Olmecs not a major civ

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

kill they all with Atlalist

So they basically would have the Maya UU, since that's what the Hulche is.

When I was in Cacaxtla they show me this paintig, I believe this is very explanatory what is happening.
On left side there is a white guy and in the right side there is a black guy (the Black guy is the king 3Deer).
Look the legs of him, the darkest guy of the middle have the same leg.
The guy who guide me use this picture to explain me why and how Olmec-Xicalanca society racisms works. I think it is amazing. Maya/Olmec people indeed have the skin more darkner than Aztec or other North America tribes.

I still don't think you understand that the Olmeca-Xicalanca people have nothing to do with the actual Ancient Olmec Civilization.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

When I was in Cacaxtla they show me this paintig, I believe this is very explanatory what is happening.
On left side there is a white guy and in the right side there is a black guy (the Black guy is the king 3Deer).
Look the legs of him, the darkest guy of the middle have the same leg.
The guy who guide me use this picture to explain me why and how Olmec-Xicalanca society racisms works. I think it is amazing. Maya/Olmec people indeed have the skin more darkner than Aztec or other North America tribes.

that is just ONE painting... that is like arguing Cleopatra was 100% Egyptian based on this statue:

 

[Henri Christophe]

I still don't think you understand that the Olmeca-Xicalanca people have nothing to do with the actual Ancient Olmec Civilization.

They may don't have nothing to do with actual Olmec, or maybe they are the last Olmecs in forgotten history. Who knows.
I was searching today, why they are called Olmecs? As far I understand they come from Olmec land and are mixed race with theses Xicalanca.
But Okay, okay, let's supose they don't have nothing in comun

What do you think a civilization about Olmec-Xicalanca?

 

[Kupe Navigator]

and also what is your obsession with this 3Deer guy. I can't find good info on him anywhere and he sounds like some underground DJ from a club or something.

What do you think a civilization about Olmec-Xicalanca?

BAD since anything about them can be represented by Mayans.

 

[Henri Christophe]

and also what is your obsession with this 3Deer guy. I can't find good info on him anywhere and he sounds like some underground DJ from a club or something.

I like him because he should be represented very black, as paint as Black dye. It should be fun. I guess just this Olmec Xicalanca and Hutus was racist society who privilege black over white, but Hutus is so recently to be a civ.

But you are right, Olmecs-Xicalanca and Maya are very similar in Unique Features

 

[Kupe Navigator]

I like him because he should be represented very black, as paint as Black dye.

and Cleopatra was black eh?
Seriously to call him black just because of ONE painting is stupid. We need more evidence.

 

[Henri Christophe]

and Cleopatra was black eh?
Seriously to call him black just because of ONE painting is stupid. We need more evidence.

Cleopatra was Hellenic white, she was greek in fact.
Olmecs-Xicalanca isn't black, they have a dark skin but isn't black. But all paintings in Cacaxtla (as already show in this threat) they are painting as black. The guy who guide me tell me it's black dye.

Another nation who like to paint his body with Black is the Krenak, unfortunely his leader still alive and can't be a Civ.

 

[Patine]

I like him because he should be represented very black, as paint as Black dye. It should be fun. I guess just this Olmec Xicalanca and Hutus was racist society who privilege black over white, but Hutus is so recently to be a civ.

But you are right, Olmecs-Xicalanca and Maya are very similar in Unique Features

Did you ever consider this 3Deer may not be a "human," leader, but a deity, "demon," "underworld/risen," figure, human possessed by a supernatural being, etc.? Those were usually drawn very differently (and often with different colours) in old artistic portrayals - such as Hindu gods being blue, or halos in old Christian art. So little is known of the Olmec, he have no idea who this 3Deer guy was, or if he was meant to be human - or historical.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Cleopatra was Hellenic white, she was greek in fact.

I was being Sarcastic...

Olmecs-Xicalanca isn't black, they have a dark skin but isn't black. But all paintings in Cacaxtla (as already show in this threat) they are painting as black. The guy who guide me tell me it's black dye.

that contradicts your statement:

I like him because he should be represented very black, as paint as Black dye.

And that isn't even a half of a problem... Major problem is that we know NOTHING about him. Heck he could be an alien for all we know. that is like saying we should have MAUI as a leader of Maori people... He could be 100% myological... way more than Dido, Gilgamesh Kupe.

 

[Henri Christophe]

AS far I know as Maya hieroglyphs, when someone is holding a stick as in this picture this mean he is the king, but instead he also is over a feather snake, so maybe he is a god-king. I like god-king, that don't make it a big problem for me.

 

[Patine]

AS far I know as Maya hieroglyphs, when someone is holding a stick as in this picture this mean he is the king, but instead he also is over a feather snake, so maybe he is a god-king. I like god-king, that don't make it a big problem for me.

"God-kings," are a big problem, as a rule, because they're usually heavily mythologized, if they ever existed at all...

And, you're ASSUMING Maya trends automatically apply...

 

[Henri Christophe]

Pachacuti was a God-king. God-king is a dude who the folks believe is a god.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Pachacuti was a God-king. God-king is a dude who the folks believe is a god.

