Just too hard

[Nikolai]

This is strange, Muso...

My experience is that the game is easier in some ways, for example, I have never been able to win a war without huge problems in Civ I and II, but this is much easier now!

By now, I play on one difficulity level lower than before(the next easiest) , I have to learn more before succeeding, but all in all, the game is more entertaining, better, more challenging(but without being impossible ) and with even an even stronger "one-more-turn" feeling!

[Muso]

Thanks for the replies and advice guys.. I'll try another game with your suggestions in mind.

I love playing Civ III.. maybe I shouldn't be so "winning oriented" but it is nice to win now and again!

[atog]

The scoring for civ 3 is very different from civ1&2.
1) The biggesting thing is territories.
So expand as much as you can. And get your culture as high as possible. Play a religious civ. You will ALWAYS need temple and cathedral, so why not build them cheaper. In my opinion, R civ is the best, especially you plan on using a gov that doesn't support police-ing. btw, peace is the reason why you lose, if you didn't get enuff map area within your border when all the borders are defined.
2) ALWAYS trade with other civ. In civ3, it doesn't really matter that you get ahead in tech, but it hurts a lot to get behind. Dont even worry about the cost of the tech, just trade them, 1 for 1. If you find yourself keeping some tech that you are the only one who has it, unless you are leading like 5 or more tech, you are not doing well with the trading.
hope that helps.

[Allemand]

Playing on a huge map, I aim for 8-10 cities by the year zero, then I quickly expand that out to about 25 cities before attacking anyone. The early years are peaceful, but I overrun the nearest (or easiest) civ when I get to chivalry, take the next civ with cavalry, then the next one with tanks, although this schedule could be speeded up at the lower levels. After railroads war is much harder, so make your move early.

I like the Regent level because there are no production advantages either way, but Warlord can also be challenging when you are learning the game. Not being a masochist I have avoided the upper levels so far. In Civ II the AI was too weak in anything but Deity, but in Civ III that's not the case, making the lower and mid-levels very appealing for challenging but fun games.

Early expansion is a must. On the huge map the civs become very large, taking up every habitable spot and then going for those that are not good (like the arctic ones). To win a domination or cultural victory, you will generally need more than 25 cities. I turn off the diplomatic and space conditions.

The game seems to reward the warmonger, making it tougher for a peaceful builder. If you want to play the builder role, then peace is very important. The AI seems to think that he should get more than the human player in any kind of "fair" deal, but if you have the resources that's not so bad up to a point.

Bottom line, if war is your favored method then do it early. If you prefer peace then never go to war.

I hope they fix that fighter bug soon, I'd really like to test the F-15.

[Pyrodrew]

3. Research Polytheism,Monotheism,Education etc which the ai civs dont give priority to. Then exchange techs with one civ and sell it to the others.

Unfortunatley, this is another weakness Civ3 has that Civ2 did not... I hope the patch corrects this. Civ2 military leaders researched military & peaceful did not. Civ3, I agree, it seems ALL the AI Civs have the SAME research priority for all the techs... they seem to research the same ones... perhaps even in the same order. Medicine & Sanitation are also 2 techs ALL the AI Civs NEVER go after until much later. This makes the AI in the game weaker than it should be... and worse less variety... you always know what the AI has regardless whether he/she is warlike or peaceful.

Then with 2-1, I was able to bribe another nation (with a tremednous amount of money, 2 luxuries and a tech) to war with him. After that, #3 ally was easier to bribe, and the other 2 practially begged to get into the feeding frenzy.

This always seems too... easy to do as well. 1 Tech (Sanitation) & 500 gold +20gold/turn each wasn't a "tremendous" amount of money to me since I was able to sell Medicine to 13 AI Civs for a total of over 3000 gold at +300gold/turn right before. A very small price to get the 2nd & 4th largest Superpowers to declare war on the 3rd largest Superpower. I suppose this is more due to the AI Civs just paying TOO MUCH gold for a Tech, otherwise it wouldn't have been "cheap to me". But I was expecting peace-loving Gandhi (Aggressiveness1), who I asked 1st, to ask for a higher price for sending his people into war than the Babylonians (Aggressiveness4) were asking for... there was no difference.

In civ3, it doesn't really matter that you get ahead in tech, but it hurts a lot to get behind.

Depends on the techs. Unfortunately, since the AI Civs still value & research dead-end techs for which the wonders have already been completed... it's not too hard to get ahead.

Although Civ3 is a great game, these things REALLY should be addressed... hopefully in the patch.