Disappointed: chopping is the only way.

[ShaLouZa]

I think there should be a happiness penalty just like whipping. Who really enjoys seeing clearcut stands of tree trunks all over their contryside? You should get a "+1 We will never forget your destruction of our city's natural beauty."

And Ents coming to destroy your city.

(Everyone saw LOTD, right ? )

 

[rewster1]

RoFL
btw It's LotR, but yeah... probably everyone here has seen it.

 

[EDaddy]

Yeah, I hate dead end techs. Especially the Wheel. I never bother researching it...
Though seriously, "handcuffing yourself" to specific civics is often a good thing, because you can concentrate on maximizing the benefit of that civic... like running slavery and pop-rushing granaries/lighthouses/etc. or... well there are a lot of possible examples. Cottage spamming + US is one of them, obviously.

The Wheel isn't a dead end tech. It leads to pottery. And I love researching The Wheel -- can't build roads without them and roads are very important in any Civ game.

 

[rewster1]

Oh. you're right. I just looked at the "civ4 technologies" page on this site trying to find a tech that didn't have anything in the "leads to" column. Guess it was a misprint. I've been playing as the Mongols lately (start with wheel) so I guess I forgot it was a prereq for pottery. I guess archery and horseback riding would be better candidates for "early techs that nearly everyone researches but are dead ends technically".

 

[MyOtherName]

You can get Democracy at least as quickly as Replaceable Parts, much less Railroads (which are really necessary to make the Lumbermills even competitive).

Sure, watermills are uber, but aside from that, you don't need railroad for lumbermills to be superior to the rest of the choices.

e.g.

A lumbermill costs you one food (because you use it instead of a farm) and nets you two hammers.

A mine costs you one food and one commerce (because you use it instead of a windmill) and nets you one hammer.

So they're not only competetive, they're superior. It's better to run windmills and lumbermills than mines and farms.

 

[DaviddesJ]

So they're not only competetive, they're superior. It's better to run windmills and lumbermills than mines and farms.

Yes, there's a small window in time (i.e., after Replaceable Parts, but before Railroads or Biology) when windmill/watermill/lumbermill is the most effective production city. But you can still get way more production, overall, by building lots of towns and using Universal Suffrage.

If you keep a few forests around in one or two towns because you're going to convert them to production centers at Replaceable Parts, you certainly aren't going to do yourself any great harm. But it's hardly going to be a decisive advantage, either.

 

[ArtiC]

i think that worst problem with forests is that they boost starting position too much, and i doubth that engine that determines starting positions takes forests into consideration ;[...

i mean empire that starts with like 6-7 forests around capital will just roll over the one that has like 1-2. i mutch rather had a few extra forests than a late calendar-resource

well and if u got jungle around you, u`r screwd anyways ;]


just popped in my head... hav anyone EVER seen any resources (except furs, deer, calendar ones) pop in the forested tile ? ;]

 

[Thalassicus]

This only is the case if you're running at 0% science, though. If you're researching, hammers are much better than cottages for production.

No, this is a fallacy, because if you add more commerce, you can lower your research rate to keep your research level constant, while producing more gold equal to the output from the commerce you added.

I think you missed my point: If you're running at 100% science with 0 gold income, hammers are obviously better than commerce for production, since you can't rush anything.

Cottages are better than straight production if you're under Suffrage, have the Kremlin, reduce your research significantly, and war weariness isn't a problem -- and if the Kremlin isn't reduced in potency in upcoming patches. Projects can't be rushed, though.

 

[Beamup]

Ah, but if your base commerce is higher, you aren't reducing your research significantly (or indeed at all) by lowering the science slider (relative to the lower-cottage higher-slider approach).

That's actually an additional advantage to cottage-based production - it can be converted into extra research more efficiently than hammer-based production.

 

[AU_Armageddon]

Neither of us puts cottages on hills, for the reason that cottages aren't allowed on hills.

I disagree with both of you. Cottages ARE allowed on grass hills and there are times and strategies when it may be prudent to do so, particularly in those common later game scenarios when your empire is set up such that gold has more value than hammers.

 

[Thalassicus]

Ah, but if your base commerce is higher, you aren't reducing your research significantly (or indeed at all) by lowering the science slider (relative to the low-cottage high-slider approach).

That's actually an additional advantage to cottage-based production - it can be converted into extra research more efficiently than hammer-based production.

I don't see exactly what you're getting at. If you're running at 50% science, then each town is only producing half as much gold (8), giving you less buying power.

Say the gold to hammer ratio were 2. If each town produces 16 commerce, it's worth 8 hammers at 0% science. If you're running at 75% science, each town produces only 4 gold, giving you 2 hammers.

So at 0%, with a 2:1 gold/hammer ratio each option would produce (after subtracting the common hammer):

Town - 8 hammers
Workshop/lumbermill - 4 hammers

At 75%, each option would produce:

Town - 2 hammers
Workshop/lumbermill - 4 hammers

So at 75%, a workshop or lumbermill would logically produce more hammers than a town...

Unless I overlooked something?

 

[Beamup]

Did I overlook something?

Yes. You're overlooking the fact that the correct variable to hold constant is NOT your science rate, but the number of beakers being produced. If you consider a constant science rate, then you are not considering the fact that you're getting extra beakers out of the town, hence underestimating its value.

