My ideas on forest planting

[EQandcivfanatic]

I have played Civ 3 for a while now and for a long time i could not figure out how planting trees is useful. Now after a few games i discovered what good they are. This is for people who have also been wondering about trees.

Use 1 (as a resource attracter): When a resource runs out another of the same resource always pops up somewhere else. I have discovered that for resources like iron or oil are much more likely to pop up in a forest and even more likely to pop up in a tundra forest. If you already have one of that resource it still means that there is one less resource that goes to the enemy.

Use 2 (tundra improver): Tundra only provides 1 food, unless you are luckly enough to get game as well. Even with game however tundra does not allow even a 12+ city(if surronded by tundra) to be productive. Forest adds 2 production to those squares and if game is on the square thats 3 food and 2 production and if you have factories with power plants even more production.

Use 3 (a wall): In the Middle Ages of the game where knights and calvary rule the game offensively the mounted units progress rapidly against you somtimes even making you lose 3 cities a turn. At this point in the game you should have many wotrkers and therefore be able to plant a "wall" of forests which would slow down the enemy and give you more time to send more troops against them.


That's all the uses i have seen for forests if anyone else knows how forests could be used please post it here.

 

[Trench]

if you have extra workers you can plant trees and then cut them down for 10 sheilds....

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

I was going to mention that except it seems to me that it is a waste of time and worker power. Also the 10 sheilds usually by that point in the game are no good for things like Cathedrals and Wonders.

 

[dunk]

Use 1... Only the original tile type matters for resource placement.

Use 2... Good idea.

Use 3... Good idea.

Chopping planted trees down... You do not get the 10 shields from planted forests anymore. Only the original, natural forests. And, those 10 shields are lost if the nearest city is building a wonder as rushing of any kind save leaders is prohibited for wonders

 

[Zouave]

Originally posted by dunk
Use 1... Only the original tile type matters for resource placement.

Use 2... Good idea.

Use 3... Good idea.

Chopping planted trees down... You do not get the 10 shields from planted forests anymore. Only the original, natural forests. And, those 10 shields are lost if the nearest city is building a wonder as rushing of any kind save leaders is prohibited for wonders

Which is yet another non-historical unrealistic piece of Firaxis bullbleep trying to screw the human. A tree is a tree is a tree.

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

ummmmmm, which part of the quote are you referring to?

 

[kring]

Good ideas. I use the forest on tundra a lot; the AI seemed to use it so I copied them.

 

[eighty]

Originally posted by dunk

And, those 10 shields are lost if the nearest city is building a wonder as rushing of any kind save leaders is prohibited for wonders

Also, if u whack down some trees and the shields go towards the city, it can no longer build wonders until the said improvement is complete.

A forest can also be used in a land bottleneck to provide a defense bonus for your troops. Then stick a fortress on top of it. If you have time, build the fortress first because it takes less time on a non-forested square.

If u have a right of passage with an AI, try planting forest on some of their huge food producing squares and hopefully their population will go down. (Does this work? Never tried it, but it seems like it might )

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

Okay so now i got #s 4 and 5.

Use 4(as a bottleneck defense): I tried this one out after eighty posted it. He is absolutely right. The only problem with this stradedgy is that if you have any automated workers they will all rush to whack down your defense.

Use 5: This one i made up on my own after trying out. Eighty's idea to plant trees to ruin food doesn't really work. The enemy workers then just chop it all down. But that leads to antoher stradedgy. Try planting trees near any city in your enemy's country. The AI should send lots of workers to chop them down(if the city is not newly built). And a worker that is chopping down trees is a worker that is not building roads, railroads or other improvements. In other words this is a time buyer.

 

[Maple]

Originally posted by EQandcivfanatic
Try planting trees near any city in your enemy's country. The AI should send lots of workers to chop them down(if the city is not newly built). And a worker that is chopping down trees is a worker that is not building roads, railroads or other improvements. In other words this is a time buyer.

If you are at war with them, you could also use this to attract workers to capture.

 

[ChickinSht]

Originally posted by Zouave


Which is yet another non-historical unrealistic piece of Firaxis bullbleep trying to screw the human. A tree is a tree is a tree.

And a game is a game. You want reality, go outside.

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

Originally posted by Maple


If you are at war with them, you could also use this to attract workers to capture.

Not nessacarly, usually even if there are trees out, at the first sign of any troops the enemy workers would just go into hiding.

 

[Anglophile]

I've noticed that the AI puts forests on plains & especially grassland tiles that have bonus food resources. This may be because I allow 'mining', aka logging, of forests in the civ3.bic file. But even with no mining, one gets a high food square with 2 production. That is more useful in my opinion, especially after the initial settler splurge is over, than 1 more food from irrigation and lower shields. With mining enabled, it's three shields and four after RRs. Really a no brainer, even if the AI worked it out before I did. I really do recommend allowing mining of forests as it makes them useful all game and keeps the tree huggers placated as one doesn't clear cut the continent.

I partially agree with those that argue the de/re/deforest exploit should be allowed. It is afterall the model of all modern logging operations. The key word though is modern. This is a latter 20th century phenomenon and requires 'breeding' more rapidly growing trees, mass seedling development, nurturing and replanting, etc. Simply beyond ancient/medieval and even early industrial societies. I would argue that the exploit be allowed but only after some fairly late technology is developed. I find it amusing that some of the strongest critics of Civ3's lack of realism also argue that they should be allowed to use 20th Century techniques in 3000 BC, which lacks, for lack of a better term, historical realism.

 

[EQandcivfanatic]

the +2 production is right for extra food grassland, but that is basically the same thing as game on tundra with forest as mentioned above.

 

[Lovro]

I use forest planting during the middle ages when one of my cities (usually capitol) is size 12 and has surplus food. I then plant forests to get a few extra shields out of the city with no growth loss. I chop the forests down once I research Sanitation.

 

[CharlyFox]

I think you just need to make the 10 shields subject to corruption ... after all, cutting trees take time for one worker and time is money ...