Petition for the Maya.

[Greywulf]

Apparently a schismatic charismatic Catholic movement in Guatemala entered into communion with the Patriarch of Antioch: per Wikipedia.

Sounds intense, lol.

Well no offense to Jesus but he isn't Lady Six Sky. Not because I don't like him but he's not a lady or Mayan.
Plus Jesus sounds too Latin for a Mayan leader name.
Almost as bad as a French leader possibly leading England...oh wait

Indeed. I want Lady Six Sky, who is...well a lady. Also Mayan, which helps.

To me it's ironic that no one seems to question how we pronounce Jesus the way we do, rather than the Greek Iisoús, or the very different sounding Hebrew Yeshua (abbr of Yehoshua) ~ personally I prefer the Hebrew way.

 

[Zaarin]

To me it's ironic that no one seems to question how we pronounce Jesus the way we do, rather than the Greek Iisoús, or the very different sounding Hebrew Yeshua (abbr of Yehoshua) ~ personally I prefer the Hebrew way.

I also prefer the Hebrew/Aramaic pronunciation, but until a couple hundred years ago it was considered entirely normal to translate people's names. Thus historical figures in Europe are by and large known by the English equivalents of their names: Philip II rather than Felipe II, Catherine the Great rather than Yekaterina Velikaya, etc. In the Bible we have names that passed first into Greek and then into Latin before arriving in English, sometimes with an Aramaic intermediary thrown in as well (Aramaic being the vernacular at the time of the New Testament). In general the entire Ancient world is, unfortunately, largely viewed through a Greek lens. My go-to Bible is a scholarly study Bible, so I frequently find myself wishing that it would abandon traditional renderings for more accurate transliterations of the Hebrew and Aramaic (and Akkadian and Persian where appropriate)...

Indeed. I want Lady Six Sky, who is...well a lady. Also Mayan, which helps.

As I said earlier I think the Mayans just make sense for a female leader because there are very few other New World civs who have that option. The Mayans seem to have been unusually accepting of female rulers in contrast to other civilizations, but it sort of makes sense given how flexibly Mayans viewed gender.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Since we're on the topic of the Maya what are your ideas on the civs abilities and uniques. Here is my take:
Maya Empire (Maya)

Leader: Lady Six Sky

Agenda: Ajaw- Likes civilizations who produce much faith along with science. Dislikes civilizations who produce little faith and science. (Could be the agenda for any Maya ruler.)

LA: New Dynasty- Combat strength when attacking city-states and their units who are at war with you or one of your allies. Defeated units also provide faith based on strength as do cities when taken provide a boost towards both faith and science.
(Taken from when she arrived at a new city-state and became queen as well as she was known to preform calendric rituals. Also she was shown on monuments standing over trampled captives of other city-states. Also made more sense to put in the sacrificial part of the Maya culture with her ability.)

UA: Maya Priesthood- Holy Site Specialists provide science based on building faith output. Temples can hold a great work of writing slot that also provides science once Recorded History is learned.
(Standard role of the priests in Mayan society who were learned and had knowledge of early science and astronomy)

UU: Yaomitl (replaces Spearman)-Has a range attack of 1 and regular anti-cav defense. (This is the name of an atlatl dart in Mayan).

UI: Triadic Pyramids (unlocks at Astrology)-provides extra faith, science, and provides culture later in the civic tree. Extra faith when built next to Holy Site and extra science if adjacent to a mountain. Must be built on rainforest.
(Would be really interesting in my opinion to actually build them on the rainforest tiles, and later on it provides some tourism just like in real life when tourists have to go hiking through the jungle to see the pyramids. And the science boost from mountains would make the pyramid like an observatory.)

 

[Greywulf]

I also prefer the Hebrew/Aramaic pronunciation, but until a couple hundred years ago it was considered entirely normal to translate people's names. Thus historical figures in Europe are by and large known by the English equivalents of their names: Philip II rather than Felipe II, Catherine the Great rather than Yekaterina Velikaya, etc. In the Bible we have names that passed first into Greek and then into Latin before arriving in English, sometimes with an Aramaic intermediary thrown in as well (Aramaic being the vernacular at the time of the New Testament). In general the entire Ancient world is, unfortunately, largely viewed through a Greek lens. My go-to Bible is a scholarly study Bible, so I frequently find myself wishing that it would abandon traditional renderings for more accurate transliterations of the Hebrew and Aramaic (and Akkadian and Persian where appropriate)...

I do tend to prefer to try to pronounce names according to the language in question, though some languages are more difficult than others, and sometimes it is just easier to remember the name in English. For instance, while it is cool to say Yekaterina Velikaya, that's not a name I remember easily, so my preference in that case is Catherine the Great (still interesting to know her real name as well).

