My preferred play style is peaceful expansion. I enjoy forward settling and blocking other civs into their peninsulas and other corners of land while rushing to expand myself. Fractal and shuffle maps are my favorite as the landmasses you tend to get suit this style well. Plus finding those uninhabited islands late into the game is nice. However, what I'm finding - to my disappointment - in Civ 6 is that the point seems to arrive too early when it makes very little sense to settle new cities any more. Playing standard speed and size, it pretty much feels like anything settled after turn 200 will never have time to grow to anything meaningful. And if the city does not have much production from terrain, that point comes even earlier, as you'll be forever building that first district. It doesn't really make sense that you're in, say, the industrial era, building factories and stock exchanges, while your new cities will only complete their first district 50 turns into the future. The disparity between your old and new cities is simply too big. The obvious answer is "don't found but conquer your new cities", but that's not how I normally like to play. So, what are the experiences and opinions of people here, what would you say, on standard speed, is the point when you probably should stop founding new cities, when the benefit you get from them until the end of the game becomes minimal?