Tweet
After following the discussions in several strategy threads, it looks like opening the game by building a worker and then building more workers and settlers quickly by chopping forests is the strongest way to get off to a fast start in the game.
Although ICS may be dead in Civ IV, early rapid expansion facilitated by chopping probably gets new productive cities in place earlier than by any other method.
By delaying city growth while a worker or settler is built and by increasing the cost of each, Civ IV attempted to put the brakes on early rapid expansion as the best opening strategy; but chopping nullifies both factors, since it contributes many hammers very quickly while also significantly shortening the delay in city growth.
I think it might be a good idea for a future patch to address this issue. As things are now, there are many more advantages to chopping than by leaving forests alone.
The disadvantages of losing a forest are minor and are easily overcome and the underlying terrain can be put to very productive use anyways, as a farm, mine, cottage, workshop, etc.
Lumbermills are one reason given for keeping forests around, but it takes a long time until they can be built and they only add one hammer (and possibly 1 commerce if next to a river). The health losses due to chopping are very minor and are easily made up in other ways.
There would be two ways of limiting early chopping as the best opening strategy:
1) Reduce the number of hammers that chopping provides, making it a less desirable option.
or
2) Increasing the benefits of keeping forests in place.
Of these two, I think adding more benefits to retaining forests is the best way to go, since chopping could be left as an opening option and because there are several simple ways to boost the benefit of keeping forests in place:
a) The health benefit could be increased.
b) Forests could also provide happiness, probably on the same scale that they now provide health. People are usually unhappier if there are not any trees around.
c) Forests could start off with 1 commerce. Increase their starting commerce to two along rivers.
d) Beef up lumbermills by adding another hammer and another commerce. Rail lines to lumbermills could add another hammer and commerce.
e) Allow unaltered forests to become National Parks, either by making this an improvement that can be built or by waiting until the Industrial Age for them to achieve this status automatically. National Parks could provide extra culture, happiness, health, and/or commerce benefits to the underlying tiles.
What do other players think? Would Civ IV be a better game if there were better reasons to retain forests?
Although ICS may be dead in Civ IV, early rapid expansion facilitated by chopping probably gets new productive cities in place earlier than by any other method.
By delaying city growth while a worker or settler is built and by increasing the cost of each, Civ IV attempted to put the brakes on early rapid expansion as the best opening strategy; but chopping nullifies both factors, since it contributes many hammers very quickly while also significantly shortening the delay in city growth.
I think it might be a good idea for a future patch to address this issue. As things are now, there are many more advantages to chopping than by leaving forests alone.
The disadvantages of losing a forest are minor and are easily overcome and the underlying terrain can be put to very productive use anyways, as a farm, mine, cottage, workshop, etc.
Lumbermills are one reason given for keeping forests around, but it takes a long time until they can be built and they only add one hammer (and possibly 1 commerce if next to a river). The health losses due to chopping are very minor and are easily made up in other ways.
There would be two ways of limiting early chopping as the best opening strategy:
1) Reduce the number of hammers that chopping provides, making it a less desirable option.
or
2) Increasing the benefits of keeping forests in place.
Of these two, I think adding more benefits to retaining forests is the best way to go, since chopping could be left as an opening option and because there are several simple ways to boost the benefit of keeping forests in place:
a) The health benefit could be increased.
b) Forests could also provide happiness, probably on the same scale that they now provide health. People are usually unhappier if there are not any trees around.
c) Forests could start off with 1 commerce. Increase their starting commerce to two along rivers.
d) Beef up lumbermills by adding another hammer and another commerce. Rail lines to lumbermills could add another hammer and commerce.
e) Allow unaltered forests to become National Parks, either by making this an improvement that can be built or by waiting until the Industrial Age for them to achieve this status automatically. National Parks could provide extra culture, happiness, health, and/or commerce benefits to the underlying tiles.
What do other players think? Would Civ IV be a better game if there were better reasons to retain forests?
)
Comment