Carcassonne Central

The way I read the River II setup, the fork is placed immediately after the spring (is this right?)  If so, read on... does that not make the spring kind of irrelevant?  why not have a tile that simply contains both a small spring and a fork?  Since it is placed at the beginning of the game, whether the fork goes right, left or right & left is utterly irrelevant, so I'm wondering why they bothered with the 2-tile setup?

Yeah, we have come to the same conclusion, so now we do it in another way. We put the volcano end tile to the side, and mix the fork into the other Flood tiles. It then gets placed whenever it's drawn. The volcano is then placed last.

But, to furhter your musings; since The River I now comes with the game itself, the spring should ackording to the rules be put aside - so it has no purpose what so ever now.

Aside from the fact that the GQ #11 spring is all one would ever use :P

As Tobias says the extra spring is somewhat of a waste. We do a little more in our setup of the river though to make things change up and give some purpose to the spring tiles.

First we take out the lakes, springs and fork from the river tile sets (including the one from GQ11). Then we mix the rest of the tiles and draw four. We mix the lake city tile in with these four and set them face down(we don't play with the dragon, but if you do, you might want to mix the volcano lake in instead to make sure the dragon comes into play early). Then we draw four more and mix the fork in with these. This second set is put on top of the other stack (face down again). We then take the spring tile with the road and one without a road and have someone draw one at random. That becomes the starting tile. We then draw tiles from the top of the face down stack and build the river. We finish it with the last lake tile.

We find this keeps the river to the same length as the original river set, but adds variety. If the spring with the road comes up, then the builders are happy. If the spring without the road comes up, then the farmers are happy. As well, the fork still comes up early enough to make a difference in the layout and the city lake tile is random enough to still change the strategy on the river.

We also like this layout as you are never 100% on what tiles will come up. Sometimes there are lots of bridges, other times there are few. Same with cloisters and cities. It really makes people think about when they want to play a meeple.

You have to be careful on how you place the tiles and make sure no one gets into a u turn situation. If to many bends come up at the wrong time it can be hard to keep the two rivers going. It happended once and we decided no further tiles could be played on the inner branch until the lake came up to close it off. It was actually an interesting river to play as we need to place tiles around the river carefully to make any use of the inner bends.

Allan

The branch tile can be placed so that the river not only runs left right but also right up, right down, left up left down. Having this as a seperate tile also allows for different people to place a first meeple as neither spring not branch are allowed to be laid upon. If you add in the new tiles from the Meusfluss download thrad then you get more branches and therefore laying the first branch nect to the spring makes sense, try it you'll see.

But yes once you have GQ11 then all other spring tiles are redundant, unless playing the kids.

Steve: With so many river bends that there are they way you put the fork doesn't make any real difference in my experience. It'll twist and turn away no matter what. Since we also allow the river to be moved and placed as far as possible in the middle of the table after it's finished it bears no strategic value (for us) in that regard either. Obviously, as you might be aware of by now, my group are quite pragmatic when it comes to rules ;)

I can't really see how adding even more tiles ie Mehrfluss (sp?) would change anythin, although more forks might have some use. I don't at all like for tiles to lie unused when I play however, and that's why we sometimes build several rivers, but even then there's one spring left over  :(

Eh, I guess I trailed away from topic a bit ...

Tobias nothing wrong with a pragmatic group  :) When we play the ruling is that once the first tile goes down it cannot be moved so we are strictly governed by the table edges as to tile laying. The extra branches do add a nice twist as you dont always end up with two fairly straight rivers running away from the spring in either direction. This makes farming more of a challenge and if you incorporate my variant "Hook, Line & Sinker" then you have even more possibilities opening up to you (sorry for the blatent plug guys  :D :D)

I hope it's considered ok to post in old topics when one has something useful to contribute.

I thought of another variant that has not been mentioned yet which could make use of two spring tiles. Instead of forking the river into two rivers, you could construct it backwards from a single lake and have two rivers which combine into one.

yes of course feel free to dig up topics and add to them (the power of forum software!)  Like Tobias I hate it too when tiles go unused!

An interesting variation I use is to start with the first river setup.  Then we take the spring for the river II and mix it in with the rest of the tiles in the bag or tower etc.  Then when this tile is drawn we proceed to complete the second river.  Now this does require that the spring be placed on the outer edge of the game board and can lead to strange setups and even the river coming about towards the end but it throws a little variety into the game and we have enjoyed this method of incorporating both the river sets.