That's right, Jesus/Yeshua spoke Aramaic (as well as Hebrew and Koine Greek), or at least the regional dialect of Aramaic, being that Aramaic had a golden age of being an important language of trade for a decent chunk of the then known world. It seems likely that he would have been quite the polyglot, with so many influential languages in the part of the world he grew up in. The "Greek lens" has its perks as well...It gave us the Septuagint, a well perfected translation of the Hebrew/Aramaic scriptures into Koine Greek, which proved beneficial for later translation, including into English.

What other translations do you like? I've got a copy of the Eight Translation New Testament, which is an interesting way to compare.

As I said earlier I think the Mayans just make sense for a female leader because there are very few other New World civs who have that option. The Mayans seem to have been unusually accepting of female rulers in contrast to other civilizations, but it sort of makes sense given how flexibly Mayans viewed gender.

Makes me wonder what was it about their culture that was different that allowed for more female leaders, as opposed to other cultures. I think that sometimes even subtle aspects of a culture can have a profound effect. Perhaps time is a factor as well here, as the Maya civilization had been around for significantly longer than other regional civilizations.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

The sacbe should probably be part of a Mayan civ. Probably a UA/LA granting paved roads in an earlier era upon completion of a domestic trade route.

I think making Maya a military civ would poorly distinguish them from the Aztecs, so I think most of their bonuses should be science/trade oriented.

 

[Greywulf]

The sacbe should probably be part of a Mayan civ. Probably a UA/LA granting paved roads in an earlier era upon completion of a domestic trade route.

I think making Maya a military civ would poorly distinguish them from the Aztecs, so I think most of their bonuses should be science/trade oriented.

What if their trader units automatically built sacbeob instead of normal roads? Could give some bonus.

Also, I agree that they shouldn't be overly military focused, and it would be nice to give them some science ability, but there should be a degree of military focus, as it would be rather strange if there wasn't for this civ.

 

[Siptah]

I also prefer the Hebrew/Aramaic pronunciation, but until a couple hundred years ago it was considered entirely normal to translate people's names. Thus historical figures in Europe are by and large known by the English equivalents of their names: Philip II rather than Felipe II, Catherine the Great rather than Yekaterina Velikaya, etc. In the Bible we have names that passed first into Greek and then into Latin before arriving in English, sometimes with an Aramaic intermediary thrown in as well (Aramaic being the vernacular at the time of the New Testament). In general the entire Ancient world is, unfortunately, largely viewed through a Greek lens. My go-to Bible is a scholarly study Bible, so I frequently find myself wishing that it would abandon traditional renderings for more accurate transliterations of the Hebrew and Aramaic (and Akkadian and Persian where appropriate)...

Having read multiple bible editions and being used to "more exact" translations of sections by historians, I still prefer to read Luther's translation (with modern orthography, the original one is often very slow do decipher). But this might be a german bias, since his language is just too good and rightfully proved very influential for the development of the modern german language.

I do tend to prefer to try to pronounce names according to the language in question, though some languages are more difficult than others, and sometimes it is just easier to remember the name in English. For instance, while it is cool to say Yekaterina Velikaya, that's not a name I remember easily, so my preference in that case is Catherine the Great (still interesting to know her real name as well).

That approach works well until you start talking with a non-Portuguese about Vasco da Gama or Fernão de Magalhães and no one knows who you are talking about. I generally pronounce names in original language when I have a clue how it sounds. I always address people with their name in the own language in personal conversation though (which is more often not the same in return, since my given name exists in many languages with different pronunciation). And as said in another thread, I don't translate geographical names, but always stick to the language I'm talking in in that moment.

How does this all connect to the Maya? Easy: I hope the maya are a (inter-)cultural trade civ this time

 

[Zaarin]

Having read multiple bible editions and being used to "more exact" translations of sections by historians, I still prefer to read Luther's translation (with modern orthography, the original one is often very slow do decipher). But this might be a german bias, since his language is just too good and rightfully proved very influential for the development of the modern german language.

Many English-speakers feel the same way about the King James Version. I think the KJV is a work of art, but for daily use I prefer the NRSV.

I always address people with their name in the own language in personal conversation though (which is more often not the same in return, since my given name exists in many languages with different pronunciation).

This reminds me of an entertaining anecdote from when I was in college. I went out to a movie with several of my friends, and one of my friends brought along her boyfriend, who was Indian-American. After the movie we went to Starbucks, and my friend's Indian-American boyfriend gave the barista the name "Robert" rather than his actual name (which wasn't actually hard to pronounce but was quite long). He joked that he should have given his real name and then demanded free coffee when they got it wrong. Of course, free is still a high price to pay for Starbucks...

 

[Guandao]

I think Firaxis adding Palenque as a City-State in a DLC might indicate they don't want to do a Mayan Civ.... Maybe Aztecs is enough Mesoamerican representation for them. Or they can't find much material on Mayan rulers beside Pacal.

 

[Laurana Kanan]

I think Firaxis adding Palenque as a City-State in a DLC might indicate they don't want to do a Mayan Civ....

