1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Forests?

Discussion in 'Civ4 - Strategy & Tips' started by Dr Corbett, Mar 12, 2006.

  1. Dr Corbett

    Dr Corbett Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2004
    Messages:
    76
    Do I save up for railroad+lumbermill combo later in game, or do I viciously denude them? I confess I'm a bit of a fan of state property or free market when I get them, and I've never tried Environmentalism (the benefit seems somewhat small, all things considered)...

    I'm sure that you want to axe jungles posthaste, but I'm not sure about the trees. These days I cut them to bits to support wonder building or something. I'm a bit of a noob though, so advice would be appreciated, even if it's "well it depends!" which I'm sure it'll be.
     
  2. scienide09

    scienide09 Regular lurker

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2005
    Messages:
    498
    Location:
    Canada
    I keep my forests for a constant heath benefit, along with the later increased lumbermill production boost. I will even switch to enviromentalism later in the game if I need the extra health.

    Try chopping everything just outside of your fat cross. You won't get quite as many shields from them, but if you're going to chop anyway, you might as well start there.
     
  3. Willem

    Willem Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Messages:
    7,313
    Location:
    Canada
    Each plot of Forest gives you .5 health so it's really not a bad idea to save what you can for the time when your cities are really big and creating a bunch of population unhealthiness. Myself, I save any Forest that is on Hills or Plains, unless they're next to a river. Grassland Forests generally get chopped to make way for Cottages, or Farms if I really need them.

    Incidentally, a wooded Hill with a Lumbermill gives you the exact same yield as if you built a Mine. Minus the Hammers you get for the chop of course.
     
  4. jerVL/kg

    jerVL/kg Sheep Nuker

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2005
    Messages:
    810
    You should absolutely chop any forests immediately next to your city, as they pose a security risk -- you don't want to give an invading army a free +50% defense bonus! You should also chop any tile where you plan to build a city later, so you don't waste the shields.

    Other than that, I try and keep as many forests alive as possible. The health bonus can be critical especially late in the game, and it's good to have them just in case you *do* need to choprush something in an emergency later on.

    Outside the fat cross, I'll usually leave forests and even jungle alone, mostly for asthetic purposes. ;) I'll also leave a few patches of forests next to unimproved tiles, as new forest will occasionally grow on them.

    The irony of Environmentalism is, if you do need to run it, you probably don't have any forests left anyway.
     
  5. Glinka

    Glinka Prince

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2005
    Messages:
    367
    There's a Green Mod around (used in Sevomod, too) that allows forest replanting, though it takes 10 turns to get one going--and even then, it's like a cottage: provides very little until it's been constantly worked for many turns.

    For myself, even without this mod, my inclination is to tear down all but one forest within the fat X around a city. This is especially true early in the game, where chopping provides a push to growth that can really make a giant difference.
     
  6. scienide09

    scienide09 Regular lurker

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2005
    Messages:
    498
    Location:
    Canada
    Why leave just one? There's no health bonus from only one forest, as each provides just 0.5 of a health point.
     
  7. Willem

    Willem Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Messages:
    7,313
    Location:
    Canada
    Yes, I was wondering the same thing.
     
  8. [Comrade]RaVE

    [Comrade]RaVE Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2005
    Messages:
    57
    Location:
    Dallas, Texas.
    I chop woods on any tile I plan on building improvements. Mines mostly, but I've cut down low-yielding forests for farrm locations. Anything in the 3x3 grid around your city goes right off the bat for the defensive reason mentioned above, but try to keep a handful off woods nearby.
     
  9. Andrei_V

    Andrei_V King

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2006
    Messages:
    930
    I try to leave 2-4 forests around non-coastal cities, and 0-2 around coastal ones.

    The health benefit of forests is more important in the early - mid game, until you build all those aqueducts - harbors - grocers.

    Environmentalism is great if you have several cities that you want to grow past 16-18.

