Global Highlands
No, really. These maps are a bit like Continents maps, but with more mountain ranges. I find them to be incredibly organic-looking and quite unpredictable. (For added fun and even more "realism" go with Toroidal world wrap.) Each civ starts out with a "natural border" of sorts, created by the mountains. This map is good if you don't like spamming a ton of cities early, and prefer a smaller empire with big cities. (While Fractal is also somewhat unpredictable, it creates one long, winding continent way too often for me. I sincerely hate those maps. Global Highlands is much more natural-looking, while being just as unpredictable as Fractal, if not more.)
Hemispheres (2)
Again, I like to go for natural, organic-looking maps. This one gives a nice mix of large continents, with some island regions. It's superior to Big & Small, in my view, because with B&S you have the "problem" of being connected to every civ in the game prior to Caravels. This makes things much easier for the human as 1) you have many more trading partners in the early eras, and 2) conquest/domination become much easier. So I don't play B&S any more, it's very predictable. (Hempisheres is also quite predictable, but in a less-consequential way. Global Highlands is tops because it's entirely unpredictable how many civs you'll have on your landmass.)
I also add 2-3 civs to almost every game I play. I really hate huge, sprawling empires with tons of cities to manage. I prefer my games to be composed of more civs with smaller empires. It's much more realistic, and more challenging for the player. (If you haven't found the theme, that's it: reducing player advantages over the AI. I'd rather play such a game than go up in difficulty where I'm simply competing against built-in cheats. (I play at Monarch currently.) The final ingredient for this recipe should be Aggressive AI, but I guess I just don't like how far this option tilts the game in one direction. Peaceful strategies become considerably easier, while warmongering becomes much less attractive. I'm a peaceful player by nature, so while Agg AI deals with one clear player advantage, it's not one that I usually make much use of in my games anyway.)
No, really. These maps are a bit like Continents maps, but with more mountain ranges. I find them to be incredibly organic-looking and quite unpredictable. (For added fun and even more "realism" go with Toroidal world wrap.) Each civ starts out with a "natural border" of sorts, created by the mountains. This map is good if you don't like spamming a ton of cities early, and prefer a smaller empire with big cities. (While Fractal is also somewhat unpredictable, it creates one long, winding continent way too often for me. I sincerely hate those maps. Global Highlands is much more natural-looking, while being just as unpredictable as Fractal, if not more.)
Hemispheres (2)
Again, I like to go for natural, organic-looking maps. This one gives a nice mix of large continents, with some island regions. It's superior to Big & Small, in my view, because with B&S you have the "problem" of being connected to every civ in the game prior to Caravels. This makes things much easier for the human as 1) you have many more trading partners in the early eras, and 2) conquest/domination become much easier. So I don't play B&S any more, it's very predictable. (Hempisheres is also quite predictable, but in a less-consequential way. Global Highlands is tops because it's entirely unpredictable how many civs you'll have on your landmass.)
I also add 2-3 civs to almost every game I play. I really hate huge, sprawling empires with tons of cities to manage. I prefer my games to be composed of more civs with smaller empires. It's much more realistic, and more challenging for the player. (If you haven't found the theme, that's it: reducing player advantages over the AI. I'd rather play such a game than go up in difficulty where I'm simply competing against built-in cheats. (I play at Monarch currently.) The final ingredient for this recipe should be Aggressive AI, but I guess I just don't like how far this option tilts the game in one direction. Peaceful strategies become considerably easier, while warmongering becomes much less attractive. I'm a peaceful player by nature, so while Agg AI deals with one clear player advantage, it's not one that I usually make much use of in my games anyway.)