I also have the feeling that one of the last three NWs to be revealed in GS will be a cenote as another nod to the Maya without actually including them.

 

[Zaarin]

I think Firaxis adding Palenque as a City-State in a DLC might indicate they don't want to do a Mayan Civ.... Maybe Aztecs is enough Mesoamerican representation for them. Or they can't find much material on Mayan rulers beside Pacal.

Or they killed off the resplendent quetzal for Monty's costume so the Mayan leader is left without anything to wear. Also one notes that they've had no qualms about inventing personalities for leaders in the past--even well attested leaders like Cyrus the Great.

 

[Guandao]

Or they killed off the resplendent quetzal for Monty's costume so the Mayan leader is left without anything to wear. Also one notes that they've had no qualms about inventing personalities for leaders in the past--even well attested leaders like Cyrus the Great.

They did put Chichen Itza in Monty's background.....

 

[Siptah]

They did put Chichen Itza in Monty's background.....

Don't say things that can't be unseen. You just ruined the game for me. Civ VI is now unplayable.

 

[Xandinho]

They did put Chichen Itza in Monty's background.....

This may mean that they never intended to include the Maya from the beginning.

Neglecting the Mayans in a series of games focused on civilization is a very odd decision, imo.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

This may mean that they never intended to include the Maya from the beginning.

Neglecting the Mayans in a series of games focused on civilization is a very odd decision, imo.

Hmmmm that doesn't sit well with me, if it ends up being the case. If the Aztecs are supposed to be a Mexico stand-in, the Yucatan and Guatemala are a completely different people that deserve distinction. The Maya are probably the best civ to represent central American peoples outside of Mexico. That or maybe the Taino, which could easily coexist since they vicariously represent Colombia and the inner Amazon.

I initially was fine leaving them out, but I keep finding more reasons why they shouldn't be cut. They're about on par with Portugal in necessity for a third expack...

 

[TahamiTsunami]

I personally doubt that any of that was supposed to be a sign that they'd decided then to leave out the Maya. I've mentioned before that in pop culture most people tend to believe that all these Mesoamerican kingdoms were essentially the same in wearing numerous feathers, beheading sacrifices on the temple tops, etc. Monty and his background do look more Mayan than Aztec and if you watch the Mayans in Apocalypto you'll notice that they act more like the Aztecs than the Maya (they're sacrificing way more people then they should be and the Spanish encountered them hundreds of years after their collapse).

I still suspect we'll see the Maya appear sooner or later, but I'm hoping against all odds that they don't end up looking more like Aztecs.

 

[Greywulf]

I think Firaxis adding Palenque as a City-State in a DLC might indicate they don't want to do a Mayan Civ.... Maybe Aztecs is enough Mesoamerican representation for them. Or they can't find much material on Mayan rulers beside Pacal.

There's lots of choices for Mayan rulers, and enough info on multiple.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I think Firaxis adding Palenque as a City-State in a DLC might indicate they don't want to do a Mayan Civ.... Maybe Aztecs is enough Mesoamerican representation for them. Or they can't find much material on Mayan rulers beside Pacal.

My only concern is they added them in a DLC as well. What are the chances that they will change a city-state from a DLC or Expansion?
The only one's that they have done so far is Jakarta, Seoul, Amsterdam, and it looks like Carthage, Toronto, and Stockholm will as well all from the base game.
Then there is the possibility that Civs such as Babylon, Maya, Italy, and possibly Byzantines, would be out, but Portugal would still have a chance.

 

[Greywulf]

My only concern is they added them in a DLC as well. What are the chances that they will change a city-state from a DLC or Expansion?
The only one's that they have done so far is Jakarta, Seoul, Amsterdam, and it looks like Carthage, Toronto, and Stockholm will as well all from the base game.
Then there is the possibility that Civs such as Babylon, Maya, Italy, and possibly Byzantines, would be out, but Portugal would still have a chance.

Jakarta, Seoul, Amsterdam, Carthage, Toronto, and Stockholm...That is six examples of CS into civ. I think it's very possible they will do it more times...

 

[Xandinho]

My only concern is they added them in a DLC as well. What are the chances that they will change a city-state from a DLC or Expansion?
The only one's that they have done so far is Jakarta, Seoul, Amsterdam, and it looks like Carthage, Toronto, and Stockholm will as well all from the base game.
Then there is the possibility that Civs such as Babylon, Maya, Italy, and possibly Byzantines, would be out, but Portugal would still have a chance.

Palenque was added quite early, in the Vikings Scenario Pack DLC, a few months after the release of Civ6. Babylon was added replacing Seoul, in Rise and Fall. That said, if there is a race of city-states to become civilizations, I would say that Portugal and Maya are in front of Babylon. On the other hand, Babylon is regular since civ1, which makes me think that it is the most likely to be included in a third expansion.