Thalassicus
Bytes and Nibblers
What do you do more often:
- Chop forests down.
- Build improvements on forests.
- Other (explain).
Forest chopping
- Thread starter Thalassicus
- Start date
justinnyc4now
Chieftain
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2012
- Messages
- 12
The only time I improve a forest is if chopping it would result in lower food (i.e. a forested tundra/mountain) or in coastal areas where there is limited production available elsewhere. Otherwise I'd rather have a farm or village and the instant production bonus from chopping.
Naeven
Warlord
I'd say it's fairly equal. If I need it for farm, I chop it. If I put a village on it I let the forest be. It's not very often I use the lumberill tho.
mitsho
Deity
There's most often enough free space to plant all the farms I need and food is available on other routes as well. Forests on the other hand provide 1 
instead of 
which is scarcer and helps tactical warfare by slowing the enemy down. My own roads always go through the forests (or hills) as well if possible. All that is of course depending on circumstances, but I usually want some forest still around, if only as my empire otherwise would look like a industrialized wasteland...
instead of which is scarcer and helps tactical warfare by slowing the enemy down. My own roads always go through the forests (or hills) as well if possible. All that is of course depending on circumstances, but I usually want some forest still around, if only as my empire otherwise would look like a industrialized wasteland...
Ahriman
Tyrant
It depends where they are. If they're river adjacent, I'll usually chop them to be able to build a farm. If they're adjacent to a border city, I'll clear then in an area facing likely enemy advance but keep some for my defensive units to stand on. If they're in a hammer-poor grasslands area I'll likely keep them for lumbermills, but if they're in a plains area I'll probably chop them and have farms or villages.
Tomice
Passionate Smart-Ass
I agree to Ahriman, it's too situational to simply say "yes" or "no". I like to leave them if possible, but production rushing, defensive bonuses or lack of farming land changes this very often. Which is good for the game, BTW - IIRC it was less balanced in Civ4.
Dunkah
Emperor
The only time I chop is if I feel there is competition (how would I even know), or a real need for a wonder quick.
I will chop if I find myself in the middle of an massive inland forest or jungle to plant farms, but that is rare.
I will chop if I find myself in the middle of an massive inland forest or jungle to plant farms, but that is rare.
albie_123
Modding In Secret
I chop occasionally. But I noticed in another post you mentioned chopping as to flatten the land for cavalry - unless you mean as a side-effect, I can easily say I have never bothered to chop for that reason.
Naeven
Warlord
gdwitt
Prince
I like the forest regeneration mod, but am suspicious of it.
I identified it as the source of many crashes in the Winter of 2012.
I am not sure what is slowing down my game and make it bugged out now.
I would keep all my river forests because the tech for more production seems to be earlier in GEM than VEM.
However, in the latest GEM, I would advise all trading posts.
I have my complaints with it but that's how the game is set up now.
See my new thread discussing this.
I identified it as the source of many crashes in the Winter of 2012.
I am not sure what is slowing down my game and make it bugged out now.
I would keep all my river forests because the tech for more production seems to be earlier in GEM than VEM.
However, in the latest GEM, I would advise all trading posts.
I have my complaints with it but that's how the game is set up now.
See my new thread discussing this.
More complicated than that; but in a totally predictable way:
Forest on Tundra: Always improve
Forest on Plains: Always chop
Forest on Hill with fresh water: Always chop
Forest on Hill without fresh water: Always improve
Edit:
I seem to have missed the Forest on flat Grassland case: That is currently the case where I think about what I want to do.
I think it's clear that if the yield value of forest was also dependent upon underlying terrain it would move it away from always/never situations.
Forest on Tundra: Always improve
Forest on Plains: Always chop
Forest on Hill with fresh water: Always chop
Forest on Hill without fresh water: Always improve
Edit:
I seem to have missed the Forest on flat Grassland case: That is currently the case where I think about what I want to do.
I think it's clear that if the yield value of forest was also dependent upon underlying terrain it would move it away from always/never situations.
Thalassicus
Bytes and Nibblers
That's the same pattern I follow joncnunn. I also leave grassland-forests in areas starved of production, like near coastal cities.