"god kings" is a mythological figure who is also a god and king at the same time... they are different from HISTORICAL monarchs who claimed divine authority like pharaohs of ancient Egypt, ancient Emperor of Japan, and Pachacuti. Also PLEASE note that one of them claimed that they are actual gods but rather they are descendants of god.
Also to be a civ leader you need some sort of HISTORICAL accounts- whether written or verbal about their accomplishments.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

At least they got a City-State.

Which has a Spanish name, so is only notionally "Olmec"

We can use theses dialects to do an Olmec Civilization?

Not really. It would be like having a Gaullic Leader speaking modern Provencial French - vaguely related at best. And we still wouldn't have a City List nor, really, enough information to give a personalty to any Leader, nor any Leader name that is reliable. We've got a total of less than 100 Olmec glyphs to reconstruct their language from, so anybody that says that X means Y or X was the Ruler with this Name in Olmec - is largely guessing.

Now, we can use guesswork - after introducing Gilgamesh and Kupe as "Leaders" and Beowulf and Mulan as in-game characters there certainly aren't a lot of restrictions left on what is possible in Civ design, but the Olmec are about as thin a civilization as we can find when it comes to the in-game information that has always been considered necessary to 'construct' a Civ game Civilization.

Oh, and Dark meaning Better or Important is pretty common in Meso-American art, at least from the Yucatan - take a look at some of the Mayan frescos that have survived and the same convention appears. That means, by the way, that art that appears to show "Europeans" in Mayan art are Suspect - the lighter skin could just mean Enemies or Victims. The only depiction that I think might be evidence of Mayan- Viking contact (after 1000 CE) is one that shows a boat with visible clinkered (overlapping) planking: a distinctively Scandinavian boat-building technique not found anywhere in the Americas. The same art shows apparent 'white men', but, again, they are no different from other 'light skin tone convention' for Defeated, Less Important, or Enemy shown in other Mayan art.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

@Boris Gudenuf, I agree with you on everything except on Mulan and Beowulf. Those are Heroes: Legendary characters who may or may not have existed. That's why they are the Heroes and why Skanderbeg isn't one.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

@Boris Gudenuf, I agree with you on everything except on Mulan and Beowulf. Those are Heroes: Legendary characters who may or may not have existed. That's why they are the Heroes and why Skanderbeg isn't one.

My beef with them is not that they are Heroes, but that they are Legendary/Mythological. They could have had a very similar mechanic and set of effects using Historical Heroes which, IMHO, would have been a better fit for a supposedly Historical 4X Game.

 

[Patine]

after introducing Gilgamesh and Kupe as "Leaders" and Beowulf and Mulan as in-game characters there certainly aren't a lot of restrictions left on what is possible in Civ designt.

@Boris Gudenuf, I agree with you on everything except on Mulan and Beowulf. Those are Heroes: Legendary characters who may or may not have existed. That's why they are the Heroes and why Skanderbeg isn't one.

And your leader can also be invited to join a cult of Transylvanian Vampires, remember... :S

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

And your leader can also be invited to join a cult of Transylvanian Vampires, remember... :S

Believe it or not, I can accept 'vampires' in a historical game easier than I can accept Mulan or Beowulf. The Vampire Legend is alive and strong and well all over eastern Europe (and elsewhere in the world in various forms) so it and they are a Real Thing, at least in sociological terms. And, of course, Wallachia did have its own 'vampire', Vlad Tepes the "Little Dragon". Anybody that can make the Ottomans start looking over their shoulder nervously is worth finding a way to include . . .

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

Believe it or not, I can accept 'vampires' in a historical game easier than I can accept Mulan or Beowulf. The Vampire Legend is alive and strong and well all over eastern Europe (and elsewhere in the world in various forms) so it and they are a Real Thing, at least in sociological terms. And, of course, Wallachia did have its own 'vampire', Vlad Tepes the "Little Dragon". Anybody that can make the Ottomans start looking over their shoulder nervously is worth finding a way to include . . .

Why so? I mean, I can somewhat accept Vampires, but ancient and classical mythology was full of Heroes who helped save their people, introduced new inventions, etc. Cultures are formed around Heroes and their exploits. I find Heroes to be much better than Vampires, but it's only my opinion, and you're free to disagree with it. I know you're better at knowing history than me.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Did you ever consider this 3Deer may not be a "human," leader, but a deity, "demon," "underworld/risen," figure, human possessed by a supernatural being, etc.? Those were usually drawn very differently (and often with different colours) in old artistic portrayals - such as Hindu gods being blue, or halos in old Christian art. So little is known of the Olmec, he have no idea who this 3Deer guy was, or if he was meant to be human - or historical.

I've tried looking up the name 3Deer for the Olmecs or Olmeca Xinacala people and I really haven't come across anything. It could just be a local thing that people called that artwork and at this point could be a local deity.
That picture of the feathered person is probably not historical but supposed to represent Quetzalcoatl that apparently is just called "Bird Man".

My beef with them is not that they are Heroes, but that they are Legendary/Mythological. They could have had a very similar mechanic and set of effects using Historical Heroes which, IMHO, would have been a better fit for a supposedly Historical 4X Game.

I can completely understand that idea. Though I also understand that they might not have been extremely overpowered and made the gameplay less fun if they based heroes on more historical characters.
Many of the already historical heroes in game are already Great Generals.