It's basically two ways to do that. The first way is to do as you mention yourself, chop it into sections and gradually change the line width. The trick is to make the change between segments small enough to not be noticeable (keep the intended zoom level of the map in mind, you'll obviously always see the "steps" when you zoom close enough, for example when you make it, but if the map is made for being zoomed out, ensure it looks great at that scale.). Adding effects to the river like glow or edge fade will also hide the stepping. I usually also place the steppings where the river joins with another river, which also hides the edges.

The second way is to draw the river using a polygon tool instead of a line. This obviously means you end up drawing both banks of the river, but youæll have full control of the appearance. This is a bit more work than using a line, and also more work if you need to move some nodes since you have both sides of the river to work width, but you can make it exactly as you want to.

To edit an existing hyperlink, first use View -> Show hyperlinks to make sure the link is visible, then use :CC2EDIT: on it. This will allow you to edit the macro behind the link. If you prefer to browse to the new map, you'll have to erase that old hotspot instead and just make a new one.

Exporting to an image takes longer time than printing to a pdf, but it gives you better control over the end result. Generally, images are better suited for post-processing than a pdf as well.

Note that if you have a large CC3+ maps and just need a section of it in higher detail, you can use the rectangular section export option, this allow you to export that small section in the same size as you would normally do for the entire map.

The most important point when exporting to an image is to set an appropriate export resolution. Personally, when I export battlemaps, I export them at a minimum of 100 pixels per grid square (usually 5' squares) for a decent quality. Of course, the higher the resolution, the larger the image, so you will often need to consider the tradeoff between quality and smaller file size if you are using it online in a VTT or similar unless everyone involved have very fast connections.

Png is the better format, but it is also about 6 times as large as jpg, so often even if jpg is a lower quality for the same size image, you can get a better export overall at the same file size with jpg because you can go higher in the resolution.

But in any case, you will never get the same quality of an image as you get in CC3+. An image consists of a fixed set with pixels, and quality will always decrease as you zoom in. To a certain degree, that is true in CC3+ too, but CC3+ keeps a set of 4 images around for each fill and symbol, and shows you a better version as you zoom in, something you cannot get in an image format.