Stategy

[scsmith]

I think part of my problem might have been my aims to go towards a cultural win.

To that end, I tried to keep a few cities, but build as many cultural things as possible.

Right now, I think the benefits to controlling a large portion of the map is horribly out of balance. My opponents had most of their cities in the 3-5 range while most of cities were 12 when the game ended.

However, they were awarded far more points than I was for their cities.

I think in Civ3 quality is far less important than quantity.

I am starting my new game now; going to be playing the Egyptians.

My plan is to:

-Mass build early (Get to 10 cities ASAP)
-Concentrate on science
-Try to take over a few other civs early, and then basically only build military for protection.

Hopefully, I can get the whole economic/scientific balance down.

Side note: Has anyone just tried leaving all their workers on auto for the entire game. Wondering how good the AI is good for the workers.

Smithy

[challenge]

I put two of them on auto in an early part of the game. I tried to understand the logic of where they went and why they built something in one city rather than another, but it escapes me. I either wasn't looking at the right information or not seeing a logical pattern in what I did observe. Starting one that way in the first turn may give a better insight.

Most of the answers to this question I read say not to do it, but the two I had did not seem to be doing any damage. My population was well below the development of the cities so it is hard to say how it would act under stress.

[Monoriu]

I have never, ever used automated workers. I insist to supervise my army of 70 workers personally. I have seen how the AI workers behave and was absolutely horrified: 10 workers rushing to a square to irrigate it. That's a good enough sign that I should never automate my workers.