The authors made substantial efforts to address the Reviewers’ comments and improve clarity of the whole manuscript, with particular regard to the presentation of results. However, a few issues still need some clarification. Therefore, in my opinion, the paper can be accepted for publication with minor revision.
Specific comments:
- Line 126: please capitalize “coriolis”.
- Lines 218-219: the explanation of Figure 3b is confusing. Maybe the words “and for negative tides” are to be expunged, if I am not misunderstood.
- Lines 254-255: it is not clear from the caption of Figure 5 that the maps showing inundated areas are relative to a specific time instead of depicting the total extent of the TC-induced flooding, which would make more sense also for consistency with the values reported in Table 5.
- Line 452: please replace “shown” with “are shown”.
- In Table 2, information about the intensity of the considered TCs would also be interesting.
- In Table 5, the number of significant digits is excessive considering the uncertainties of the results. Integer values would be more appropriate. For the same reason, in Table 6 percent values should be rounded to integers. Please also change the text accordingly. |