Borders with rivers

[Legion_IX]

Historicaly rivers being an natural obstacle were very often borders of provinces states or empires. Most well known examples are Rhine, Danube and (partially) Euphrates as roman borders. Unfortunately in previous games it hardly possible to depict it. Here are two tools how to increase the role of rivers as important natural borders.

1) In provinces were rivers lie on the border (in principle every province along Rhine and Danube) it should be possible to build "river" defense buildings in expandable modules. For example:
- Towers
- Palisade
- Wooden wall
- Stone wall

The garrisons (which are to some extend automatic generated in Rome 2 if I'm not wrong) would apear on the river battle map in same way like in the battle map of the capital. With such buildings the river crossovers like bridges should be even more difficult to cross and henceworth increase the role of rivers as state borders. Another advantage of this feature is that it is historically correct.

2) In all huge rivers and even some lakes there existed a provincial fleet. On the Rhine it was Classis Germanica and on donube the Classis Pannonica. Other rivers had also smaller fleets. So via region building menue it should be possible to "establish" a river fleet. It is not visiable on the strategic map as a unit, but in case of the attack on the battle map the defenders automatically command some warships. That would be a very effective help for the defenders, though also expensive to establish and maintain.

Despite the advantages of effective defensive force and historical correctness there is another advantage. Outside of Mediterranean area (Northern Europe and the whole "middle" part) the combined naval/land battles would be very rare. Such feature provide to increase the amount of combined battles during the game, also in areas without access to the ocean.


Here are some pictures of the river warships

[Coleus]

Roman frontier defences weren't designed to stop large scale incursions - Hadrian's Wall was breached several times - but instead to stop small scale raids and to levy taxes. They'd look pretty on the RTW2 map no doubt, but they wouldn't and shouldn't be much use if the Suebi choose to send two stacks against you.

I really don't want a situation where you can effectively wall yourself in like in Civ 5.

Not for me, sadly.

[Legion_IX]

Roman frontier defences weren't designed to stop large scale incursions - Hadrian's Wall was breached several times - but instead to stop small scale raids and to levy taxes. They'd look pretty on the RTW2 map no doubt, but they wouldn't and shouldn't be much use if the Suebi choose to send two stacks against you.

I really don't want a situation where you can effectively wall yourself in like in Civ 5.

Not for me, sadly.

I'm not saying the rivers should be inpossible to attack. The purpose is to made the attacks more difficult, like it was also the case in the reality, but not to be nearly inpossible. The ships on the battle map would also add some fun factor. The rate of the defense effect should depend on the gameplay mechanic, I agree completely.

[MathiasOfAthens]

Would be nice to be able to set up river forts, ports etc. But prob wont happen. CA might find too many gameplay problems with that.

And I dont think you could wall yourself in with buildable walls on the campaign map. One large stack could easily climb over a wall if it brought ladders or whatever.

A wall is only of value because of the men defending it. Without the men it is useless.

So if there were buildable walls on the Rhine, defending passes or whatnot it would be up to the player to garrison the forts or leave them empty or half-full. Leave only a few units and they might not be able to defend against a large stack of germans trying to climb over the wall further down the line.