TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,995
No it's not, because you are obv better of if you let the AI settle the jungle stuff and just take their citys. I know it's kind of obv for most players, but i felt like pointing it out.
Of course you can get away with it on emperor, but it's still semi optimal.
And after all you can get away with capping 3 neighbors, instead of maybe just one on deity, so why not go for it?
It depends how great of a city is underneath all that nonsense. If we're talking about a gems and a rice, then no you wouldn't want to do it. If we're talking 15 riverside tiles, a pig, and 2 gems with another good jungle city nearby, then that's a different story.
There's also a question of alternatives; sometimes you can't get past 2 cities w/o settling into jungle, and in that case going alpha ASAP only to find out the AI doesn't have IW (or on continents/non pangaea maps, simply not willing to trade it) really hurts.
Still, lately I definitely like the ability to pre-emptively deny all 3 early strategic resources at a whim. Wars in any early era are a complete joke if the AI can only build archers or longbows...you just have to watch out for the resource-less guys like Monty, SB, Sal, Mansa Musa, and Pacal (sort of, but not really). If you don't camp too close to the cities, AI will still expand and build for you.
The reason I take early IW for that tactic is to prevent the AI from settling for/on top of iron. You can see iron in AI lands even without IW, assuming they have IW (tile yields are higher than usual even on hills or unimproved grass flatland), however you can't see it outside of borders and having them settle for it and instantly produce 5-10 metal units is a serious problem.