Forests: Should you really keep them?

[monkspider]

I have seen a few of our expert players such as Friedrich strongly advocate against large-scale de-forestation. However, I have to ask, why?

Granted they do provide a bit of a health bonus, and they can be eventually upgraded into lumbermills, but I find the benefts of a "hack n slash" policy to forests are too numerous to pass up.

Lets consider some of the advantages of de-forestation.
1. You can convert the tiles into farms or cottages. Clearly, these tile improvements are essential to long-term growth. Farms/cottages are going to be the backbone of your empire in helping grow your population and provide commerce for research/culture/rushing.
2. Cutting the forests down give a nice boost to production which can be very helpful for obtaining the early wonders.

The benefits of keeping forests as far as I can see are
1. Eventually you can build lumbermills, which provide a modest boost to production. But these only come in the second half of the game, while farms/towns could have been benefiting you the whole time. Moreover, with extra food from a farm you could achieve the same effect of a lumbermill with an engineering specialist which would allow you to build up great person points as well.
2. A modest health bonus to the city in question. This is not without it's uses, but the health bonus will only be helpful in certain cirumstances. Perhaps if you have a city that has a large number of both flood plains and forests in it's radius, it may be useful to keep a couple forests around.

Now, there may be something I have overlooked, and in all likelihood there is. But I can't see any compelling reasons to keep forests around in the long-term. The fact that so many beta-testers do is perplexing, and i am very loathe to dismiss their opinions.

[Fried-Psitalon]

The "I can do the same thing with a farm's two extra food for an engineer" only works if:

1. You have biology, which comes later than both railroads and replaceable parts.
2. Your farm is irrigated.
3. You have the health to spare.
4. You have the happiness to spare.

All four of those conditions are pertinent, and the last two are especially poignant as city sizes loom; particularly on high difficulty levels.

[MattPilot]

Rezaf created a growable forest mod. Just thought i'd point that out

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=141106

[kimmygibler]

I get rid of most forests right away also. I don't worry about the health concerns because in the early game it isn't a problem and fast production is more important early. I also agree that in general farms and cottages are better than forests in the long run. Although I think the fact you can't replant forests is a great idea. It does make you think twice about clearing forests.

[khumak]

Has anyone gotten around to making a little "cheat sheet" for tile improvements? I'm basically looking for a chart that shows what each terrain type produces with each type of improvement with/without fresh water and with/without the later techs that give some of them an extra boost.

[shennessy]

I think its pretty clear that forests can only be replaced with some pretty late techs, and even then you probably need some +health and +happiness to make up the shortfall (but you also get more great persons).

So... just wondering why dont we have an option to tell the Auto workers to not chop down forests?

I dread having to micro my workers so I dont end up with whats happening to me in my current game (no more trees in all my land). Even after I have lumber mills the workers want to chop em all down.

I would love to see these options:
Auto Workers never chop forests. except if these below options are checked...
Auto workers can chop forests on resources.
Auto workers can chop forests on river/grassland.
Auto workers can chop forests on plains.
etc for all terrain types that forests can be on.

To me forests seem to be more like a free improvement or a resource instead of something to chop down.

To me managing workers is micro management that I dont want to do. Am I in the minority here?

[Ansaga]

Firaxis stated that forgetting the options to leave trees alone is a oversight and it should be in the next patch.

In my opinion trees are great. Everyone remembers the short term OMG 30 shield! whoope... No one ever thinks of the long term. The health bonus, happiness bonus, and the fact that trees give hammer! You get more hammer long term just keeping the forest then chopping it down.

[anhalibut]

And it's always possible that deforestation contributes to global warming, but I don't know for certain.

[Theseus]

Originally posted by khumak
Has anyone gotten around to making a little "cheat sheet" for tile improvements? I'm basically looking for a chart that shows what each terrain type produces with each type of improvement with/without fresh water and with/without the later techs that give some of them an extra boost.

Yes, PLEASE!!! As many cheat sheets as possible, in fact.

Re forest benefits: How does the health benefit work? Inside city radius or cultural radius? Being worked or no? Roaded? Effects of more than one?

Depending on the answers, wouldn;t it generally make sense to leave a forest on what would otherwise be a low value tile?

[Alexfrog]

Re forest benefits: How does the health benefit work? Inside city radius or cultural radius? Being worked or no? Roaded? Effects of more than one?

They must be inside the city radius, and nothing else matters (dont have to work or road, just be there).

0-2 forests inside city radius = no bonus.
3-4 = +1 health
5-7 = +2 health
8-9 = +3
10-11 = +4, etc

(i.e. .4 per forest, rounded down)

[MattPilot]

also... Two cities can share the same forest squares and both get the health benefits, even though only one city can work it.

[Jcg316]

Its thirty at three tiles away and 25 one farther. 4th 6th forests are expendable as well. Seven should grow to eight consistently. You don't have to chop forests in city radius often since doing it for early speed you need four at most usually.

Good for later cities when adding the sixth building for certain national wonders or ninth temple for cathedrals in three culture cities. Will let you build them quick and fulfil the requirement. After dawn of man you'll see before choosing techs or anything number of forests, that lets you decide based on those numbers.

Often tundra forests are worth knocking out for any decent hammer gain and others where you know you won't build a city.

Keep in mind the hammers are good for anything you can build early military quickly if you save some of the forests you consider expendable to rush a swordsman, elephant, or catapult after getting the requisite tech.

Cities that don't grow much won't need the forests as much and can sometimes use the production boost.

[Theseus]

Hmmm... it seems to me that one of the new skills to learn will be judging potential city sites according to their forests (among other things, obviously):

- How many *should* be chopped for tile production access, resource access, safety, etc.?

- How many *can* be chopped without any concern (e.g., far tundra tiles)?

What does that provide in terms of total chophammers? When should they be used?

Alternatively:

- How many forests should be kept for health? How many and which can be shared among multiple cities?

- How many should be kept for ongoing hammer production, safety, and other reasons?

And so on...

[Handel]

Does someone has an idea what are the chances for the forest to re-grow? It seems to within 5-6 cities a forest grows every 4-5 turn...

[Jcg316]

Forest growth is a concern since you may be able to jump to another health bonus. Seven should get there pretty much always, just has to have the forest/forests grow in the workable tiles not outside them. How well four forests do at growing I have no idea, but as it still takes some time to reach disease levels that resources can't prevent it seems likely it'll grow one, just depends on if its in the workable tile area or not.