Planting a settler on forest should give hammers.

[Magma_Dragoon]

Hows about the first city doesn't get the bonus?

Sounds like you might like HoMM Balderstrom. I'd like to see a civ game that has elements of HoMM, like subterranian levels, but those real time battles get old FAST.

 

[Clam Spammer]

Hows about the first city doesn't get the bonus?

That's an interesting thought. I suppose it would work as a gameplay mechanic, but it would be a bit confusing since it would be inconsistent with your other cities. Your first settler could remove a forest without BW, but then the rest would need it to chop them.

How about this (which I came up with while I was typing the last post and didn't bother to expand on):
You can settle on forest tiles at any time, whether you have Bronze or not. However, when you do so, the forest remains on the tile. Cities in forests can only build a limited selection of buildings. These would probably include most ancient and classical era buildings, as well as a couple of wonders (Henge, Oracle, GLH, Colossus) but not walls. To build any other buildings you have to chop the forest, which occupies the city's build queue for 3 turns (the same time it takes for a worker to chop) and requires the Bronze Working tech. When you finish chopping the forest, you get the hammers, just as you would if a worker had chopped it. Also, you have the option of chopping it with workers instead, or at the same time to speed it up.

The city doesn't get a defense bonus from the forest - it would be built in a small clearing in the forest (you don't see this on the map, but presumably that's what would happen) so defenders wouldn't get any strategic advantage like they would on a hill. And besides that, it would destroy an early rush, which would be quite unfair.

What all this means is that cities founded on forests function the same as other cities, provided that you don't delay teching BW for too long, and you don't have the nonsense with forests just vanishing into thin air when you settle on them.

I'm still not sure on jungles though. Personally, I think they should be off-limits until you can chop them.

Any thoughts?

 

[Balderstrom]

I believe it takes one worker 9+ Turns to chop, might even be as much as 12. By the time I'm chopping en-masse I've usually attained +50-100% Worker Speed, and 2+ workers chopping one tile, which takes ~2-3 turns.

I think it might wind up too complicated to decide what buildings can/cannot be built, and code required to restrict them. An easier route - would be to limit the city POP to 5? 6? until the forest is removed.

Would need to WorldBuilder a test to see if workers can chop a forest where a city is - or if the city overrides any such action on the same plot. If workers CAN chop there...
Then its actually fairly easy to implement, might even be doable in Python, trigger on CITY build, if a forest exists, put one back there after the city is settled.
Then a python restriction on city Pop/size while a forest exists.

 

[EweezE]

One time I settled aka "planted" my settler and there was a hut in my BFC. I received the gold from the hut instantly upon founding the city.

This hammer idea is interesting. I like the idea, but strongly agree with no forest tile spawn for initial settler. Therefore if you want the hammer bonus (cause you like to rush ), then you must waist 1 or 2 turns moving onto the forest tile. It could even be dulled down to only a 20 bonus for balance. I waist 1 turn moving onto a Plains/Hill to settle with an extra hammer when allowable. It would be even sweeter if it were a Plains/Hill/Forest + this new rule!

 

[Clam Spammer]

I believe it takes one worker 9+ Turns to chop, might even be as much as 12. By the time I'm chopping en-masse I've usually attained +50-100% Worker Speed, and 2+ workers chopping one tile, which takes ~2-3 turns.

I'm talking about Normal speed here (obviously this would scale with game speed). 3 turns is the default time for chops on Normal.

I think it might wind up too complicated to decide what buildings can/cannot be built, and code required to restrict them. An easier route - would be to limit the city POP to 5? 6? until the forest is removed.

I don't think it would be that difficult. You'd just have to look through the buildings list and make a decision on each one, which is sort of what I did in the previous post (I think most of the early buildings could be built with limited space). For large wonders, you'll tech Bronze and chop to get them built anyway. A population limit would make sense too, but then you're going back to Civ 3 where your cities would get stuck at pop 6. It probably wouldn't come into play very often though.

One time I settled aka "planted" my settler and there was a hut in my BFC. I received the gold from the hut instantly upon founding the city.

That's normal - goody huts can't exist inside your borders so they pop when you build a city or get a border pop that encompasses them. I think you're immune to angry barbs when you trigger them this way, the same as when you use a scout. Don't know what this has to to with the topic though.

This hammer idea is interesting. I like the idea, but strongly agree with no forest tile spawn for initial settler. Therefore if you want the hammer bonus (cause you like to rush ), then you must waist 1 or 2 turns moving onto the forest tile. It could even be dulled down to only a 20 bonus for balance. I waist 1 turn moving onto a Plains/Hill to settle with an extra hammer when allowable. It would be even sweeter if it were a Plains/Hill/Forest + this new rule!

They are already 20 , aren't they? (Normal speed again - did you mean 20 on Epic?) This was changed in one of the patches for Vanilla, and it is this way in Warlords/BTS too.

Thanks for the feedback guys

 

[EweezE]

They are already 20 , aren't they? (Normal speed again - did you mean 20 on Epic?) This was changed in one of the patches for Vanilla, and it is this way in Warlords/BTS too.

I meant if the new rule of "planting" a settler on a forest yielded hammers for the 1st build like this thread is discussing. Someone suggested 30 for the bonus, and I suggested 20 . If this was already in the game via a patch then there would be no need for this thread.

