simulating river transport.