Breaking this out from the other thread about canalisation:
Currently, if a ship-canal, which can take barges or ocean-going vessels up to the Medium size constraint, if extended to be joined to a river which is also of the Medium size (which is likely, to ensure through-navigation is possible), it will transform the junction tile from public river to a piece of player-owned canal.
It's also not terribly obvious (graphically) that it has happened, unless you're paying close attention.
This happens in spite of the fact that it is not for practical purposes an upgrade, in terms of the vehicle types that can use the tile.
The consequences are
- Player pays maintenance for the tile (minor)
- Public River is severed, and navigation becomes subject to access rights issue/control. (potentially more serious gameplay issue)
I'd suggest it shouldn't be considered an upgrade, therefore shouldnt happen by default - but don't know how easy that is...
Interesting. I know the spot to which you refer and you're right, it's not apparent by looking at the graphics, since the river still looks the same and it's just the canal that T's in to the river. I guess the act of changing the tile from river to river with canal makes it owned by the player instead of public player. I wonder how easy, or not easy, this is to address in the code.
This extensive canal/ship based game has been a great chance to discover a lot of gameplay nuances that wouldn't normally be discovered.
Agreed :-)
Whereas if you join a small canal to a large river, it doesn't make the river into a canal, ownership is unchanged. So there must be some mechanism for it deciding when to do it / when not to.
It may also be an issue with small river & small canal, large river & large-ship-canal.
you can check by using ctrl+O to visually inspect ownership.
Indeed, but you'd only do that if something suggested there was a problem. Lets you find the problem to fix it, but doesn't stop it occurring.
This is not a bug, strictly speaking: the best solution to this, I think, is that under discussion in the original thread from which this was branched.