Forests with new patch -- To cut or keep?

[Proteus]

Not entirely true, or at least I suspect not. Now, while it strictly wasn't woods that sprang up, I did see today, that a jungle sprung up on a developed hex. But that depends on what you call 'developed'. To me, before I saw this, I considered developed anything that had a trace of a worker or settler on it, such as a road. The jungle sprang up on a road. I've no doubt whatsoever. I also think it's true that if something were mines it wouldn't have sprung up, but time may find that false too.

Yep, it´s rather a question of definition.
They might spread into tiles with (rail-)roads,
but they won´t spread into tiles which have things like farms/cities/workshops and the like.

Or to be more precise:
I think they can spread into developed tiles if they can coexist with the tile improvements there (which is the case for roads and railroads) but they won´t spread into tiles where they would have to replace one of the existing tile improvements (for example you can only have a farm or a forest in a tile, but not both at the same time, therefore a forest won´t spread into a tile with a farm as this would destroy the farm).
Therefore forest spread has similarities with an automated worker which has the option to "keep existing tile improvements" turned on

 

[BriantheBold]

It seems to me that I never get hammers from harvesting jungle even when it is two or three tiles away from my city. Does chopping for hammers only apply to forest tiles or does it also apply for jungle tiles? And isn't there some wonder or civic that requires at least one forest tile within a city's radius to be built?

 

[RED DIAMOND]

It seems to me that I never get hammers from harvesting jungle even when it is two or three tiles away from my city. Does chopping for hammers only apply to forest tiles or does it also apply for jungle tiles? And isn't there some wonder or civic that requires at least one forest tile within a city's radius to be built?

Forest only. Jungle clears but gives zero shields.

 

[Charles 22]

Yep, it´s rather a question of definition.
They might spread into tiles with (rail-)roads,
but they won´t spread into tiles which have things like farms/cities/workshops and the like.

Or to be more precise:
I think they can spread into developed tiles if they can coexist with the tile improvements there (which is the case for roads and railroads) but they won´t spread into tiles where they would have to replace one of the existing tile improvements (for example you can only have a farm or a forest in a tile, but not both at the same time, therefore a forest won´t spread into a tile with a farm as this would destroy the farm).
Therefore forest spread has similarities with an automated worker which has the option to "keep existing tile improvements" turned on

I concur. (the following typing was made under protest) - What a bunch of baloney, the stupid software wouldn't let me just type "I concur". It says it's too short.

 

[DementedAvenger]

lumbermills also get +1 shield from railroads also...

hill + forest + lumbermill + railroad > hill + mine

...

But mines get a bonus from railroads as well. This is like arguing that apples are better than oranges because apples are a type of fruit...

 

[jesusin]

On Emperor and above I would cut most of the forest, but not all. And I would never chop towards settler or worker.

Depending on difficulty level and number of luxuries available, you will only be able to grow your cities to around size 3, so you don´t want to turn hammers into food, but the contrary. I would no doubt change 5 food for 4 hammers, that's why I would never chop-rush settlers or workers. Slavery helps a lot, too.

 

[Luhh]

the extra health doesn't change much regarding forests. As long as there are hills you'll pretty much always want to chop down the forests.

I think forest chopping is one of the worst features in Civ since it's so abusive and unbalancing. Me no like.

 

[EscapedGoat]

Chopping forests is still a no-brainer. Lumber mills and railroads come too late. Until then, working a forest square isn't much to shout about. I'd rather have a cottage on that square. If I need hammers, I would rather mine a hill and get a farm where the forest was.

As for the health benefit: Gee, would I like a free chopped settler(3*30 hammers) or would I like 1.5 more health in my city from 3 forests? The answer is totally obvious. That new settler can probably grow to size 6-10 with just your empire's health from food sources.

 

[Oggums]

But if it's all grasslands/food plains and no hills, I'd rather save some forests than have to wait for a workshop to stop sucking.

 

[Astax]

I have heard that civic upkeeps and fast expanding can ruin you financially now. That, along with the added bonus of +0.5 to forests (giving +3-4 instead of +2) for health bonuses to your capital, and the new automated worker feature of keeping forests.

Does this mean that keeping forests instead of settler chopping could be more beneficial now?

Stupid patch makes it chop now mroe than ever! Frikin settlers are so expensive! Used to be 3 chops on quick now its 4!

 

[rabottens]

I use early chop rush. And I save select spots for lumbermills as well. I try to maintain a balance so I can benefit from both aspects of to chop or not to chop. If you decide to go with environmentalism the forests provide a decent health boon.