Petition for the Maya.

[Xandinho]

There's something important to note. None of the City-States introduced in the Vikings DLC have been replaced. Any City-States that have been replaced are part of the base game. Since Palenque was introduced in the Vikings DLC, does that mean Firaxis is having trouble replacing it to add the Maya to the game? Or does it mean they decided not to add the Maya to the game?

I kind of wish they didn't add Palenque as a City-State then.

In addition to Palenque, the other city-states included in Vikings DLC were: Auckland, Antananarivo, Armagh, Granada and Muscat. With the execution of Palenque, it is quite unlikely any of these city-states to become civilization in any way, especially Auckland and Granada, I don't think anyone ever expected a New Zealander civilization or a Granada civilization .

Anyway, does it make sense for them to do Mayan Civilization and keep Palenque as a city-state? Such as Spain and Granada.

 

[Guandao]

In addition to Palenque, the other city-states included in Vikings DLC were: Auckland, Antananarivo, Armagh, Granada and Muscat. With the execution of Palenque, it is quite unlikely any of these city-states to become civilization in any way, especially Auckland and Granada, I don't think anyone ever expected a New Zealander civilization or a Granada civilization .

Anyway, does it make sense for them to do Mayan Civilization and keep Palenque as a city-state? Such as Spain and Granada.

They could use the native name of Palenque on the Maya city-list, and still keep Palenque as a City-State.

 

[Zaarin]

I weep for the Maya, but I am sure they will be in base game Civ VII if not in Civ VI.

Ask any expert on Mesoamerican history and they will tell you that the Maya were far more important than the Aztec. Ask Firaxis and they'll tell you that if we must have an indigenous New World civilization, it will be day one DLC and include Monty the Mascot. (That's unfair. Most of the previous versions of Civ have managed to include both the Aztec and a North American civ. But my bigger point is that while the Maya should be the base game staple, they won't be for the same reason we can't ditch Nuclear Gandhi or Alexander the Punchable.)

Anyway, does it make sense for them to do Mayan Civilization and keep Palenque as a city-state? Such as Spain and Granada.

They could--it's not like the Mayan city-states were unified. I actually originally proposed making Byblos/Gubal a separate city-state from Phoenicia since Byblos was actually very different culturally and politically from its coastal cousins. So sure, keep Palenque a city-state. That does rule Pacal out as a leader, though. Bring on Lady Six Sky of Naranjo?

They could use the native name of Palenque on the Maya city-list, and still keep Palenque as a City-State.

This is another alternative. I'd prefer Mayan names anyway: Lakamha (Palenque), Yax Mutal (Tikal), Sa'aal (Naranjo), etc.

 

[seasnake]

The Maya, Mississippi, Pueblo and Iroquois would all be worthy inclusions, they have had incredible impacts and advances over wide reaches of land. Pre-Columbian America is just not high on Firaxis list by the fact we have Sweden and Canada coming. Nothing against them, but I really think they were down the pecking order.

Frankly, if I was filling the New World I’d have the following:

America, led by Washington
Coast Salish, led by Chief Seattle
Pueblo, led by Popay
Sioux, led by Sitting Bull
Cree, led by Poundmaker
Mississippi, led by Tuskaloosa
Iroquois, led by Hiawatha
Aztec, led by Monty I
Maya, led by Pacal
Colombia, led by Bolivar
Inca, led by Huayna Capac
Brazil, led by Dom Pedro
Mapuche, led by Lautaro

All before Canada.

 

[Patine]

The Maya, Mississippi, Pueblo and Iroquois would all be worthy inclusions, they have had incredible impacts and advances over wide reaches of land. Pre-Columbian America is just not high on Firaxis list by the fact we have Sweden and Canada coming. Nothing against them, but I really think they were down the pecking order.

Frankly, if I was filling the New World I’d have the following:

America, led by Washington
Coast Salish, led by Chief Seattle
Pueblo, led by Popay
Sioux, led by Sitting Bull
Cree, led by Poundmaker
Mississippi, led by Tuskaloosa
Iroquois, led by Hiawatha
Aztec, led by Monty I
Maya, led by Pacal
Colombia, led by Bolivar
Inca, led by Huayna Capac
Brazil, led by Dom Pedro
Mapuche, led by Lautaro

All before Canada.

I wouldn't put Colombia and Brazil before Canada. Not by a longshot. In fact, I'd FAR rather see the Muisca than Colombia.

 

[seasnake]

I feel Colombia and Brazil fill in a geographic gap that Iroquois, Salish, Cree and Sioux all overlap in the case of Canada. But I'd be persuadable either way.

 

[Patine]

I feel Colombia and Brazil fill in a geographic gap that Iroquois, Salish, Cree and Sioux all overlap in the case of Canada. But I'd be persuadable either way.

