Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
In real life, a civilisation would never chop down a forrest to provide lumber for production.
Please remain bored at all times.
It shouldn't interfere with things like this however. Classic example of patching a bug with a cast, rather than a bandaid.
Did you actually expect us to buy the tile, in a gold starved game? Or perhaps we should wait 99 turns until our city expands to that point. Hmm.
Everyone expects the Fireaxis Inquisition!
There were two problems with chopping of forests: 1 is that it provided production to your nearest city, even from halfway around the world. 2 is that you could use it offensively to wreck a competitor's production.
It was fun while it lasted but was definitely an exploit.
To me it seems like you just need to be place such things ON the forests - Then remove them later and the forest is still there.
I think the second one is a big reason why it was fully removed rather than adjusted. I think being able to destroy bonus/luxury resources near another players' territory would be very strong and annoying, and being able to destroy strategic resources like Oil and Uranium be downright crippling.
I do think forts should be able to be build outside of territory on non-resource tiles. Other than that, good riddance.