forum.freeciv.org

Forest is not the best tile to use for a city. You cant mine it and it generally generates little food. Therefore lots of players chop it off in order to get farmland.
Since this game puts some focus on the environmental impact of civilization, it would be nice if deforestation would influence global warming or lead to natural catastrophies to the adjacent cities or have some sort of economic effect. Same aplies to jungle.

In Civilization IV and VI and possibly V, there's build environment park option. Environment park requires forest/jungle and not produce anything unless happiness. To build preserve forest, you need to discover special technology.

Theoretically and conceptually, I would say that this is covered with "pollution by population". You can't have large population without removing forests, but larger population also creates pollution by itself, so, in the end, the effect is there.

But reversely you dont get credit if you plant trees in the desert randomly!?

XYZ wrote:Since this game puts some focus on the environmental impact of civilization, it would be nice if deforestation would influence global warming or lead to natural catastrophies to the adjacent cities or have some sort of economic effect. Same aplies to jungle.

Strong support, at the moment I consider anything with less than f+s+t<7 as "bad land", including forest + river + railway, and that's just wrong. Maybe global warming effects should depend on the number of forests per continent, not realistic, just for fun.