I was very disappointed with civ2 when I bought it. After plaaying so much civ1 they rearranged so much, and I felt the new graphics, fake 3d and video clips wasn't quite what I'd have liked to see.. with time, I have grown to appreciate the game, but it was first when I discovered how much could be tweaked in scenarios that I got fired up about it. Shortly after I played mp scenarios, and thats where civ2 is the best, IMO.
I still don't feel civ3 is what it could've been. Somehow they managed to get trapped between two stools. They didn't go up that alley of expanded, more flexible parametres, deeper gameplay, historical detail and user customizability that I've liked to see. Instead, they decided they wanted animated units and leaderheads, and all kinds of fancy stuff, that doesn't really make the game any deeper, but creates a zillion files, with a severely limited editor that makes it very tough -if not impossible- for someone who wants to make scenarios, while they could have made it much much easier. Civ3 could've been a gem, opening up for all kinds of players to create history with a minimum of fuss. Instead they made it much much harder.
On top, the game runs slowish and sluggishly. Especially on larger maps.... I still think the game has some strengths, but its just not up to what I wanted. Maybe it'll improve in my mind, like civ2, but without proper editing tools & mp, I doubt it.
but about skullers) we can play civnet. Although the timezone is the only major drawback. There are 6hours delay between Ottawa and Paris... 