Wait, the fork is supposed to go right after the spring according to the rules?  Is that true?  I thought you start by grouping all your river tiles and removing one spring and two lake tiles.  Then, all the remaining river tiles, including the fork, are shuffled and placed face down (or in a bag).  Then, the chosen spring begins the game, and tiles are drawn one at a time, so that the fork could come up at any time.  Once the final tile has been places, the two lakes are used.  But now I'm not sure if those are the accepted rules or if that's just the way we've been playing it?

Yep, the fork is supposed to go right after the spring. In fact, the rules actually say that the youngest player should place the fork- so although it's the second tile in play, it's actually the equivalent of the original starting tile (the one with the dark back).

That said, I think a lot of people mix it in with the others - just as you described - because it leads to more interesting layouts. I suppose mixing it in could lead to difficulties, but, really, it's one of those 'house' rules that many people use because it really doesn't matter too much…

I see.  But I'm confused when you say, "So although it's the second tile in play, it's actually the equivalent of the original starting tile (the one with the dark back)."
The youngest player places the fork as part of his turn, and may deploy a follower as normal, right?  The original starting tile with the dark back is merely "placed on the table," not as a part of someone's turn, and no followers may be deployed there, correct?
So the fork is kind of in its own category...After the spring placement (which is no one's turn), the fork is a "forced placement," like the original starting tile, but unlike the original starting tile, the fork is still a part of the youngest player's first real turn?  Is that right?
In this sense, the fork seems more similar to the youngest player's "first drawn" tile in the basic game than to the original starting tile.  But am I misunderstanding something?

You're right, my bad. Got my head stuck in Rhem 3 at the moment, so not much else works properly.
 :o

That's ok...That actually leads me to two quick questions on this topic.  I know this isn't the thread for river rules, but what the heck, it's relevant to the use of the fork:

1)  If you're using River I and River II expansions, and for your two lakes, you decide to use one with the volcano, your Annotated Rules state that the volcano gets placed last.  That would mean that after all the river tiles have been placed, and there are two lakes left, that the non-volcano lake tile is a "forced placement," and then the volcano tile is a "forced placement."

That makes sense.  I'm wondering what you do if you choose to use the fork (and therefore two lake tiles) but NOT the volcano tile.  So now, you're using the lake from River I and the non-volcano lake tile (I think there's a castle on it) from River II.  So the question is, after the river tiles have all been placed, does the next player get to CHOOSE which lake to place?  Or, do you actually place both lake tiles face down (or in a bag), and have the next player choose the next lake tile blindly?  And then the other remaining lake tile would be a "forced placement" for the next player?

2)  I'm confused as to what happens to the original starting tile (the one with the dark back, referred to henceforth as OST) when you're using the River expansions, because of your wording in the AR.  Perhaps you misspoke, but I believe you wrote that you have two options. 
Option #1:  You wrote that after the river and lakes are completed, the next player may begin his turn by drawing and placing the OST.  In this option, I assume the player may deploy a follower, even though when the OST is actually used as a starting tile, this is not the case?
Option #2:  You wrote that the OST may be mixed in with the River tiles??  Is this a typo?  I assumed you meant to say that it could be mixed in with the remaining tiles (the regular tiles left after the river and lakes are completed).  That would seem strange to mix the OST in with the River tiles.  Also this seems strange, because if this was the intent, then no option is mentioned of mixing the OST in the with remaining normal tiles.
Also, as mentioned above in a previous reply, what about the option of leaving the OST out of the game entirely in this case, as was originally written into the River rules that come with the basic game?

My understanding was that the official rules stated that when using the River, the OST was completely eliminated from the game.  If this is the offical rule, I would prefer to abide by it.  If this is not the case, and use of the OST is allowed alongside the River, my personal preferance would be to mix it in with all the other regular tiles.  The fact that it has a dark back doesn't matter if you have the bag.  But I don't know how this would affect players without the bag.

Thanks so much for your time on this clarification!

There's no ruling on this, so I guess you can do whatever you wish. Since the River II tiles officially replace the original lake, it would be pointless to ask for a ruling as well. My personal take would be that the lake with town should be placed last, and that the lakes are still 'forced placement'. But it's up to you.

By "it" here I was referring to the fork, which as you said, many people mix in with the other river tiles. As for what to do with the OST, the rules vary. The River actually says that the OST may be mixed in with the other (normal) tiles, or placed immediately after the lake. The Count of Carcassonne says that it should be eliminated. In this case, you should take your pick as well! Personally, I always mix it in - eliminating it is a shame, and immediate placement gives an unfair advantage.

