If you conduct 350 BPT at 100% and Oxford would provide 40 BPT, then that's more than 10% of your total research. In normal games, you cannot expect the values that we accustomed to in HoF like usually 80-100 BPT Oxford, but 40 BPT imo. is still quite something, especially because it gets more quickly if you really always work the weakest Cottage until it's a Village and then continue with the next one. Nothing you need to do if you don't want to, but I'm really curious how the different approaches will turn out, because I don't think that the 20 city approaches are actually that much better than the 10-city-ones.
I'd like to compare a little bit closer because I find this really interesting:
19 cities (Pollina) against 10 cities + 2 Settlers on their way (me)
93 pop against 48 pop
380 BPT @ 100% 160 BPT sustained against 250 BPT @ 100% and 170 BPT sustained
Wonders compareable
13 Workers against 11 Workers
13 Granaries 8 Libraries 6 Lighthouses 5 Courthouses against 9 Granaries 7 Forges 7 Libraries 6 Lighthouses 1 Monestary + Religion spread in all cities running OR
10 Horse Archers (me, Pollina didn't write anything about an army so I assume none)
Capital Academy, 2nd GS almost ready, half GM + half GE + half Prophet ready (all me, would be interesting to get exact information from Pollina here)
And this I find very interesting, because it's not like
Pollina or
Jastrow would have simply played better imo. , it's 2 completely different approaches. What I find the most interesting i. e. is, that the sustained BPT with 10 cities are higher than with 20 cities, so yes,
Pollina and
Jastrow have a way higher potential for research, but in fact, they're currently researching slightly slower. Then the Forges that I build make cities 25% more productive and also give great Happiness, imo. 8 Forges could very well be seen as 2 cities, so if I also count the Settlers that are 1 or 2T before reaching their destination, I'd have 14 cities according to that calculation, 15 against 19 already sounds a lot closer than 10 against 20. Pollina definitely got the cheapest rush with 3 Warriors but said herself, that she couldn't oracle CS because of that, Jastrow also didn't oracle CS, still, the teching position seems to be very very similar, maybe Pollina is hanging back a little because she mentioned that she'd look forward to map-trading so I assume no Paper. I also believe I had 1 tech more than Jastrow, but just to be sure, I got IW, MC, Alpha, Maths, Currency, Calendar, Philosophy (on screenshot actually only half but I also already have partly Education, so let's count Philo just because it's very exact in regard to the Beakers I got) , CoL, CS, Paper, also 450
in the bank which is enough for 6T of research so roughly 1500 BPT possible (enough for Education with the bulb from the almost finished GS) . I'd like very exact information on this from
Pollina and
Jastrow, because I assume, that the difference between the games is a trade-off of Forges instead of more cities to get an earlier and easier Oxford + GP / Religion against again more cities + I got an army,
WastinTime maybe too (he didn't mention how many losses he had against Justi's capital so maybe up to 8 HAs) so army against again more cities.
It may be proven completely wrong in the final spoiler thread and maybe
Pollina and
Jastrow will be so much up in front, that I'll really feal as bad as
BiC mentioned, but I'm still hoping that I won't, because I i. e. invested quite a lot of
and
into spreading my religion and into generating a Prophet for a shrine and those things can also be seen differently again. When building buildings I actually have a 50% bonus, so if assuming buildings would be the biggest gain from that point on, then I'd have 18 cities (12 +50%) , and an army of 10 HAs imo. can also easily be seen as 2-3 cities.
I do this, because when I first read
Jastrow's and
Pollina's results, I was shocked, but what I see now, is that it are really trade-offs, basically horizontal expansion (lots of small cities widely spread with TRs as the main source of economy) against vertical expansion (few well developed cities) . If this was Deity, I'd say that the 20-city-players would already have won, but as this is Prince I'm really not sure, because REXing to less cities i. e. also means that the AIs will found more cities in the meantime that can be conquered with very little force probably, and while a Missionary i. e. is a huge investment in the beginning, it actually pays back the whole game and it gives interesting options like early Pacifism to jump forward by several bulbs.
What I'm sure about, is, that the person that gets the 1 tech / turn tech-rate at earliest will win the game, and that is something that cannot be calculated or judged by just number of cities or whatever, because investing heavily into a super-strong-capital with Oxford + preparing a GA-chain to create tons of Great People to bulb, bulb and bulb might i. e. result in 10T earlier Corporations, and that could change a whole game. Maybe even with less cities then 1 tech / turn would be reachable earlier because Corps (or State Propety) are just greater advantages then i. e. the land owned, we saw that in BOTM 97, where
Jastrow beat me by 4T from half the number of cities while simply being a lot earlier to corps than me.
I've learnt a lot from you over the years, so it's nice to be able to offer a tiny bit back. 
I've entered the final phase of my game, but won't spoil anything so that you others don't gain additional advantages to the knowledge about the colonial mechanics 
