I usually avoid trying for Cultural victories, because the idea of letting my science stagnate while the AI surpass me seems far too dangerous. With this map I couldn't pass up the opportunity to try. I still hadn't met any of the AI at 1 AD, but the status report said they were far behind me, while the terrain offered an incredible defensive ring.
I ended up researching more techs than were necessary for the classic cultural victory strategy. I finally switched over to producing culture (at 80-90%) in 1170, when I could run Representation and Mercantilism (along with Free Speech, and a bit later, Pacifism and Caste System). That let my Artist specialists continue to research enough science to keep me ahead of these AI. I founded Christianity, Taoism and Islam, in addition to the Buddhism and Confucianism I already had.
I finally made contact with two of the AI in 1170. I'm not quite certain how that happened, since I didn't have any units exploring the desert (I never even thought of using spies!) and I didn't see any AI units. Perhaps the AI's cultural borders had expanded into a desert hill from which my own territory could be seen?
As I approached my victory threshold, I finally settled a city on the desert ring in 1645 to build a fort-canal, after which my rifles destroyed War, Conquest and Death. I never saw what happened to Famine. Enbilulu and Ninanzu were at war. I joined in and captured one of Ninanzu's cities, but then he capitulated to Enbilulu. I declared war on both of them, but there was no time to push my conquest further, as my 11th GA culture bomb raised my third city to legendary status, giving me a Cultural Victory in 1765.
Too slow in these circumstances, I know. I'm hoping those who usually excel at this path decided it would be too easy, and went for an early conquest, instead.
P.S. While every detail of this map was a work of beauty, from its symmetry to its formidable obstacles to the subtle way the rivers made the desert ring porous for trade purposes, choosing to give all of the AI the same nationalities was spitefully nasty. What's wrong with letting our diplomats distinguish who they're talking about?
