arrrgh -- can't win rise of rome scenario

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

i've tried it four times now, and although i come closer each time, the
persians are still soundly defeating me as rome, playing at regent
level.

any one have any strategy tips for this scenario? it seems to me to be
a question of exactly when to attack. it seems that both carthage and
macedon should be attacked early on. a few other questions:

- gaul a waste of time, give how little population can be conquered?

- go for sicily as first movement in game first?

- take out macedon first, or carthage?

- egypt worth conquering?

- ever make sense to attack persia directly?
anyone ever won with population/area?

thanks,

CL
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

commandoLine@yahoo.com wrote in news:1103624862.341067.216540
@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

> i've tried it four times now, and although i come closer each time, the
> persians are still soundly defeating me as rome, playing at regent
> level.
>
> any one have any strategy tips for this scenario? it seems to me to be
> a question of exactly when to attack. it seems that both carthage and
> macedon should be attacked early on. a few other questions:
>

I allied with everyone against Carthage. This meant Carthage had a whole lot
of enemies to worry about than just me. Also, Carthage has no one to trade
with which is much more important.

data64
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

Standard Tactics for RoR as Rome

I. Tech research path :

1. The one allowing Legionary II
2. The one allowing Heavy Calvary
3. Republic for Legionary III & FP. [Do not switch govts] Also do not
research Monarchy, buy it from the AI.
4. Literature. (Move up if AI is slow getting Monarchy)
5. Philosphcy
6. Pick Imperalism as your free tech and switch immedately.
7. Construction
8. Enginerning for the bridge crossing
9. Doesn't really matter at this point, just finish them all in 4 turns
each.
10. After reaching the far future era, turn reserach off.

II Wonders
Must Have :
1. Temple of Artemis

Nice to Have's:
1. Herridan's Wall
2. Mussieum [in a high food surplus city along a river, like Neapolis]
3. Colossus [a high shield coastal city[
4. Baccrilla

So-So:
1. Great Light House

Don't Bother:
1. Great Libary [but if the AI builds it, be aware of it for intelgeent
tech trades]

III. Military plans:
1. Secure Silicy, starting immedately
2. Take Sardina & Corscia
3. Sack Carthage [raize to the ground and leave]
4. With Legionary IIs and HC, capture Carthigan Spain.
5. With Legionary IIIs and HC, destroy / capture North African Carhage.
Don't capture cities until you are sure you can keep them, prior to
that raize to the ground.
6. At this point, you have a choice of civs to go after. Macedonia is
easyist and is sufficent to win if you plant enough cities. It would
also be a good idea to take Marasellis. That can be done for free on
turn 1 by asking them to join in an alliance against Carthage.

IV: Colonization:

1. Northen Italy + In fill Italy for more citizen pumps.
2. River valleys east. No obsticales to this early on, just keep some
military units in these towns.
3. Most of Spain & Southern France. Easy to do once Carthage elimated
4. North Africa from Libya [for the Dye] west. No obsticale to this
once Carhage elimated.

V. Development

Workers : 1 Roman worker per city initaling is a good guide line for
this conquest. Remember that all forms of legions (not inside an army)
can build roads. Foreign workers can also help the wonder sites early
on. A stack of 3 Foriegn Workers = 1 Normal one.

Citizen Pumps are very important in this conquest.

Remember to have cities stuck at size 6 permeantly pumping out
settlers, even during the GA.. Don't have them build Aquaducts too
early.

Also have cities stuck at size 12 pump out citizens. Don't build
Hospitals until the game is almost won.

Basically reaching 20% of the land area takes longer than reaching 50%
of the worlds population.

FP placement: Use the first MGL created after getting Republic to build
the FP. The best locations for builders are near the Dye in Spain and
half way to the Silks in the river valley. The only really bad
locations though would be in Italy / Silicy / Sardina / Corscia and
well as points as far away as Libya, Turkey, Egypt, Cyrpus in the East,
and the cities on the UK to the North West.

