I like it, it would add a tactical advantage to who ever owns it and it would make games more interesting. But the realism of it would be off i don't think a ww2 area battleship would fit down the st.Lawrence.
Water way to and from great lakes
Especially in the world game, this would add a lot I think. Large rivers too have played their part in many wars, why not here too?
Just a thought.
Post a Reply
Please log in to post a reply.
16 Replies
Sure, here is a pic of an Iowa class BB going down the Panama Canal.

I like it...
Here for more info: click
I like this idea however if you do it in america then in other parts of the world with major rivers you would have to add them too. Also bridges would play a bigger part in the war so they would needed to be added too. but other wise its a good idea
The maximum boat beam that can go down the St.Lawrence is 78ft, and the Iowa class battleship has a beam of 108ft sadly it wouldn't be able to go down the St.Lawrence. And the largest war ship to go down the St.Lawrence was the USS.Macon (CA-132) a heavy cruiser.Quasi-duck wrote:
Sure, here is a pic of an Iowa class BB going down the Panama Canal.
Yeah, maybe a new kind of water just for SS, DD and CC?Gen.Jamison wrote:
The maximum boat beam that can go down the St.Lawrence is 78ft, and the Iowa class battleship has a beam of 108ft sadly it wouldn't be able to go down the St.Lawrence. And the largest war ship to go down the St.Lawrence was the USS.Macon (CA-132) a heavy cruiser.
Actually, this is a great idea! We could make our own in game navies for green and blue water activities and have littoral zones for smaller ships!
that is a good idea or limit the class of ship that can enter.Quasi-duck wrote:
Actually, this is a great idea! We could make our own in game navies for green and blue water activities and have littoral zones for smaller ships!
Yeah, that would be a littoral zone kinda thing.Gen.Jamison wrote:
that is a good idea or limit the class of ship that can enter
Cool. I agree with all of it including the bridge concept. Amazon, Nile, etc.
Now is only a game developer or admin woudl read these threads.... 
I should quit at WG and get a job working on call of wartjwood78 wrote:
Cool. I agree with all of it including the bridge concept. Amazon, Nile, etc.Now is only a game developer or admin woudl read these threads....

YOU WORK AT WARGAMING!? no joke right, cause that's really coolGen.Jamison wrote:
I should quit at WG and get a job working on call of war
Yes sir I do.mrgreeen4567 wrote:
YOU WORK AT WARGAMING!? no joke right, cause that's really coolGen.Jamison wrote:
I should quit at WG and get a job working on call of war
I'd actually love rivers and large water ways in the game: it would be a tactical advantage to whom ever holds
"Hit first ! Hit hard ! Keep on hitting ! ! (The 3 H's)" Admiral Jackie Fisher
"The 3 Requisites for Success – Ruthless, Relentless, Remorseless(The 3 R's)" Admiral Fisher
Crates: a Term used to define any unwanted and unneeded feature in CoW
Game Username: LordStark01
it's getting a bit complicated when you add bridges.
It sounds realy nice but you have to completely redo the game mechanics since the current road-system does not support obstacles like bridges.
But they could implement them as variations of city's. With their own strength and weakening points for troops who want to pass them
Post a Reply
Please log in to post a reply.