Keeping forests alive.

[Lunsen]

Hey, I've been trying to search but I'm far from finding my answer.

I was wondering what the general community thinks about keeping forests.
I've seen alot of people saying you should just cottage up everything and chop those trees to the ground. Anyone got any good arguments for why I should not keep em'?

As I can't see why I should chop em in a production-city, they make good hammers with lumbermills in the future. Perhaps in commerce-cities where cottages makes more use but they too need hammers right?

 

[twansalem]

I probably don't chop enough.

I rarely chop a plains forest especially really early on, as they are a pretty good source of production (especially later on with lumbermills). If I'm in caste system and can build workshops, occasionally I'll chop a few and build workshops, as that's a pretty good source of production.

Grassland forests are a bit trickier. Sometimes I'll just let them be and lumbermill them later. Sometimes I'll chop them and irrigate if I don't have enough food resources to grow my city, and if it's a commerce city I'll chop and cottage them. I should probably do more of this, but for some reason I don't like chopping down too many forests.

Tundra forests almost always stay as is, as once you chop a tundra forest without access to fresh water there's nothing you can build on it. I'll occasionally chop and irrigate a couple of riverside tundra forests if absolutely necessary to get some extra food. Of course my real preference is to avoid settling near tundra or ice altogether unless there are some good resources and a few deer to let the city grow.

If you can afford it, sometimes it's nice to leave a city (or city location) with 8+ forests and a couple of food resources for a really nice National Park location.

Of course I don't play at the higher difficulty levels (I usually play at Prince), so I don't need to squeeze every last bit of commerce out of every tile, so my answers are probably quite different from the real pros around here.

 

[Ghpstage]

they make good hammers with lumbermills in the future.

And this is the biggest argument against Lumbermills...... in the future. They aren't available for an very long period, in fact the most important period where you set up everything that follows!
Until RP the forest just sits taking up space while offering a poor yield compared to improvements.

To make matters worse, by not chopping them you are losing out on the lump sum of hammers you could have got by chopping. Hammers which could have been spent setting yourself up in a strong position earlier with more cities, units, infra or maybe a wonder or two.

Even when you can make lumbermills they are far from an obvious choice. Watermills are equal at RP, and have more growth potential, while workshops can also be competitive (even more so if your playing BTS) and don't require forests to be built.

That leaves us with the things that are unique to lumbermills.
Lumbermills can be built on dry flat tundra tiles while nothing else can, so leaving these forests for lumbermilling is a no-brainer. The same applies to non riverside flat ice tiles, but they aren't seen in standard scripts and probably aren't worth working anyway.
The second thing is that they give 0.5 just for being in a cities BFC. So its reasonable to leave a small number of forests at a city that you can forsee health troubles in, though its much better if these tiles aren't going to be worked till RP!

My personal policy is to chop if I want to work the tile the forest is on, chop if I need something built NOW (e.g. settler races/rushes/wonders), chop to set up cities faster and to chop forests immediately next to any city that may be threatened in war (defense bonuses!). There are a few exceptions, but I tend to chop an overwhelming majority of forests.

 

[s.bernbaum]

If you enjoy having forests and lumber mills and you are playing at low or medium difficulty levels, there is no reason to chop the forests. The AIs do not have such an advantage that the chopped builds are essential. You may miss out on some World Wonder or other and your game will probably run longer until a victory but that will also let you build the lumber mills. At high levels, it is a different story due to the AIs advantages. I would, however, usually chop forests on the tiles adjacent to my cities (the first ring of the fat cross) to avoid leaving a defensive bonus tile for AI to use if it attacks the city. Typically, you won't be working all the tiles anyway until after you can build lumber mills, so you are only missing out on the chop production. BTW, on marathon, you can have your cake and eat it too. If you chop in a checkerboard pattern, a lot of the chopped forests will grow back.

 

[LeHam]

Well Lumber Mills get extra gold and production bonuses later on from technologies and railroad gives them +1 production, so they're really good later on. Sometimes I have forests in between BFCs and so I'll use Forest Preserves to speed up regrowth of forests and replace some of my farms with lumber mills (after Biology they produce an extra food so it's not a big loss.

 

[AutomatedTeller]

forests are great. I try to keep some for my GP farm (for nat park) and, if I can, for my ironworks city (for health). I almost never ACTUALLY keep any for ironworks, however.

It's hard to resist chop. And lumbermills take a long time to build, too.

 

[plasmacannon]

For me, they stay on tundra and plains tiles, with the exception of a war front and giving the enemy +50% defense to attack my city.
I have ended up with filler cities that don't have alot of food to be decient, nor alot of grassland hills, but, will have 5+ plains forests. These usually become production powerhouses with lumbermills. I am still looking for the great National Park location, and, I never end up building it.

The thing about wonders.
If, I have stone or marble, I built them and chop accordingly.
The same for IND leaders.
When neither, I will have to chop alot more, so, it usually is better to build units and capture cities, than, to waste several trees on 1-2 wonders.

 

[Lunsen]

Great discussion! I appreciate the answers given
The main problem as many of you said is that once you chopped a forest it will probably never grow back. (Unless you have nereby forests that can spread wich rarely happens).

This has changed some of my playing tactics as most times I've saved 'em forests for future lumbermills but I might aswell just chop some for immidate cottagespamming or whatever I wanna do with the tile.

Thanks alot!

 

[Lunsen]

I've never even considered the health bonus aswell as the defense bonus my enimies get.
This is probably why I am still on Prince.

 

[Skallagrimson]

Hey, I've been trying to search but I'm far from finding my answer.

