A world without chopping?

[BadHorsie]

I was thinking back to the days of Civ games that didn't have chopping. I remember how tedious and drawn out the first era of the game was in comparison. You had a tiny, crappy city that took AGES to build everything that it essentially needed.

I was wondering, how many people think that chopping has improved or polluted the gameplay - considering how many people abuse it (me included).

Would it be more fair if new cities didn't have that ability to help them get up to speed at an unnatural rate?

 

[Veritass]

Like everything else in the game, it depends.

It depends on what leader you are, and what type of overall location you get, and what type of victory you might want to go for, and who your neighbors are, etc. The only time I see it as unbalanced is when on a varied map, one player gets a ton of forests to chop, and another player gets ice floes or jungles. Of course, if you are the one with the forests, it's good, but if you're not...

Anyway, it seems a trivial feature request to have one of the startup buttons be that you do not get hammer bonuses from chopping. Of course, you need the ability to remove forests where you need them removed, but you could disable the hammer bonus easily enough.

 

[Silver Marmot]

It's an interesting feature, and I definitely like being able to chop units very early in the game.

 

[GreatSquid]

I think it definitely makes the new cities less tedious at least for a minute. It's nice to build a few quick things before it slows down so the town isn't worthless.

 

[Pendle Witch]

I follow the logic of chopping a structure but chopping a unit doesn`t make much sense

 

[King Flevance]

I liked it when it was added. I still do as it seems realistic. All that lumber surely isnt burnt up in smoke. But I like it after the chop-nerf better than before it in 4. I have never really began to use it as a strategy in and of itself. But the small boosts here and there are nice. I am a chop minimalist and alot of times I have at least 1-2 forests around for lumbermills.

 

[wiseguy101]

I think that it's better now than before 1.61. Before 1.61, it was too powerful in my opinion. Now, it's more balanced.

 

[jimbob27]

I think it's better since the 1.61 nerf.

I'd be nice if the AI could somehow be programmed to chop more. They don't even clear jungle a lot of the time. Loads of my games have 1 or 2 civs who never manage to develop properly, simply because the don't build enough workers, and never make jungle clearance a priority. Human players normally excell in jungle areas, because of all the lovely grassland underneath.

 

[AndreasS]

I would like the chopping to depend on roads again. A road to in the woods should doubble the effect of chopping, or no road should half the effect..... Would add even more strategy an choices.

Think of the situation: You are building a wonder, you need to chop, but do you have time to build the road first?

 

[Howitzah]

I guess I choose "other."

I think chopping is good, but should only be usable to an extent. It would've been nice if they had implemented a Wood resource, so you could, say, chop to make Archers, or a barracks faster, but not be able to chop most Wonders, and metal-based units and buildings.

 

[flytyer]

I am of the other strategy...if it happens, great, if not then whatever

 

[bhavv]

I save my chops for wonders since I usually play for a cultural win. Makes up for not having caravans anymore.

 

[Black Attila]

I rarely rely on that tactic, In fact, I prefer to save my forests for lumbermills, unless I feel farms are necessary(or rarely cottages).

 

[Elmstr]

timbermills are usefull but it is so late in the game till you get them

 

[Calavente]

Chopping....

I'm in the other strategy...
no real investment in chopping, can be useful some times, but as after the chopping, the tile produce 1 less hammer, it is mostly not interseting in the long term.
forest is a long term ressource, at the begining of the game, it is not a interesting tile, as it produce no more than 3 points (2food and 1 hammer or the reverse) and lumber mill arrive very late. At the end of the game, you have lumbermill, and with ecology, it makes 1happy for the city... Youpi !!

but if you choppe it, you will work the tile, then no more happy
as you cannot regrow the forest (it grows randomly only on non-improved tiles), I think it is well balanced to have some chopping bonus. (even a big one). You are bargaining a short term advantage against a long term one...
ex for wonder, with chopping you may be able to have a one time boost, but for the next wonder, you will produce one hammer less..

 

[Kalleyao]

It makes the game more fun and/or less tedious

 

[drkodos]

Anytime a mine is placed on a forrested hill, trees are chopped. Anytime forrested grasslands are converted to cottages or farms, trees are chopped.

Trees are chopped for hammer yields whether or not a player is a "chopper;" players that claim to never chop are likely mal-informed and do not understand that any improvement of forrrested land (with the exception of a lumbermill) involves chopping trees.

with chopping you may be able to have a one time boost, but for the next wonder, you will produce one hammer less..

Not true. If one chops the trees on a hill and then mines it, hammer production goes from 2 (two) to 4 (four). More if a resource is involved.