I think that's all… Yell if I'm still talking in circles.
:)s

These are some things I brought up in my review of the Annotated Rules, but this is definitely a better place to be discussing them.

The volcano tile is last because it brings out the dragon, but indeed, if you're not playing with the P&D expansion, I'd be more inclined to use the original lake tile. Reading the rules for the River, I get the impression that the forced placement of the lake tile occurs between turns, so it is not possible to place a follower on the lake in that case. In the case of the River II, it is not permissible to place a follower on a volcano tile, so in my mind it makes sense that when using the normal lake tile instead of the volcano lake tile, that the normal lake tile should be placed after the lake with a city tile. It seems the rule of thumb is that followers may not be placed on tiles that are forced placements, though I think/hope that it is allowed to place a follower in the city on a lake tile since there is no explicit mention of the player who places this tile taking an extra turn. Perhaps this is a question for HiG?


In that case, there's a typo in the Annotated Rules because it says "mixed in with the stack of river tiles".

My inclination would be to mix the OST with the rest of the tiles, but so far I've been leaving it out in all my games. Although it is permitted to place it after the lake, that's too much like a forced placement IMHO. Might be good to add a footnote about this in the relevant spots, with or without an official ruling (would be nice to hear what HiG has to say though).

I'm glad we're discussing this, because even though it seems like a trivial point, I've always wondered about this.

Scott, I think there's one point of disagreement.  As far as I understand, there are various kinds of "forced placements."  But some are not "player's turns," and some are.

Example #1)  If playing with only the basic game, the OST is placed first, and is not considered anyone's turn (no followers may be placed).

Example #2)  If playing with the basic game and River I, the spring is placed first and is not anyone's turn.  However, once the river is completed, that lake is placed by the next player...so although that lake tile is forced upon the player, it does count as his turn, and he may place a follower on the lake tile.  At least, that is my interpretation, and it explains why the rules explicitly state differently when discussing the volcano tile.  If, at this point, after the lake tile is placed, you choose to go with the OST tile next, that would again be a player's turn.  (I thought the original River I rules state you should disregard the OST when playing with the River I, but if not, I'll probably just mix it in with the remaining tiles from now in.

Example #3)  If playing with the basic game and River II, the spring is placed first and is not anyone's turn.  Immediately following this, the river fork tile is a "forced placement" for the youngest player, but that does count as his turn, and a follower may be placed (I believe).  Then, the river is built.  Now, at this point, there seems to be some ambiguity.  If the volcano tile is one of the two lake tiles being used, then after the river tiles are used up, the non-volcano lake tile is a "forced placement" for the next player, and that does count as his turn, and a follower may be placed.  Then, the next player must place the volcano lake tile, and while that is his turn, no follower may be placed (because of the special exception for the volcano tile), and therefore there is another exception allowing the same player to immediately draw and place another tile, on which he may deploy a follower.

However, if you're not playing with the Princess and the Dragon, but with both the River I and River II expansions, you must "remove one spring tile and one lake tile," because you should now have two springs and three lakes (including the volcano, and of course, not including the GQ expansion).  So, if you choose to use the two non-volcano lake tiles, then once the river is finished, there doesn't seem to be an official ruling as to how the next player chooses which lake tile to draw and place.  According to my interpretation, whichever lake tile is chosen, it definitely counts as the next player's turn, and a follower may be deployed.  The issue is, it makes a big deal if the next player gets to choose which of the two lake tiles he gets to place (because one of them has a city segment, I believe).  But nowhere in the rules does it state that one of the two lake tiles must be placed last (if you're not using the volcano).  So my guess would be that, as it currently stands without an official ruling, the next player would have to draw blindly from the two lake tiles face-down.  Then the next player would be forced to draw and play the other lake tile, which would still be his turn, and he could deploy followers.  Then, you're back to the whole question of whether to play the OST next or to mix it in with the remaining tiles.

Sorry if this is long-winded, just trying to clarify the question.

In summary, this is my understanding:

If you're playing

Basic Game
Original Starting Tile - Automatic placement, not a turn, no followers deployed.
Game then begins with youngest player choosing from the remaining pile.

