So just how badly are we screwed? Well, here's a good idea.
The average distance between players in this sort of setup should be about 13-17 tiles. There are 2967 land tiles on this map (from the mouseover of "Land score" in the scoreboard). With 18 players, that works out to an average of 2967/18 = 165 tiles per player. With me so far?
Okay then, so let's see what we got.
Taking the equidistant line between us and Carthage. We each have 6 tiles in our "spheres of influence". This doesn't mean that we absolutely can't settle further towards them than that (or they can't settle further towards us)... but it does mean that such a city would be closer to the rival player than to the founding player, i.e. much harder to defend. Sticking to your "sphere of influence" is always the safest bet early on, unless you have exceptional circumstances.
Now working on the assumption that we're connected to another landmass with more civs to the south/east (which is looking extremely likely at this point), then based on the average distance between players, our "sphere of influence" to the south will likely be 6-8 tiles (half of the 13-17 tile average distance between civs).
So, what does that leave us with?
Best case scenario (8 tiles to the south): 67 tiles. Worst case scenario (6 tiles to the south): 62 tiles. A far cry from the 165 tile average per civ.
But it gets worse: of those 62-67 tiles, 12-14 are useless flat tundra, flat ice, or flat desert. So in reality we have 50-53 useable land tiles within the sphere of influence around our start.
It doesn't finish there though. Check out how many food resources we have outside our capital in our sphere of influence: a piddly 4. Unirrigated Wheat, plains Sheep, Clam and Fish. Two of those four (Sheep and Fish) are stuck in the relatively useless north with no hills for hammers in sight. In the west, we have the Wheat, and that's it. In the south, we have the Clam, and that's it.
The land to directly across from our capital is looking almost certainly like part of a larger continent now - and thus probably within someone else's sphere of influence rather than ours. As for the island to the north... if it even is one, it's unlikely to hold much besides tundra and ice. Even if we do have a bit of extra land available in a marginally settleable island or two, that's massively worse than having that extra land reachable by land units, due to the investment and time required for Fishing + Sailing + Galley before you even get the Settler.
So basically, we have a grand total of 50-53 accessible and useable land tiles around our start, and just three relatively crappy city sites available within our sphere of influence: one with next to no hammers (north), and the other two (west and south) with hardly any food.
Meanwhile, the average player has 165 land tiles available to them, and a few will have more than that to make up for our own massive shortfall. (Those 100 tiles must have gone somewhere else, after all.)
In terms of available land alone, we're three times worse off than the average civ in this game. Let alone the luckiest ones.
We are so screwed.