These ships look really really good. It would be nice if some cargo ones were added to the set, although the current ones could also carry not only passengers, but also some other cargo, especially ferries. You can look at Shark or another "Fish" set how it is configured. These are really good sets to draw patterns from.
Any way, I noticed a few problems.
1. Loading and unloading is extremely slow. In the case of the largest ship, it takes almost a year.

As far as I know, there are two ways to determine the pace, it's worth paying attention to.
2. One of the ships (Cau Cau) in five directions is placed almost on the edge of the tile.
- [+] Spoiler

- Cau Cau.png (119.59 KiB) Viewed 14121 times
3. The wave that ships create is visible even when they are stationary (FISH-SHARK disables this animation / graphic completely)
4. With Paddle Wheeler, the wave is a bit too wide and when the ship is coasting, the graphic appears on land.
5. Yes, prices and maintenance cost are missing. I don't know if you'll be able to find that, but even if you do, using actual prices, properly adjusted of course, may not necessarily be the best in this game. This may not be important for you and for players who mainly or only care about looking pretty. Well, I like things to be economically refined.

In general, there are several sets that are good in this respect. These include Fish-Shark, 2cc Trains and WAS. These sets have fixed costs based on earning capacity, and I think this is the best benchmark for pricing and maintenance cost. It is good if the starting point is the average income during the year. If you want the ships to be rather cheap, the price could be 30-40% of the annual profits and the costs, for example, 5-7% of it. Then it is easily scale these costs and if the player increases the cost of these ships, they will still be relevant and each ship will earn something. An example of a poorly balanced set is unfortunately av8, where after increasing the costs, large planes still earn a lot but small ones only bring losses, because their base costs were not proportional to earnings. Of course, the base costs are only the base and it is worth changing them a bit so that it is not too technical and boring.

If you would like to go this route, first consider the following two points.
6. Ships are a bit slow. It's good that they have a sufficiently large capacity, because thanks to this they will not move one after the other, but there are still two problems here. The first is that the slower the ships move, the more ships are needed, and the more ships in a lane, the less realistic it looks and the greater the load on the game. The second is that the slower it moves make longer transport time and the lower profit - it can be and it would be worth solving it differently, by adding the cargo aging multiplier, but still, I think it would be nice to have a speed setting similar to Fish-Shark
7. Cargo aging - this can be a big problem. I already wrote about it in Garry's
thread (2nd point). There will most likely be a greatly increased drop in rate with transit time, which at the speeds of your ships will be just catastrophic. So it's really worth thinking about adding these modifiers. Even if this change can be stopped or modified, the addition of this feature will still be beneficial for the set. All Fish-Shark ships have it and it works really well.
8. As a curiosity, I will write that in Polish Cau Cau (Kał Kał) is read similarly to English Poo Poo.