Court Houses: Should be rushed in most cities after switching to
Imperalism. Bascially every city except those in Northern Italy and
Corscia will benifit from having one.

Cash Rushing is very important once you have Imperlism.

The Science Improving buildings are greately devalued in this conquest.

V: Armies:

Remember that you start with an empty shell, and also if you get an MGL
too early, you can form an empty shell with it and wait for a better
unit. I like to wait until Legionary IIs before armies.


On the specific questions:

On the Celts in Gaul:

Marasellis is a city you want. This would get the Celts mad enough if
taken militarily where you really should be crippling the Celts while
you are at it so you don't pay for it later. Note that the Carthagians
have a force on the way from Spain, so you need to defend against them
at the same time. After kicking the Carhigans out of Spain, it will be
easier to exile the Celts onto the UK. I wouldn't bother crossing the
channel, the Celts are programmed to never build Galleys.

On Silicy: YES! The Carhigan cities start very undefended. If you wait,
they may have the oppruntiy to actually build some more defenders. Plus
attacking them with the Legion I will trigure your GA, which will
greatly help.

On Macedon : I wouldn't attack them until the Carthigan civ is
competely wiped out. Attacking them early will distract from the holy
crusade against Carhiage, plus weaken the Macedonias to the point that
Persia gets to annex Macedonian Turkey early on instead of stalemating.

On Eqypt : Not particularly worth conquering, but wouldn't hurt
anything IF you've already wiped out the Carthigans.

On Persia : Nope. Too far away. There are much easier ways to reach 20%
of the land area.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

commandoLine@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1103624862.341067.216540@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

> i've tried it four times now, and although i come closer each
> time, the persians are still soundly defeating me as rome, playing
> at regent level.
>
> any one have any strategy tips for this scenario? it seems to me
> to be a question of exactly when to attack. it seems that both
> carthage and macedon should be attacked early on. a few other
> questions:

I stayed at peace/allied with Macedon the entire scenario. You
don't have to go it alone, and if you can buy nations into alliances,
then just focus on one enemy at a time. Carthage should be first.

> - gaul a waste of time, give how little population can be
> conquered?

Gives expansion room for you to settle in if you wipe them out.

> - go for sicily as first movement in game first?

Probably. It would be a lot harder to take if you get kicked off
first.

> - take out macedon first, or carthage?

As I said above - Carthage first. Ally with Macedon if possible.
They are strong defenders and you will save yourself a lot of units if
you go after someone else.

> - egypt worth conquering?

If you can get over there they have a couple of luxuries you could
use.

> - ever make sense to attack persia directly?
> anyone ever won with population/area?

Absolutely, just get Macedon to join in with you.

--
ICQ: 8105495
AIM: KeeperGFA
EMail: thekeeper@canada.com
"If we did the things we are capable of,
we would astound ourselves." - Edison
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

this is perhaps the single most comprehensive and intelligent reply i
have ever receieved in 6 years of posting to newsgroups -- thank you! i
wish i could get car repair advice this good!

- it had never occurred to me to build cavalry; i suppose they are
effective in campaigns since they can pick off those weak units before
they recuperate. i had just assumed that since the roman legions were
so amazing, why build anything else (but numidian
mercenaries/garrisons)...
btw, when you say take libya for dye, did you mean ivory? for
building NM?

- also hadn't occured to me to methodically pump settlers out of size
6/size 12 municipalities, and pursue a 20/50 win; had assumed this
wasn't doable

- sacking carthage also will be a new strategy; should've been obvious,
as i went throug hell trying to defend it.

looking forward to printing out these instructions and pursuing a
disciplined and well thought out victory over the goddamn persians :)
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 21 Dec 2004 02:27:42 -0800, commandoLine@yahoo.com wrote:

>i've tried it four times now, and although i come closer each time, the
>persians are still soundly defeating me as rome, playing at regent
>level.
>
>any one have any strategy tips for this scenario? it seems to me to be
>a question of exactly when to attack. it seems that both carthage and
>macedon should be attacked early on. a few other questions:

You are at war with Carthage from the start, and can't stop that.
You're best bet is to finish that war as fast as you can.

