I'm pretty new to GC3 and although I've been playing 4X since Civ I, including the earlier GC's and their DLC, I'm one of the 80% of players that mostly muck around in Normal (or the one just above it); mostly so I can experiment and mix and match and get massive replayability.
Anyhoo, saw this thread and tried the strategy on Normal for the largest galaxy my rig could handle (Huge) with 9 opponents. This was my 4th game by the way (and 3rd played to completion - I retired one after a couple of poor choices where I was swamped early on)
Got very boring after the initial settler rush colony rush (more so than I would have thought actually), and by the time the galaxy was completely colonised - I had around 30 planets before they started culture flipping - I just sat down and spammed research and eventually won a Research/Tech ascension victory (287 turns Zzzzz). Didn't build a single military vessel and only researched military tech in the last few turns to get enough to Ascend.
Metaverse score: 15
I think this says it all. Of course I know the higher AI difficulty changes everything (I mostly muck around 4X on Normal, but not always), but this particular sort of scenario does - for me at least - eventually settle down to micromanagement hell.
Reminds me very much of the Infinite City Sprawl strategy on Civ II (except the resources are finite and fixed in place and you need some development on each planet et cetera but the game play was similar and I felt the same Zzzzz) .
You might be interested to note that the very active Civ community takes a different approach to the "fix the AI it's broken!" lament, in that they look at this as a challenge, and people who want to use it compete with each other to max out their scores (check out Apoloyton or CivFantatics) .
But for me, it's back to a new game. Can I wage a war on two fronts with two totally different offense/defense strategies and still complete colony/diplomacy tech-wise? Only time will tell.