I was wondering what the general community thinks about keeping forests.
I've seen alot of people saying you should just cottage up everything and chop those trees to the ground. Anyone got any good arguments for why I should not keep em'?

As I can't see why I should chop em in a production-city, they make good hammers with lumbermills in the future. Perhaps in commerce-cities where cottages makes more use but they too need hammers right?

The trade-off is that a tree tile yields .5 health (1 health per 2 tree tiles), which is a yield you don't get from workshops or cottages. A chop yields about an axeman's worth of hammers, depending on game speed, etc.

Some things to consider on either side of the argument: chopping takes up worker turns. Chop yield for an axe rush can be worth the cost in health and worker turns. When not planning to axe rush the chop yield can go towards rapid city expansion or other early game priorities. Also a forest gives a 50% terrain bonus which means invaders LOVE to use your unchopped forests as avenues of approach to your cities.

My personal resolution of the trade-off is that for the Iron Works and National Forest cities, I don't chop (and I ensure that neither of those are border cities!) In cities with special health challenges (not on fresh water, and/or lots of floodplains) I'll leave 2 or 4 or even 6 unchopped trees as a mitigating health factor for them. Along borders, the tiles on the same side of a river (or either side facing Ragnar since he has Berserkers) adjacent to cities are REQUIRED chops. Chops that are neither required nor "forbidden" in my policy, I get to them when I get to them, and my preference is to use chop hammers for some key wonders like Oracle, Great Library, or Pyramids (especially Pyramids if spiritual). I see them as "break glass in case of emergency" hammers since they're not renewable. And of course just because you have a tree doesn't mean your city has to work it. Avoid working the trees and just leave them there unless a city really needs to grow into the tiles.

Lumber mills: helpful in IW since they don't cost food and yield health. Most other cities they're pretty much a wash with a very subjective trade-off between health and early hammers.

 

[lymond]

chop chop chop!!!

 

[el toro loco]

i like to keep 2 forest in every city for mostly the 1 health and asthetics. it's just kind of sad looking at a completely barren land. you can usually find 2 tree spots that aren't going to serve you much like plains no river spot or 3rd or 4th production hill that you can't mine because of lack of food. you can still chop a ton but have a little left. and then later you can lumbermill.

 

[jmas]

Well Lumber Mills get extra gold and production bonuses later on from technologies and railroad gives them +1 production, so they're really good later on. Sometimes I have forests in between BFCs and so I'll use Forest Preserves to speed up regrowth of forests and replace some of my farms with lumber mills (after Biology they produce an extra food so it's not a big loss.

I get what you are saying, except about replacing farms with lumber mills. Forests won't grow on improved tiles like farms, right? Do you mean you switch from working a farm to working a lumber mill in certain cities?

 

[AutomatedTeller]

I also pretty much always chop a forest on a river. The commerce bonus is way too nice.

 

[nfw]

"A tree is a tree. How many more do you have to look at?"

Remember these words from The Gipper.

 

[karadoc]

Chopping gives a decent hammers boost, and in the early game those bonus hammers can make a really big difference. If you don't chop, you're really missing out on some quick productivity.

Late in the game... lumbermills are ok, but they aren't better than the other improvements. The real reason to save the forest is for the healthiness bonus - particularly for forests that are in range of more than one city.

In my Mod, another reason to keep forests is that they reduce your civs contribution to global warming - which is another late game effect. So from a strategy point of view, it's a question of whether you need the goodness now, or if you can save it for later.

 

[Tortfeasor]

I find that on larger maps I'm more likely to have cities with lumber mills or a national park city. The reason for this is fairly simple, smaller maps move faster with fewer cities so I need more hammers and I need those hammers now. In contrast if I'm playing a large map then I likely have several good production cities already fully chopped that can handle most if not all of my production needs. Therefore I can give more consideration to the health of those newer cities or plan a 2nd gp farm from a national park city.

On smaller maps I definitely tend to find that watermills work better since they give me far more hammers overall. A chop will net you on average 30-odd hammers. Take for example a riverside forest plain, the forest gives 1 food and 2 hammers. Watermill that tiles and you get your 30-odd chop hammers, the watermill will make up that hammer you lost and since the tile is no longer forested you get a commerce out of it.

But I only play on Prince so I'm sure there are people who could go much further in-depth with the numbers and give you far better advice with them.

 

[Ataxerxes]

On smaller maps I definitely tend to find that watermills work better since they give me far more hammers overall. A chop will net you on average 30-odd hammers. Take for example a riverside forest plain, the forest gives 1 food and 2 hammers. Watermill that tiles and you get your 30-odd chop hammers, the watermill will make up that hammer you lost and since the tile is no longer forested you get a commerce out of it.

Sorry if I'm stating the obvious, but this means you're running State Property (which I do). The decision is more involved if you plan to use Free Market and Corps (especially one like Sushi).

 

[-Asterix-]

chop chop chop!!!

Second this!

Early hammers > late hammers. When you could build those lumbermills in the future, build workshops instead.

 

[Tortfeasor]

Sorry if I'm stating the obvious, but this means you're running State Property (which I do). The decision is more involved if you plan to use Free Market and Corps (especially one like Sushi).

Do please correct me if I'm wrong but the base yield of an unworked riverside plains at machinery is 1 food and 2 hammers. You chop the forest and do nothing it becomes 1 food, one hammer, and 1 commerce. A watermill at machinery gives you +1 hammer to a riverside tile, that brings you back to 1 food, 2 hammers, and you get that extra commerce.

I was saying that in short games on small maps you're better off with a watermill because you get a slightly better tile long before you can work a lumbermill for just the cost of some health. My math does of course presume that you're working a riverside tile though.