    The forests are very weak compensation for Environmentalism (+6 health), you need at least 12 forests left in the fat cross. If you really leave that many, you may never get to the point where you have a choice, whether to adopt Environmentalism or not. :)
     
  10. neriana

    neriana Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2005
    Messages:
    255
    Unless I have a specific reason to chop -- I need a farm there, or I'm rushing a wonder, for instance -- I leave them. I hate the idea of denuding the world for a temporary gain, it depresses me. I live in Florida and see too much of that every single day. Also, by the time I reach the industrial era, my production is incredible, with all those forests.
     
  11. Dr Corbett

    Dr Corbett Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2004
    Messages:
    76
    Thank you all kindly for the advice - I see there's not much of a consensus here, but I suspect that's just a result of Civ IV's multifaceted and complex nature. :)
     
  12. jerVL/kg

    jerVL/kg Sheep Nuker

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2005
    Messages:
    810
    Someday I want to build cities surrounded by unchopped jungle, switch to Enviro, and see how high a happiness bonus I can get. :)

    Frankly, in all of my games, by the time I reach the modern era, health ceases to be an issue. I don't even bother building aqueducts or supermarkets, or even hospitals most of the time.

    Do coastal cities get a health bonus?
     
  13. Willem

    Willem Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Messages:
    7,313
    Location:
    Canada
    I don't know about that. It seems to me that most of the posters are in favour of saving some for the health benefits. It's not unanimous of course, but there certainly seems to be a majority opinion happening.
     
  14. Andrei_V

    Andrei_V King

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2006
    Messages:
    930
    Yes, if you build a Harbor there. It basically doubles health benefit from seafood resources.

    Environmentalism adds +6 health no matter what. It also adds +1 "We love our National Parks!" per forest/jungle. So, if you save 4 forests for Environmentalism, you'll get +4 happy.

    If you are running relatively small perfectionist empire with huge cities, Environmentalism far outweights Free Market/ State Property, since you get a lot more commerce from bigger cities, and a lot better trade routes.

    Try an OCC game once, you'll see for yourself that it is essential there. You can fight out happiness limit completely by building Globe, but you cannot win unhealthiness.
     
  15. jar2574

    jar2574 Prince

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    590
    I think that there is a consensus of pro-chopping among many players. (at least among many serious players in the GOTM). Chopping allows rapid expansion, which allows you to grab all the health resources you need, not to mention more land for more cities.

    I chop everything in sight unless a city has absolutely no hills, then I may leave a few for production reasons.

    I do not use environmentalism because my games are over before then.
     
  16. Dusty Monkey

    Dusty Monkey Warlord

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2006
    Messages:
    110
    Early chopping is most definately the best play.

    I'd go so far as to say that war over the chopping rights of big patches of lumber is also a damn good play.

    Not so sure about TOTAL deforestation however...
     
  17. Shoot the Moon

    Shoot the Moon Playing World in Conflict

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2005
    Messages:
    708
    I cannot think of a reason that I would not chop almost everything, except for lack of workers. I would rather get the hammer bonus, and then improve that land, than not get the bonus and not be able to use that land. Espicially on new or captured cities lat in the game, I need to chop certain important buildings (courthouses, granary/lighthouse, barracks) before the city would have enough hammer production to build them itself. And by the end game when lumbermills and railroads come about, production is not as important is research and food (by then I would most likely be either milking or gunning for technologies I need to win.)
     
  18. [Comrade]RaVE

    [Comrade]RaVE Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2005
    Messages:
    57
    Location:
    Dallas, Texas.
    The trick is to stop chopping at a certain point so you can allow the forests to regrow before you get environmentalism. Once you get your cities and improvements laid out, then you're generally producing well enough to not need a chop-rush.
     
  19. Shoot the Moon

    Shoot the Moon Playing World in Conflict

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2005
    Messages:
    708
    But by then I most likely have very few forests left (because, at least for me, almost all forests are chopped in the early game) in those cities, and any new cities you get (which will most likely have forests) will not have the production necesarry to get certain vital buildings (like courthouse):( , which I would chop. I guess it is all really a matter of playing style.
     
  20. lutzj

    lutzj The Last Thing You See

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    1,693
    Location:
    New England
    It rounds up , so you're better off with an odd number
     

Share This Page