In a one-city challenge, the disadvantage of having only one city is mitigated to an extent by the fact that in that city you can build 5 national wonders, and without the 6 prereq buildings usually needed for most of them. Recently I've been toying with the idea of a two-city challenge -- in essence, a game on normal settings where a player commits to only building one additional city, and to razing any enemy cities captured. While two cities are better than one, the obvious disadvantage is you would be unable to build any national wonders except National Epic, Heroic Epic, National Park, Maoi Statues, Mt. Rushmore, and West Point. I'm curious whether people think this would be easier than a one-city challenge or harder, as well as what approaches one might try to such a challenge. Obviously a lot depends on the set-up, so here are some thoughts I had. If it seems like an interesting idea, and if I can get a good map, perhaps I will post it as a forum game. Note: If I do end up posting this as a forum game, the following discussion may amount to having some (more or less specific) map spoilers. If you're interested in playing the resulting game, and want to go in completely blind, you may want to stop here. That said, I hope some people will read and contribute their opinions. --- Difficulty Obviously this is something people could adjust individually, but what would provide a reasonable challenge for most players? My instinct is Emperor, although my ambitious side is drawn to Immortal.. Leader I'd like to avoid an explicit presumption towards wonder-whoring, i.e., no Industrious. To keep things sporting in this context, then, I'm leaning towards a Philosophical leader -- but not Gandhi, because he's a little too obvious for a (quasi)-OCC. With this in mind, the three that jumped out were Alex, Pericles, and Liz. All three are strong leaders, but I'm drawn to Alex in particular to encourage something more interesting than the peaceful building you often see in OCC. Start I'd like to provide a strong start, but one that does not in itself determine early strategy. So, no Stone for the first city, and probably also no Marble. What I'd really like is something that is flexible and encourages creativity in early decision making, which to me means lots of food and production, rather than lots of commerce (especially for a Philosophical leader.) So probably no gold or gems either, but a couple food resources, hills and/or production specials, and lots of trees. In addition to this, the start should probably also have a strategic resource in at least the second border-pop if not BFC, although I'm not sure it matters which one. Oil should probably be placed so that there is at least a 90% chance the player will have it in his borders by the time it becomes relevant. Map The second city is another matter, however. What I'd like is to have a couple good potential second city sites nearby, which have different advantages the player must choose between. So for example there may be a stone/marble site or a gold/gems site nearby, but taking one of these would require foregoing a killer GP site or a great production site with an important strategic resource. Realistically, having several potential second city cites probably means a Pangaea or Continents map, where the player's start is fairly centrally located. Between these I would lean towards Pangaea, although Continents could be an option if the start is coastal (which incidentally would possibly be a good match for Greece's Fishing start.) For neighbors, I'd ideally like a nice mix of insane war-mongers and religious zealots. --- Well, those are the main things I can think of. Let me know what you guys think!