Rivers are placed in between spaces in Civ III, unlike in Civ II, where they ran inside the spaces themselves. The boost given to commerce and food because of rivers can be invaluable if you know how to use it in conjunction with roads, etc.Originally posted by badassb
Perhaps a stupid question. But why are rivers so uselless in CivIII. I remember that in Civ II the movement rate of units was increased when you moved alongside the river. Why did the remove that?
On some larger or custom maps (Aanar's Europe), rivers can be found EVERYWHERE. Inhibiting the movement of those units with so many rivers could really disrupt the flow of battle in the game.Another thing. Why not make it impossible to cross rivers without a road ( bridge) over it? ( or perhaps just for wheeled or mounted units). This would give rivers more strategic importance. Rivers could be used as natural borders or as a way to keep the a.i. out of your territory. And bridges would be valuable assets in an empire.Fool! Of course it would be!Oh yes and the civ that discovers a river ( and perhaps also a chain of moutains) should be able to name it. ( seen that in a game called "conquest of the new world")
This shouldn't be to hard to implement, would it?