From: Houston, TX
No Bob, I'm afraid that is not how it works. You are the revolutionary thinker here. You are the one that has to convince us that in-hex rivers are the wondrous thing you make them out to be. Leonardo had to convince the world, it was not the world that had to show to Leonardo he was wrong.
Last time I checked, TOAW already has river hexes. It doesn't have river hexsides. Getting them will take lots of code and graphics $$. So, the above is a pretty strange claim.
Nevertheless, I'm happy to tout the virtues of river hexes over river hexsides:
1. Rivers have transverse defensive benefits due to their meandering, wandering, etc. Just like entrenchments have transverse benefits because they are dug in a zig-zag pattern. River hexes have this feature. River hexsides do not. River hexsides are too "neat" compared to the real world.
2. Brand-new bridgeheads over rivers are vulnerable to counterattack. River hexes can model this. River hexsides can't.
3. Coding riverine movement and bridge destruction/repair are straight forward with river hexes (so's the game play). Not so for river hexsides.
The criticism of river hexes is all about where to defend to receive the defensive benefit and pay the movement costs. Well, I think we're going to fix that. But, even without that, just imagine the typical situation where a front line approaches, reaches, and passes a river defense line: The river penalties are paid once in either case (river hexes or river hexsides). There is just a slight difference in the exact location where they are paid. That's what this whole endless nonsense is about: Exactly where a 0.7 penalty is paid.
We are still awaiting to an answer to the original question on this thread.
Did you see my posts #14 and #33?
I leave with the words of another member of that cabal of group-thinking, someone that also thinks hex edge rivers are good and an acceptable abstraction, in fact, this chap seems to think they are as acceptable as in-hex rivers, it's just a matter of graphical and personal preference:
Rivers are not infinitely thin, like some kind of abstract geometric concept. They take up real space. The choice of hex side vs. through-hex is strictly a matter of personal preference, and which set of distortions we wish to live with. There is also the matter of graphic representation. I've yet to see a hex side river graphic that doesn't highlight the hex grid, and there are quite a few gamers out there who really don't want to see "hexes".
It's from a chap called Norm Koger. http://normkoger.com/truth.html
Reading that, I've completely missed the part where he says that the number of games using river hexsides "proves" that's the way to do it. So, I think I'll dismiss Norm from the cabal.