Basic Game with River I
Spring Tile - Automatic placement, not a turn, no followers deployed.
Youngest player begins by choosing from River tiles. 
River completed.
Lake Tile - Forced placement upon next player, counts as turn, followers deployed.
Game continues with the next player choosing from the remaining pile (possibly containing OST?).

Basic Game with River II
Spring Tile - Automatic placement, not a turn, no followers deployed.
River Fork Tile - Youngest player begins by being "forced" to place the River Fork tile, counts as turn, followers deployed.
The game continues with the next player choosing from the remaining River tiles.
River completed.
Non-volcano Lake Tile - The next player is "forced" to play this tile on either of two path-ends of the forked river, counts as turn, followers deployed.
Volcano-Lake Tile - The next player is "forced" to play this tile on the only remaining incomplete river end, counts as turn, followers may not be deployed, player allowed to draw and place again, followers deployed on new tile.
Game continues with the next player choosing from the remaining pile (possibly containing OST?).

Basic Game with River I and River II  (One spring is chosen, even possibly the one from GQ, and two of the three lakes are chosen.)
[If one of the two lakes chosen is the volcano Lake tile, follow the same procedure as for above (Basic Game with River II).]
If both of the non-volcano Lake tiles are chosen to play with, then:
Spring tile - Automatic placement, not a turn, no followers deployed.
River Fork Tile - Youngest player begins by being "forced" to place the River Fork tile, counts as turn, followers deployed.
The game continues with the next player choosing from the remaining River tiles.
River completed.
??????  Next step is in question until clarified.  My guess would be the next player draws "unsighted" from the two lake tiles face-down, then plays the drawn lake tile on either of two path-ends of the forked river, counts as turn, followers deployed.
Then, the next player is "forced" to draw the other remaining lake tile and place it on the only remaining incomplete river end, counts as turn, followers deployed.
Game continues with the next player choosing from the remaining pile (possibly containing OST?).

Do I have this right?  This is moot, of course, if it's official that when using River I and River II, both of the River II lakes are supposed to be used...but I was under the impression you merely "disregarded one spring and one lake," which would mean you could choose which spring and which lakes you want to play with.  There's not much point to playing with the volcano if you're not playing with the dragon.

It will be interesting to see how this turns out. :)

This time around, I'm checking both the Annotated Rules AND the RGG rules. Annotated rules will be referred to as AR for the rest of my post.

Basic Game with River I

According to RGG, the OST is removed when playing with the river. Both AR and RGG agree that the placement of the spring is not part of anybody's turn. The RGG rules seem to indicate that the lake is placed as part of a person's turn, which is the opposite impression to what the AR give me.



The AR make it seem like the lake is placed between turns, though it's possible I'm just making the wrong conclusion here.

Basic Game with River II

According to RGG, the OST is removed. Branch is placed as part of the first player's turn; nothing prohibiting follower deployment. City/lake tile is not even mentioned; volcano/lake tile placed after all other river tiles. There is not even any mention of separating the city/lake tile, which suggests to me that is actually mixed with the river tiles. This would mean that one of the branches could be completed before the other, with subsequent river tiles going to the other branch in whatever order they are drawn. This opens up yet another question: do we separate both lake tiles or just the volcano/lake tile?

Basic Game with River I and II

According to the footnotes in the AR, one spring and one lake are discarded, but there is no specification which ones to discard. This would seem to allow the possibility of discarding the volcano/lake tile. The double-placement rule seems to be caused by the volcano itself, and not by the fact that it is the last tile, so you are probably right that follower deployment may always occur on the normal lake tile regardless of which expansions are being used. Whether or not the player draws blindly one of the lake tiles at the end depends on whether the city/lake tile is set aside or mixed in with the other river tiles.

Summary of my understanding

Basic Game
Original Starting Tile - Automatic placement, not a turn, no followers deployed.
Game then begins with youngest player choosing from the remaining pile.

Basic Game with River I
Spring Tile - Automatic placement, not a turn, no followers deployed.
Youngest player begins by choosing from River tiles. 
River completed.
Lake Tile - Forced placement upon next player, counts as turn, followers deployed.
Game continues with the next player choosing from the remaining pile (possibly containing OST).

Basic Game with River II
Spring Tile - Automatic placement, not a turn, no followers deployed.
River Fork Tile - Youngest player begins by being "forced" to place the River Fork tile, counts as turn, followers deployed.
The game continues with the next player choosing from the remaining River tiles, which includes the city/lake tile.
River completed.
Volcano-Lake Tile - The next player is "forced" to play this tile on the only remaining incomplete river end, counts as turn, followers may not be deployed, player allowed to draw and place again, followers deployed on new tile.
Game continues with the next player choosing from the remaining pile (possibly containing OST).