>- gaul a waste of time, give how little population can be conquered?

Plenty of land area to grab for territory. That's about it. Not
worth hitting until you can deal with them without worries on other
frontiers.

But since you can build cities easily, and that is part of how you
win, always look for easy opportunities to grab territory.

>- go for sicily as first movement in game first?

Yes. You can take it, easily using the army you start with, and not
too much harder using your forces sans the army. The army will reduce
the hazards of counterattack.


>- take out macedon first, or carthage?

You never need to take Macedon to win. But you're not likely to do
well if you don't take out Carthage fairly fast. Carthage takes time
to build up, and it is vulnerable to invasion. Especially if you have
a good army to go in with.

>- egypt worth conquering?

No, but if you happen to be there it isn't too hard to do. It is
not on a good path to anywhere else you want to conquer.

>- ever make sense to attack persia directly?

Not really. If you were doing so well as to have it be a good
choice, you should have already won the game. You really need to
take out your neighbors first, expanding and securing your territory,
before going beyond that.

>anyone ever won with population/area?

Possibly one of the easiest ways. Rome can chuck out new citizens
faster than anyone else.

In fact, it isn't a bad idea to make some at the start, and colonize
useful locations near (and even inside, not all good city sites are
used) home. Then, look for the good luxury and resource sites, get
those too. Next, when you clear out territory -- the barbarian cities
can't easily be captured, and you can raze others (especially
Carthiginian) -- fill up the area with cities.


What I haven't yet done is created a Roman empire which is close to
its historical map. You don't need to do that to win, but gathering
up all the northern lands as population centers reduces the need to
actually take over places like Egypt, even Macedon.


--
*-__Jeffery Jones__________| *Starfire* |____________________-*
** Muskego WI Access Channel 14/25 <http://www.execpc.com/~jeffsj/mach7/>
*Starfire Design Studio* <http://www.starfiredesign.com/>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 21 Dec 2004 02:27:42 -0800, commandoLine@yahoo.com wrote:

>i've tried it four times now, and although i come closer each time, the
>persians are still soundly defeating me as rome, playing at regent
>level.
>
>any one have any strategy tips for this scenario? it seems to me to be
>a question of exactly when to attack. it seems that both carthage and
>macedon should be attacked early on. a few other questions:
>
>- gaul a waste of time, give how little population can be conquered?
>
>- go for sicily as first movement in game first?
>
>- take out macedon first, or carthage?
>
>- egypt worth conquering?
>
>- ever make sense to attack persia directly?
>anyone ever won with population/area?
>
>thanks,
>
>CL

First thing I do is ally with most anyone agains't Carthage. This
will keep them busy while fueling hatred toward them. I stay allied
with Macedonia and Persia throughout most of the game.

I go after Carthage first. I usually hit the small islands to the
south. Be prepared to heavily defend them. From there I can continue
to move forces toward Carthage. The captured islands are actually
easiest to defend by filling squares with cheap defensive units.

Once I start to get a hold on Carthage mainland I start moving forces
over to their other pieces of land. With Carthage out of the way I
use defending legionaries to help build up a road structure.

I normally let the Celts build up cities throughout the game. At some
point they will declare war and I will ally with the Goths agains't
them. If they don't have enough cities yet I only take a few.
Otherwise I wipe them out.

Once Carthage is out of the way I start cranking out settlers to build
up the peninsula between the Celts and Carthage. I also may attack
Macedonia to complete my huge empire.

I rarely build heavy Calvary. I use weaker cites to produce defensive
units and stronger ones to build legionary. Don't be in a rush to get
better legionaries before your cities are strong enough to build them.

I have only gone for Egypt when Carthage had already conquered them.
There are a few luxuries but otherwise not worth the effort.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

It's not a build only Legionaries or build only Heavy Calvary, they
compliment each other.