I'd far rather see Muisca than Colombia. And the very Civ's you mention above complete for, and overlap with, the United States as well, for that matter.

 

[Zaarin]

Mississippi, led by Tuskaloosa

The problem with the Mississippians is that everything we know about them comes from their decline. It would be as if the only Roman emperor we knew about was Romulus Augustulus--we'd know that Rome was an interesting and powerful civ worthy of inclusion, but we'd lack leaders who really merited inclusion. It would make far more sense to include one of the Mississippian successor confederacies, like the Choctaw, Chickasaw, or Creek. Ideally the Choctaw for Pushmataha.

 

[Lord Lakely]

Ask any expert on Mesoamerican history and they will tell you that the Maya were far more important than the Aztec. Ask Firaxis and they'll tell you that if we must have an indigenous New World civilization, it will be day one DLC and include Monty the Mascot. (That's unfair. Most of the previous versions of Civ have managed to include both the Aztec and a North American civ. But my bigger point is that while the Maya should be the base game staple, they won't be for the same reason we can't ditch Nuclear Gandhi or Alexander the Punchable.)

I am currently working my Civ 7 vision and I found that the INCA are probably the best choice as the South/Mesoamerican staple because there's significantly more information on them (allowing for a versatile blend of abilities) and they have at least three good leader choices (Wanya, Topa and Pachacuti), each of which had a distinctly different governing agenda and accomplishments). As iconic as the Mayans are, it is immensely hard to find reliable information to design something better than a Doom Count civ and they deserve way better than that. (Given that Firaxis NAILED the Aztecs, Inca, Mapuche and Cree in terms of design, they have some pretty big shoes to fill when they make their Mayan civ, in XPac 3 of Civ 7 alike)

(I'd also have less issues with Aztecs being the staple if their design is kept fresh throughout the future installments. Civ 6's Aztecs are one of the best designed civs in the entire game, so no complaints there, but I don't want a carbon copy of that in Civ7 vanilla if we can get Mayans or Incans instead))

This is another alternative. I'd prefer Mayan names anyway: Lakamha (Palenque), Yax Mutal (Tikal), Sa'aal (Naranjo), etc.

Yes. I cringe whenever I see the Spanish names as was the case in Civ 5 (Civ 5 had horrid city lists in general, but Maya were one of the worst offenders. I have a bilingual file with 40 of the most important sites (that we know the Mayan name of) just in case this happens in a future installment I can rename the cities manually.

 

[Zaarin]

I found that the INCA are probably the best choice as the South/Mesoamerican staple because there's significantly more information on them (allowing for a versatile blend of abilities) and they have at least three good leader choices (Wanya, Topa and Pachacuti), each of which had a distinctly different governing agenda and accomplishments). As iconic as the Mayans are, it is immensely hard to find reliable information to design something better than a Doom Count civ and they deserve way better than that.

Considering that the Maya had writing and the Inca and Aztec did not, I find that hard to believe--everything we know about the Inca and Aztec is filtered through the eyes of their enemies. Also the Maya have plenty of leader choices as well scattered across their various city-states, including the much-requested Lady Six Sky and civ staple K'inich Janaab' Pakal among less obvious choices like Ki'q'ab of Q'umarkaj or Yax Nuun Ahiin I of Tikal (someone asked for a child king?) or Yuknoom Ch'een II of Calakmal. I, too, would be disappointed by a return of Apocalyptic Mayans™, but I think they have some great potential for faith-focus (faith from kills like Gorgo's culture?), science (the precision of their astronomical observations was extraordinary), and clear-cutting bonuses (hey, look, Firaxis: a civilization that destroyed itself because it mismanaged the environment--I wonder if that concept might sound familiar to anything you're working on right now). I'm not the most original at designing civs, but I think there's a lot of really interesting stuff that could be done with the Maya rather than just CALENDAR OF DOOOOOOM™.

 

[Lord Lakely]

You don't need to tell me how difficult out of the box thinking is w/r/t game design is. I struggle with think of good abilities for France (partially because I refuse to make them "ZOMG EVIL CULTUREMONGERS" although that's what everyone sees them as now, *sigh*), let alone the Maya. (on the flip side, I have like 10 different ability ideas for Civs such as England and India. oh well)

The issue with the Mayans is not the lack of information, but the internet's lack of access to information that specifically helps game design . A lot of the information on the Mayans is either too vague or too specific to wade through effectively. It took me several hours to find the Mayan word for "pyramid", for instance (hours!). I've found better sources on the Hittites and the Tlingit than I've found on the Mayans.

