After faving Nomad for a while, I gotta say that most games on that map are great. What would you say, what percentage of games on certain maps were really good games?

I think Nomad has almost 100% good games with Random Civ. When there is one of the meta-civs (Spanish, Malians, Persians, Lithuanians) against a non-meta-civ it is way lower, so overall I'd say something like 80%.

I think Four Lakes is my favorite map in that regard. Majority of games is great. It basically only feels not good when I fuck up by myself. 90%+ good games I think. (Just that they tend to be kinda stressful.)

I think both share that you can switch focus when losing on one front so that there are more swings and more options to make something happen, Arabia is more linear.

With Arabia I'd say it's something like 50%. Many games are just standard-Feudal-Meta, one executes better and wins early Castle Age. Other than those, there are many good games and some great.

Arena has many bullshit games I think. Trebs and BBC dominate too hard, getting pushed by a 2-farm-eco isn't particularly fun in my opinion, some Castle Age strats feel a bit too strong and kinda unfair too defend against. I dislike relic wars and treb wars, but I like booming and strong Imperial army comps. I think I like maybe 30% of the games on that map. Without clown strats probably over 50%.

Black Forest is a bit like 0% great games, 100% good games, you know what you get.

That said, it probably makes sense to distinguish by "I didn't enjoy that game" - "I enjoyed that game" - "that game was amazing". Amazing games would be probably like Arabia 15-25%, Nomad 30%, Four Lakes 40%, Arena 10%.

I think Acropolis ranks quite high for me too, always fast paced with multiple attacking angles and very effective tech switches pretty often. Might hit my Nomad-30%-great-games-standard.

Golden Pit and Gold Rush tend to feel like civ-win, if not they are pretty good too. Probably both over 20% great games as well and over 70% good games. (I'd say they are my favorite team game maps btw.)

A map which I do like on paper but which tends to play out a bit meh is Valley. I presume that might be because I don't have a good intuition for that one yet. Quite different things can be strong there. Should make for many good games once I understand it better, but so far 40% good games or less, can't really recall games that felt amazing.

Serengeti feels similar for me with the addition that it feels too much speed based, when I lost there I usually feel like I just played too slow which sucks. Not sure if I even had a game on that map that I really liked at all, maximum is basically "it was okayish" if I manage to get a lead.

Whatchaguysthinkin