Just throwing this one out there, but why is # of turns by far the most common metric to use when judging quality of victory. What about something like score? Just to clarify, I'm not saying using score is better than # of turns, but rather that they both seem equally valid to me. Also, when discussing strength of civs, it seems like there would be some vastly different answers depending which measure you use. Namely civs with weak early games and strong late games would rate much better using score as opposed to # of turns.