Chop chop

[dregor]

Whenever I play, unless I'm in the warmongering frame of mind, I agonize over whether or not to chop forests or try to conserve them for the long-term benefit of lumbermills. The early benefits of chopping are obvious, and sometimes the early game is so crucial that I find I've shot myself in the foot if I opt not to chop.

I see a lot of posts from people with a chop-heavy frame of mind, so perhaps this isn't much of a debate for me to be having at all. The temporary boost in hammers seems small compared to the long term benefits of working the forest tiles hammer.

I guess what I'm looking for are various schools of thought on chopping. Is there a "sweet-spot" balance you try to aim for as far as number of forests? Do you only chop outside city radii? Screw the environment and go all Isengard on the trees? I've never given the Environmentalism civic a shot, is it a worthwhile goal to shoot for?

[yimboli]

You're asking if there's a generally accepted balance between:
1- the turn advantage of units, conquests, and wonders acheived via the chop
2- the long term advantage of forest hammers + lumbermill + happiness with environmentalism

Is that accurate?

[Arrian]

It depends on the health situation. If chopping won't make my cities unhealthy, I will probably do a fair amount of chopping.

Since each forest is +.5 health (rounded down), I will keep only even numbers of forest tiles in a given city radius. If a city has 5 forest tiles, I will chop 1, 3 or 5 (most likely 1 or 3).

Given the chance, I like to chop forested tiles along rivers and turn them into cottages (or, if I need food, farms). I'll leave the off-river forest tiles for either later chopping or lumbermills.

-Arrian

[dregor]

Originally posted by yimboli
You're asking if there's a generally accepted balance between:
1- the turn advantage of units, conquests, and wonders acheived via the chop
2- the long term advantage of forest hammers + lumbermill + happiness with environmentalism

Is that accurate?

Well, I like to think I used a lot more unnecessary words... yes, that's how to put it better than I did I'm playing a game atm where I felt it was necessary to do some chopping to try and get the oracle (which I lost by 2 turns still but that's another gripe). And of course now I'm wishing I had the forests back for the long-term goals.

The comment about keeping only even numbers of forests is a good one that I'd never fully thought about. I agree about chopping along rivers, the benefits are fairly clear there.

[samspock]

It depends on what else the city has to work. If it is very poor on hammer producing tiles I leave as many as I can. Sometimes I have no choice but to chop to get something vital working. I had to once clear the only three forrests that a city on the end of a narrow penisula had access to to finish Ankor Wat. The city had 5 seafood resorces and the resulting priest specialists I was able to run more than made up for the loss.

[anhalibut]

You can also chop outside the fat cross for the city.
The hammers produced are fewer than those from a closer chop but you get to keep the forests next to the city.
This is of course assuming that your cities aren't overlapping or near overlapping.

[smbakeresq]

If you are expansive, then the +3 health could be used to chop 6 forests, if you choose. If you choose not to chop, then going for replaceable parts sooner is a must

[Blake]

Forests are generally not worth working, the only exception is if your capital is your only city.

My rule of thumb is that if the city needs the health and can't "afford" to work the forest tile (were it improved into something more useful like a cottage), the forests stay. Oddly enough forests (in the early game) are most useful when not worked, they're crappy tiles to work, but the +0.5 health can be a very useful passive bonus (it can be like free food).

If the city doesn't need the health... like it has a much lower happy cap... then the forests get whacked. If the city has high caps and needs more productive tiles to work, the forests get chopped down and replaced with cottages.

I tend to avoid chopping strictly for producing stuff, it's worth doing in a pinch, but usually I'd rather keep the passive health benefit and use whipping to get production.

Lumbermills are not generally worth building by themselves, since Workshops become productive earlier (as long as you run State Property) and cost far less worker turns (Lumbermills require railroad too), unless of course the forest health is needed, in that case the lumbermills are great. But remember the production of lumbermills is nothing special since workshops and mines are equal.

So ultimately forests are really all about the health.

[Arrian]

So ultimately forests are really all about the health.

Pretty much, yeah. I'll agree with that, even though I never use State Property.

-Arrian

[MasterDave]

I always chop to an even number of forests. As a rule of thumb, I try to keep four forests near my capital, but if looks like a very high growth area (i.e. lots of food resources, some flood plains, etc), then I may try to keep six forests within the fat cross. Forests that are between cities but outside of fat crosses are ALWAYS chopped. Cities without much growth potential (not much food) are generally chopped around.

Lumbermills with railroads can be nice, but mines with railroads produce the same amount with the chance of discovering a resource throughout the course of the game, so I generally will chop trees on hills when choosing between chopping on hills or flatland.

Environmentalism is not a concern since I generally do not have health nor happiness problems in the late game due to my tendency to trade as many resources as possible with the ai's or a friendly human player. Therefore, with ample health and happiness in most cities, I will stick with free trade for the commerce boost or state property (if my empire is large).

[Jaybe]

Originally posted by Arrian
Pretty much, yeah. I'll agree with that, even though I never use State Property.

Yeah, State Property in the hands of a player is exploitation (other than losing the +1 trade route of Free Market).

[Mr Justice]

i will sometimes leave all the forests around a particular city in my game if i am in an game with few hills anbd few sheild producing tiles in my empire and i plan for this city to be my mid-late game production city (ewith iron works).

i never use workshop/watermill for my primary production city, so if there is no appropriate hilly site i can still have a powerhouse of a production city (not til l8 game though)

another positive about forrests is that if you have 5/6 foresets together then they grow every so often into other unimproved tiles (they can grow on tiles with only a road on it).

however i do chop regularly, but not religiously.

[Datajack Franit]

Allow me to add something: forests may be damn useful to slow down an enemy invasion. That turn needed to walk over a forest may save your life, if you let them grow all over a border.

[MasterDave]

Originally posted by Datajack Franit
Allow me to add something: forests may be damn useful to slow down an enemy invasion. That turn needed to walk over a forest may save your life, if you let them grow all over a border.

They also provide cover for enemy troops to approach your cities and be safe from counterattacks. I prefer a border that is clear of trees. If the cavalry run toward my cities more quickly, then they are easy pickings when not stacked with infantry (no defense bonuses in most cases).

[Datajack Franit]

Originally posted by MasterDave


They also provide cover for enemy troops to approach your cities and be safe from counterattacks. I prefer a border that is clear of trees. If the cavalry run toward my cities more quickly, then they are easy pickings when not stacked with infantry (no defense bonuses in most cases).

True, but I've seen too many times the enemy sneaking near the border then invading it without any kind of reason, roaming through the grasslands and burning the cities nearby. Expecially at Emperor level, slowing down an enemy may give you the extra turn that might be used for whipping a crossbowman, a wall.