What this thread could generally benefit from is a list of things the Mayans themselves were notable for. Their calendar and their bloodletting rites (contrary to popular belief, human sacrifice was rare with the Mayans and instead they would puncture soft tissue and use bleed on a cloth, and burn that cloth as an offering instead. When sacrifices happened, it was usually someone of importance like a noble or a captured King) are what I went with in that other thread, but the Mayan Kingdoms were mostly City States that vassalized weaker City states and coerced them in to their empire. Wars were waged for ceremonial purposes, similar to how two peacocks would vie for the same peahen. They also only went on the warpath during the rainy season because they lacked pack animals - supplies had to be carried by serfs (who themselves needed to be fed) or by boat. Even IF the Mayans never learned to work hard metals, their weapons were lethal. Weapons such as the atl-atl and the macuahuitl, as well as a rudimentary hand grenade (filled with live bees!) were deadly weaponry.

They are a fascinating civ, but most of the things I just mentioned are really difficult to implement in the current Civ 6 system without turning them into a charicature. I tried by emulating their bloodletting and tying it to unique Era Score manipulation (allowing them to lower it), as well as giving them bonuses based on the type of Era they're in, but that feels gamey, even for me.

 

[Zaarin]

I struggle with think of good abilities for France (partially because I refuse to make them "ZOMG EVIL CULTUREMONGERS" although that's what everyone sees them as now, *sigh*), let alone the Maya. (on the flip side, I have like 10 different ability ideas for Civs such as England and India. oh well)

There seems to be an unwritten rule at Firaxis: European civs must be bland.

The issue with the Mayans is not the lack of information, but the internet's lack of access to information that specifically helps game design .

Okay, that makes more sense. Also I suspect a lot of the scholarship is in Spanish.

I've found better sources on the Hittites and the Tlingit than I've found on the Mayans.

...Neither of those surprise me, actually. The discovery of Hittite was a huge milestone for a whole slew of disciplines, especially Indo-European linguistics but also Assyriology, Semitic studies (the Amarna letters!), and several others. And Tlingit has a surprisingly visible online presence. (Can we have them for Civ7, please, Firaxis? Pretty please?)

the Mayan Kingdoms were mostly City States that vassalized weaker City states and coerced them in to their empire.

If we ever get vassalage back (in a third expansion or in Civ7), this would actually be a great ability to include, because it's very different from the Greek or Phoenician city-states, which were sometimes at war and sometimes in league but rarely in direct vassal-sovereign relationship, whereas this happened repeatedly in Mayan history. Just not in the form of the return of Civ5's city-state buying abilities. Those were annoying...

 

[Patine]

There seems to be an unwritten rule at Firaxis: European civs must be bland.

But a parallel rule seems to say that, if the Firaxis developers aren't careful, non-European civs become exaggerated and focused on several well-known tropes, far overshadowing, or even ignoring, any other richness which would easily enhance them in gameplay.

 

[Zaarin]

But a parallel rule seems to say that, if the Firaxis developers aren't careful, non-European civs become exaggerated and focused on several well-known tropes, far overshadowing, or even ignoring, any other richness which would easily enhance them in gameplay.

You mean like Korea becoming the eternal science civ even though that really only reflects the past ~20 years of their history? (Honestly Civ6 would have been a wonderful opportunity to wean the fans off that idea because science abilities could still be made a LUA for Seondeok or Sejong while the civ was made more culture- and/or faith-focused.)

 

[seasnake]

I'd far rather see Muisca than Colombia. And the very Civ's you mention above complete for, and overlap with, the United States as well, for that matter.

Yes, but the United States has had by far the greatest worldwide cultural impact of any modern nation and the greatest impact of any nation of the Western Hemisphere, including the tribes I listed. They’re in just because you can’t properly frame the development of civilization in the 19th and 20th centuries without America.

 

[Patine]

Yes, but the United States has had by far the greatest worldwide cultural impact of any modern nation and the greatest impact of any nation of the Western Hemisphere, including the tribes I listed. They’re in just because you can’t properly frame the development of civilization in the 19th and 20th centuries without America.

Except, they're very existence as a nation, is not as an independent civilization and cultural development with a long pedigree in it's own right, but, like Canada and Australia, formed as a British colonial endeavour.

 

[seasnake]

Yes but every nation comes from somewhere, almost all of them have roots in a forerunner culture or nation. I posted this elsewhere but basically civ-worthy to me is a ratio of antiquity/duration + cultural impact. If you’re ancient then its assumed your culture had more time to reverberate, if your a modern nation you need to have an outsized impact. So Persia, Judea and Phoenicia would have preference over Iran, Israel and Tunisia.

The United States is modern, but its cultural impact has been so distinct and lasting it qualifies. The only other modern nation that had an nearly the same impact is the USSR, but the U.S. has 150 years longer lifespan so far, so that also weighs in the U.S. favor.

 

[Lord Lakely]

If we ever get vassalage back (in a third expansion or in Civ7), this would actually be a great ability to include, because it's very different from the Greek or Phoenician city-states, which were sometimes at war and sometimes in league but rarely in direct vassal-sovereign relationship, whereas this happened repeatedly in Mayan history. Just not in the form of the return of Civ5's city-state buying abilities. Those were annoying...

