It is now the third time that I review some version of this manuscript, which was previously submitted twice to another journal.

Through both rounds of revisions, the authors have implemented changes that have largely addressed my earlier comments and, in my opinion, improved the article. At this stage, I do not have any other major points of criticism.

Still, I have found some discrepancies between text and figures/data that need to be looked at. There are also some bits of text that may benefit from some wordsmithing. These are all pointed out in the annotated ms.

Also, upon a re-read of the paper, I now think the authors could move all the description of methods, analyses and results that are included in the section 4.2 of the Discussion to the corresponding relevant sections (Methods and Results). I think the narrative of the paper would benefit from that.

I have left all the minor comments and suggestions in the annotated version of the paper.

This manuscript shows the results of a Delft3D modelling study on the effect of upstream alluvial slope on avulsion frequency in river deltas. The study follows a nice systematic approach of Delft3D runs and analysis of various morphometric features that would be of interest to readers. The authors also made a decent effort in tying models to case studies.

Although I like the systematic approach and analysis, I have two main concerns: (1) Not all arguments and choices in the design and analysis of this study are clear to me, as detailed in the attached file. (2) Some arguments in the text seem to contradict, and not all claims are clearly supported by the results. Although there is potential in this study, I encourage the authors to address or clarify the comments in the attached file. Purple comments are mine, yellow are another reviewer.