 

[Clam Spammer]

I can see this needs some clarification...

On Normal speed:

In Vanilla, before the 1.61 patch, chopping a forest gives you 30 in the nearest city.

After 1.61, including both expansions, chopping a forest gives you 20 in the nearest city if it is inside the BFC, and less if it is further away from the city. After you research Mathematics, chopping yields 50% more hammers (that is, 30 if inside the BFC, as in Vanilla).

In all versions, when you settle on a forest, the trees are removed instantly and provide no hammers. This is what I (and the OP and others who have posted in this thread) want to change.

To make sure we are on the same page here: which version do you play, and what game speed?

 

[Onagan]

A city settled on a forest should trigger a event.

That event gives you 20 turns of one additional , and 30 turns after Mathematics. It's the same amount of but not instant.

 

[Balderstrom]

A city settled on a forest should trigger a event.

That event gives you 20 turns of one additional , and 30 turns after Mathematics. It's the same amount of but not instant.

Wow, that is so simple and clean.

Think I'll go with 75%, 15/22 (turns) (normal speed) pre/post mathematics - when I work on my game tweaks later this month.

 

[Polobo]

Also consider, however, the the worker unit is a lot cheaper than a settler and while the worker can chop the forest and move on the settler only gets to do it (at most) once.

You lose a turn simply moving onto a forest tile (you cannot found the city on the same turn you move onto the forest, baring a road...) These two facts combined make it entirely reasonable that those settlers spent their turn not only moving onto the forest but actively chopping their way into it.

The pre-chop option sucks since those hammers go to the nearest city which is probably a ways away so you only get 4-5 hammers instead of the 20/30. It would be nice to get the full hammers in the newly founded city.

 

[Clam Spammer]

You're right, that is very simple indeed.

One thing though: if you give the full amount of hammers, you're saving the player some valuable worker turns with no penalty (aside from a delay in getting some of the hammers, which doesn't really matter over such a small time frame).

So, the question is: should there be a hammer penalty for this, and if so, how much? Or, in other words, how many hammers is 3 worker turns worth? A 25% penalty as Balderstrom suggests seems like a reasonable estimate, but I'm not sure.

I presume these events would start only after you research Bronze Working, and also that when you get Mathematics, the remaining length (rather than the total length) of forest events in progress would be increased by 50%.

 

[EweezE]

I can see this needs some clarification...

In all versions, when you settle on a forest, the trees are removed instantly and provide no hammers. This is what I (and the OP and others who have posted in this thread) want to change.

To make sure we are on the same page here: which version do you play, and what game speed?

I am on your side here! Why are you talking to me as if I'm against the idea? If you read some of my posts in this thread you'll see that I am FOR the hammer bonus upon settling on a forested tile. I suggested 20 free (instead of the 30 someone else mentioned) towards the first build in the city. This is the third time I've suggested it now. I don't see why you are asking me these questions.. But, I play on 3.17 and Epic speed.

 

[Onagan]

Maybe there is no use of a penalty.

The further you chop that forest, the lesser the amount of , which means you should get more then in a BFC tile, as it's closer to the city.
A new city use only a small part of the tile, and when it grows it expands to the rest of the tile. And thus then chopping the nearby trees.

But if you do a penalty you better get 20% penalty. It's better for the other speeds (8/16/24/48 - 12/24/36/72) pre/post Math.

With 25% you get (7.5/15/22.5/43 - 11.25/22.5/33.75/67.5) pre/post Math

 

[Clam Spammer]

I am on your side here! Why are you talking to me as if I'm against the idea? If you read some of my posts in this thread you'll see that I am FOR the hammer bonus upon settling on a forested tile. I suggested 20 free (instead of the 30 someone else mentioned) towards the first build in the city. This is the third time I've suggested it now. I don't see why you are asking me these questions.. But, I play on 3.17 and Epic speed.

OK, thanks, that's all I needed to know. I thought maybe you were talking about Vanilla (yes, some people on this forum still play Vanilla) where you always got 30 from chopping on Normal speed, and you could have been suggesting reducing it to 20 when you found a city on top of it. I didn't think for one moment that you were against the idea.

So what you meant was reducing it from 30 to 20 on epic speed, for balance. How would this be balanced? For a start, if my (initial) idea was implemented, you would have to research Bronze Working before you can use this at all, so it won't help so much with the warrior/quechua rush since you can't build the city on a forest. But, more importantly, depending on which idea is used, you would have to either:

1. Wait 3 turns (Normal) while the Settler chops the forest before the city is built,
   
2. Get a worker to chop the forest as normal,
   
3. Hold up production in the city while the forest is being cleared, or
   
4. Get only a slight production boost per turn, over a longer period of time.

Actually, come to think of it, I'm not so sure about #3. If the number of turns for which production stops is constant, then it could be exploited somewhat in terms of an early rush in cities that would otherwise have low production. If that is what you meant, then you're right . It would need to be changed somehow. Probably the simplest proposal, though, would be just to scrap this idea and make the player use a worker to chop the forest.

#4 would have similar complications (even if you're rushing, you'll get most, if not all of the hammer bonus by the time your army is built), and as such I'm not sure this is such a great idea after all. I've changed my mind on this one.