Since the question is in regard to production specifically, the best way to compare is to hold beaker production constant by adjusting the science rate. Which means that all of the extra towns' commerce becomes gold (effectively), and you have a comparison between gold and hammers only, without having to also consider differences in beaker production.

The fundamental point is that you're not going to be using the same science rate with the two strategies, so comparisons at the same science rate mean very little.

 

[Yzen Danek]

Universal Suffrage? Kremlin? Towns?

By the time any of these things enters the game, I've already won, or at least I've taken enough decisive material to assure a win, such that the addition of the gold->hammers mechanic is moot.

Chop early, chop hard, build an insurmountable army, and take what's yours. This is what wins in Emporer and Immortal games.

Is that imbalanced? Compared to what? Compared to the huge production and research bonuses granted the AI? In multiplayer, we all have access to the same mechanic.

And it's historically accurate. The hills embanking the Tigris and Euphrates were once cedar forests; they were cut to build the Sumerian and Babylonian civilizations. New England, now forested again, was clearut to make room for farms and provide lumber for the building of the New World. Everywhere man has gone, we've cut forests. Sustainable forestry is a modern concept, not an ancient one.

If there is to be had one legitimate gripe about chopping, it is this: the AI doesn't use it well.

 

[lawren65]

Neither of us puts cottages on hills, for the reason that cottages aren't allowed on hills.

Actually I was pleasantly suprised the other day to find an AI town on a grassland hill. It turns out you can (and should) put towns on grassland hills.
No towns on plains or desert hills though....

 

[Thalassicus]

I think I see your point, but I don't see how it relates to the hammers a town produces.

From this thread, I got:

Sum of factors -- Base hurry coefficient
0% -- 3
25% -- 2.5
50% -- 2.25
75% -- 2.1
100%-- 2
125%--1.928
150%--1.875
175%--1.833

Unless this is mistaken. Assuming the 1.5 stated earlier, at max gold output a town produces ~11 net hammers. 2 base hammers gives 4 of output. So, if the town converts 35% of it's hammers to gold (65% research rate), it would produce ~4 hammers. This could be the break even point...any less gold than this, and the town is less useful for production than base hammers. The Kremlin would obviously modify this, as would a different gold/hammer conversion ratio. Without the Kremlin, then, even at the stated ratio, a 70% research rate or higher would render towns less useful than hammers for production, regardless of beaker output...

 

[Beamup]

What research rate you're using has absolutely no relevance to anything here. You have extra towns, you reduce your science rate accordingly to produce the same number of beakers. Which means 100% of the commerce from the town becomes gold for rushing. Quite simple. It doesn't matter one whit what science rate you might be running. You have more commerce, you can choose to turn it into gold. That's all there is to it.

Here's another way to look at it. I'm essentially specifying a particular science rate. At that science rate, the towns are strictly superior to mines (or anything else), since they produce more hammers, the same (not spent on rushing) gold, and the same beakers. Obviously you would only run a different science rate if that was a superior option to the one at which the comparison was made. Which means that you're even better off.

 

[Wodan]

Misc comments:

Re: Cottages/towns on Hills
There are two things hills provide: +1 hammer (-1 food) and the option to build a mine/windmill.

The only real decision in regard to what improvement you build is the bottom line net result.

So: mine, grass hill (railroad) = 1F4H0C right?
town, grass hill = 1F1H6C I believe.

Do you want 4 hammers or 6 commerce? Entirely personal preference..

Re: Wheel is a dead-end tech
EDaddy said you need it for Pottery... that's true but I believe Pottery is one of those with alternate path requirements. I think you can also do Agriculture -> Pottery. (In fact, I do this often.)

The default is Wheel -> Pottery and this is what the in-game tech tree shows. I really wish the in-game tree would show the alternate paths.

Wodan

 

[katank]

Pottery requires Wheel. Animal Husbandry allows for Writing without needing Pottery but AH does not allow Pottery. Note that if you don't start with the wheel, AH is the fastest way to writing.

 

[Wreck]

The only real decision in regard to what improvement you build is the bottom line net result.

So: mine, grass hill (railroad) = 1F4H0C right?
town, grass hill = 1F1H6C I believe.

Not with full civics and tech. Town, gives +1P,+7C. Mine+RR gives +3P. So the question becomes, is 2P==7C? No. You can buy 2P for $6, and 7C can get you $6 even without gold-enhancing buildings. Thus, a town is superior in just about any real situation -- once you have democracy, printing press, etc.

What's superior about mine+RR is that it doesn't require 70 turns to develop, nor high tech for most of the production. You build them and boom, they're there.

Incidentally, if you leave the forest on the hill, then it also gets, effectively, +3P (1P from forest, 1P from lumbermill, 1P from RR). However it is superior to mine+RR because it also adds health to the city. There's a big downside, though, which is that you went through much of the game without the benefits of high tech. Also, later in the game you often don't need the health.

 

[Boppo]

Incidentally, if you leave the forest on the hill, then it also gets, effectively, +3P (1P from forest, 1P from lumbermill, 1P from RR). However it is superior to mine+RR because it also adds health to the city. There's a big downside, though, which is that you went through much of the game without the benefits of high tech. Also, later in the game you often don't need the health.

I use this only for cities later in the game. Once you have Lumbermills it is better in a city to keep the forests on hills than to cut them down for a mine. Actually I'll often keep most any forest not directly next to one of my cities as long as I can support it food wise.