Basic Game with River I and River II  (One spring and one lake are discarded.)
Spring tile - Automatic placement, not a turn, no followers deployed.
River Fork Tile - Youngest player begins by being "forced" to place the River Fork tile, counts as turn, followers deployed.
The game continues with the next player choosing from the remaining River tiles, including the city/lake tile.
River completed.
Either the volcano/lake tile is placed and the player is allowed to draw and place again, or the regular lake tile is placed and the player is not allowed to draw again.

Original Starting Tile
Option 1: play it at start, which excludes the use of any rivers or Count expansion.
Option 2: play it after the river as a forced placement (follower deployment allowed)
Option 3: mix it in with the rest of the land tiles
Option 4: discard it

Forced placements
Type 1: follower deployment allowed - occurs as part of a turn
Type 2: follower deployment not allowed - occurs outside of a turn
Type 3: follower deployment not allowed due to tile feature - take extra turn

I'm still not clear on whether follower deployment is allowed on the volcano/lake tile when the P&D expansion is not being used, since according to the rules the volcano tile has no special significance anymore. In theory, there's a possible advantage to leaving the volcano/lake tile in because it gives a double-turn. A player could place a pig on the volcano/lake tile if it's connected to their farm, and then place another tile with a follower.

Stop me if I'm wrong guys but when placing the lake and volcano tile you are not totaly stopped form placing a piece, you may place a pig or a builder on this tile but not a meeple, which can be advantageous if the river tile with the pig famr has come out at the right time for you.

Dont see the problem with the tile placement on the rivers myself. When using both sets you put to one side the tile with spring, volcano and the branch to be used at the specific times, all other tiles go inthe bag,stack or whatever you use, to be drawn each turn. So the spring goes first with no placement allowed, branch next (unless you have your own variation in play) and placement is allowed, whic can be very advantageous for farming, then each tile comes out of the stack/bag until last player is forced to play the volcano tile. End of river placement and no problem. Yes I can see why if not using P&D you would want to use normal lake tile, with relevant allowance but if you use either tile and dont allow a meeple to be placed on that tile then its more fun as you can battle to connect round the end of the river to farm further, which I believe is the original intention.

And also does anyone actually still use the youngest player first rule ? All of our players are over 21 so it got dumped straight away and now its just a case of who pulls the black meeple out of the bag goes first.

Really as long as all your players agree on a certain ruling then go with what suits you best.

That's correct, but if you're not playing P&D, the volcano loses it's significance, so I'm wondering if meeples can be placed on it in that situation.


Sounds like you are agreeing that the city/lake tile goes in the bag? Have you been playing it this way in your games?


We played youngest player starts in the last game I played. Most of the players were under 20. It was the first time I had played with that rule, because in the RGG rules "the players decide among themselves who will be the starting player, using any method they choose." Before that last game I played, I hadn't read the Annotated Rules.

Scott, you brought up a good point.  I completely forgot to consider the option of mixing the city/lake tile into the bag with the other River tiles when playing with the volcano.

But that still begs the question:  What if you're playing with River I and River II, and you choose not to use the volcano tile?  There is no mention, in that case, of which lake tile HAS to go last.  So, at this point, the simple questions is, when playing with the two non-vocano lake tiles, is there an official ruling as to whether the original lake tile must be placed last (allowing you to mix the city/lake tile in with the River tiles, just as you would if you were setting aside the volcano tile)?

The possible rulings in this case could be:
#1)  Players must set aside Original Lake Tile (to be placed last), mix City/Lake Tile in with River tiles.
or
#2)  Players must set aside City/Lake Tile (to be placed last), mix Original Lake Tile in with River tiles.
or
#3)  Players may choose with Lake Tile will be set aside to end the River, and mix the other Lake Tile in with the River Tiles.
or
#4)  Players must set aside BOTH Lake Tiles face down, and once the river is completed, the next player draws from the two possible Lake Tiles (and plays it), and then the next player plays the other Lake Tile.
or
#5)  Players mix BOTH Lake Tiles in with the River Tiles.  River Tiles are drawn and placed, and as soon as one players draws and places one of the Lake Tiles, the players search the remaining River Tiles for the other Lake Tile, set it aside at that point, reshuffle the remaining River Tiles, and then continue to draw and play.  When the river is finished, the next player plays the "set aside" Lake Tile.