Hmmm... Maybe gaining the Suzerain bonus of a City State after conquering that City State? Or "Can't annex city states, allying a city state blocks all other civs from sending envoys to that city state." I like either idea and it would suit the Mayans and their permanent league wars. Make it happen, Firaxis.

There seems to be an unwritten rule at Firaxis: European civs must be bland.

No excuses for Germany and England imo, which have a myriad of fun abilities (and I think Germany especially is well-designed in Civ 6 at least. The less said about England the better). Like I said, France is the hardest to find good abilities for because the things they are the most notable for (Hundred Year's War, Maginault Line, Grand Tour, the City of Light, early use of Cannons, Châteaux) transition into bonuses that are either boring or generic or both boring and generic. Their real life civilization was built on early war, early-to-mid engineering and mid-to-late game patronage of the arts - this is sort of how they work in Civ 6, but that always felt accidental to me (CdM became a good warmonger after they boosted DipVis, but that was mostly done to make the Mongols stronger, rather than CdM)

Okay, that makes more sense. Also I suspect a lot of the scholarship is in Spanish.

Precisely. Most of it hasn't been translated into English yet. I can read Spanish, but my active knowledge isn't good enough look up information I need (such as indigenous names for key concepts such as Pyramids and their bloodletting rites) AND THAT FRUSTRATES ME. (I could of course learn Spanish, but I hated my high school Spanish teacher, so nope.)

The discovery of Hittite was a huge milestone for a whole slew of disciplines, especially Indo-European linguistics but also Assyriology, Semitic studies (the Amarna letters!), and several others.

The Hittites mostly benefit from their location, actually. The Turks are very proud of their ancestry (um, ignore that the Hittites were Hurrians and the Turks are of Turkic origin) and most Turkish tourist websites have detailed, but succinct summaries on Hittite culture, which makes learning about them a blast. Here's a link to one such websites. (and I freaking hope they get added in Civ 7 as well. Not Civ 6 because most of their abilities have already been taken by other Civs (the reviled "+2 movement after a declaration of war" is a PERFECT ability for them), though Telipinu and Puduhepa are very interesting characters that deserve more attention than they've been getting)

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

As iconic as the Mayans are, it is immensely hard to find reliable information to design something better than a Doom Count civ and they deserve way better than that.

I, too, would be disappointed by a return of Apocalyptic Mayans™, but I think they have some great potential for faith-focus (faith from kills like Gorgo's culture?), science (the precision of their astronomical observations was extraordinary), and clear-cutting bonuses (hey, look, Firaxis: a civilization that destroyed itself because it mismanaged the environment--I wonder if that concept might sound familiar to anything you're working on right now). I'm not the most original at designing civs, but I think there's a lot of really interesting stuff that could be done with the Maya rather than just CALENDAR OF DOOOOOOM™.

Giving them a focus on both faith and science makes the most sense, instead of going the apocalypse route. Maybe that's why they delayed them for this expansion.
As for my design earlier I suggested giving holy site specialists the ability to produce science as well as faith when working and let great works of writing provide science once Recorded History is learned.
As for the leader bonus I would give Lady Six Sky combat bonuses towards city states who are allied with the other Civ you are at war with and faith from the defeated units and city states.
Also a pyramid improvement built on rainforests which provide extra faith next to a holy site (temple), science when built next to a mountain (observatory) with culture and tourism later at like flight.
I would hope they take this similar approach.

 

[Siptah]

The Hittites mostly benefit from their location, actually. The Turks are very proud of their ancestry (um, ignore that the Hittites were Hurrians and the Turks are of Turkic origin) and most Turkish tourist websites have detailed, but succinct summaries on Hittite culture, which makes learning about them a blast. Here's a link to one such websites. (and I freaking hope they get added in Civ 7 as well. Not Civ 6 because most of their abilities have already been taken by other Civs (the reviled "+2 movement after a declaration of war" is a PERFECT ability for them), though Telipinu and Puduhepa are very interesting characters that deserve more attention than they've been getting)

It's not just the Turks, which are indeed into the history of their land, as is the modern state. The Hittites and many other Anatolian sites benefit from having excavators that care about the general public. While many archeologists publish only very detailed, academic-oriented and expensive yearly/seasonal progress reports, the excavators in Anatolia publish easy to understand and affordable books on their specific sites for a broad audiences since decades with updates every few years. It's really a great phenomenon that I wish others would copy in that way (it sure exists for other places but the density for Anatolia seems unique). It's so much better (at least for me) than having the less careful and usually much more interpreting and agenda-driven journalists or historians publish on the sites or not having non-academical output at all. This may also be the reason why you can find so much great info on the net about the Hittites or Neolithic Anatolia.