Heavy Calvary usally beats most any non-Roman unit attacking, but does
have a low defense value, so Legionarys are still needed to protect
them if the oppoent has any units left after your attack. Legionary III
Armies are very verstalie, by itself it will both keep up with the
Heavy Calvary and protect it in route and it's also great leading off
the attack (twince!)

Don't bother with NMs even if you get Ivory, Garrisons are cheaper and
have the same defense factor.

No, I mean the Dye in Libya, it's between Tripoli & Tolbruk on the
coast. No one owns it initally, the Egyptain civ would evenually settle
there, but the Egyptain AI will in-fill Egypt east and also settle the
Incense sites before heading west that far.

The only way to win Histrographiclly is to rapidlly grow your empire.
Your unlikely to pass Persia Histographically without reaching at least
15/40, because the Histrograph is an average of all turns.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

Heavy Calvary against the AI is very devasting when properly used and
escorting.
And Heavy Calvary are much cheaper to build than Legionary IIIs.
In fact post Republic and pre Imperlism, almost all the Legionary IIIs
in my empire are those that used to be I's and IIs.

Post Imperalism, Legionary IIIs and HC can be rapidally built in an
area with a few turns warning with a 1000 gold reserve.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 22 Dec 2004 11:59:18 -0800, joncnunn@yahoo.com wrote:

>Heavy Calvary against the AI is very devasting when properly used and
>escorting.
>And Heavy Calvary are much cheaper to build than Legionary IIIs.
>In fact post Republic and pre Imperlism, almost all the Legionary IIIs
>in my empire are those that used to be I's and IIs.
>
>Post Imperalism, Legionary IIIs and HC can be rapidally built in an
>area with a few turns warning with a 1000 gold reserve.

I found Heavy Calvary to be rather useless against't Hoplites and
Numidian Mercs. It also is the best unit the AI can build which puts
Rome back down to their level. I build them only in low productive
when I am already overloaded with garrisons. I use them to take
smaller distant cities like the Goth or Scythe.

I almost always lost Heavy Calvary attacking fortified cities. The
rarely lost Legionaries attacking anything. While they may be slow I
just use ships or settle on a slow advance. Sooner or later they will
get there and conquer all in their path.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

P12 <nowhere@all.com> wrote in
news:1k5ks0psl9brmhtr77tt17ljp2iq8g8sm8@4ax.com:

> On 22 Dec 2004 11:59:18 -0800, joncnunn@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>Heavy Calvary against the AI is very devasting when properly used
>>and escorting.
>>And Heavy Calvary are much cheaper to build than Legionary IIIs.
>>In fact post Republic and pre Imperlism, almost all the Legionary
>>IIIs in my empire are those that used to be I's and IIs.
>>
>>Post Imperalism, Legionary IIIs and HC can be rapidally built in
>>an area with a few turns warning with a 1000 gold reserve.
>
> I found Heavy Calvary to be rather useless against't Hoplites and
> Numidian Mercs. It also is the best unit the AI can build which
> puts Rome back down to their level. I build them only in low
> productive when I am already overloaded with garrisons. I use
> them to take smaller distant cities like the Goth or Scythe.
>
> I almost always lost Heavy Calvary attacking fortified cities.
> The rarely lost Legionaries attacking anything. While they may be
> slow I just use ships or settle on a slow advance. Sooner or
> later they will get there and conquer all in their path.

I think the key with Heavy Cavalry in this scenario is moderation.
To rely on heavy cavalry would be foolish with the superior Legionary
units available. But they can still serve useful purposes and should
be built for those purposes.
For some examples ... They are perfect for killing enemy cavalry.
As mentioned above they are good for warring with weaker, but more
distant enemies. They also make better scouts/pillagers than Legions.

--
ICQ: 8105495
AIM: KeeperGFA
EMail: thekeeper@canada.com
"If we did the things we are capable of,
we would astound ourselves." - Edison