What do you think?  I know this is beating a small issue to death, but I'm a sucker for minutiae.

As an aside:  Is that true, you can place other special pieces on the volcano tile?  Really?  So, if you're playing with the Dragon, I know you can't place followers...but you can place a pig?  Anything else?  A barn?
And I'm not sure what the ruling on the volcano piece is if you're using it without the dragon.  I know the rules say the volcano has no special significance in that case, but I would imagine you still have to abide by the rule that you cannot place a follower, and that you then get to draw again.  But maybe not?  Is there an official ruling on this point?  I don't know if the phrase "no special significance" means you just play it as a normal tile and ignore the special characteristics of the volcano tile, or if it just means not to worry about the dragon, but still abide by the "no followers" rule.

Also, if the ruling is made that when playing River I and River II without the volcano, the Original Lake Tile only is set aside, and the City/Lake Tile is mixed in with the River tiles (which seems like a simple solution if made official), I would imagine you COULD place a follower on that final Lake tile (unlike with the volcano).  That would require a significant rule change if it weren't the case.  I understand the motivation, but that would certainly need an explicit change to the rules.

In the case of substituting the normal lake for the volcano/lake, I think the normal lake should be set aside and placed last just as the volcano/lake is placed last, and the city/lake is mixed with the river as usual. The normal lake is taking the place of the volcano lake in the game. Since followers may be deployed on the normal lake tile, no extra tile is drawn.

According to the rules, exactly one lake tile is set aside, so that discounts options 4 and 5.

I love discussing minutae too, and if it weren't for this, I never would have noticed that the city/lake is supposed to be mixed with the river.

Builders and pigs become permissible for deployment on volcano tiles when the Big Box came out. Since they are no longer followers, they are not subject to the rule that followers cannot be deployed on volcanos. See footnote 73 in the Annotated Rules (page 32). Since the barn is not a follower, I suspect it may also be placed on a volcano, provided the conditions for barn placement have been met.

There's no official ruling regarding the volcano/lake beyond the "no special significance" statement. We need something more explicit, but obviously there are two possible rulings here:
#1) player may not deploy follower, draw another tile
#2) player may deploy a follower, do not draw another tile
Drawing another tile cannot be permitted if follower deployment is allowed, since the drawing of the extra tile is intended to make up for not being able to deploy on the volcano. "No special significance" could merely refer to the dragon not being summoned and the regular rule regarding follower placement on volcanos may still apply. If pigs and builders were still considered followers, this would be a non-issue, but because a pig can be deployed on a volcano, this could give the player who places the volcano/lake tile an advantage if the tile is connected to his/her farm. When playing with the dragon, this would be less of an advantage since the dragon is likely to eat their farmer.

Yes, this is a strange circumstance now, playing with the volcano, without the dragon, but with builders and pigs.  Hmmm...you're right, the way I read the rules, the player who places the volcano is going to get a slight advantage of having the option to place a pig, and then getting to draw and place another tile with possible deployments.

Thanks for the clarification on the River...I didn't realize the rules explicitly stated that only one lake tile must be set aside?  In that case, it does seem logical that it would be the Original Lake Tile, which can be thought of as replacing the volcano.  Although, it doesn't perfectly satisfy...since the whole purpose in mandating that the volcano gets placed last is because of the special characteristics of the volcano tile, characteristics that the Original Lake Tile does not share.

Perhaps the City/Lake Tile couldn't (or shouldn't) go last because then when the youngest player decides who goes first (or places the fork himself), it will be predetermined who is going to get the City/Lake tile based on the number of available River tiles.  And people like to make cities.

Mixing the City/Lake Tile in with the River tiles is a simple and reasonable solution, and it's probably the best option without an official explanation in the rules.

I'm a new player to the world of Carcassonne. I was perusing the forum and happened upon this thread. I apologise if this has been answered before but, what would be the problems with starting the game with the river branch tile, mixing lake and city/lake tile in with the rest of the river tiles. The spring tile being set aside for the last play. This would provide a choice of three possible plays on the first go (depending on what tile was drawn, obviously).

Welcome! :)

Starting from the branch would usually mean the spring would end up farther away from it. I haven't personally tried this, but the thought has crossed my mind. I think it would affect the size of farms, but I'm not sure whether it would be an improvement or detriment. I encourage play-testing and reporting back with the results. ;D