The best way to let a game die is to stop supporting it and not giving new content. Is that what you want?
My civ suggestion are in the same vein as some of the latest civ boni. If you don’t like it, that’s not my problem, it’s yours with the devs.
What does make you think so? I see civ request threads everywhere, on Reddit, Steam, here as well as on AOEZone (albeit an old one).
Support needed : Game performance
Not needed: New events, new civs, new superficial stuff that make people play the game once a month despite ■■■ performance to keep the xbow live subscription rolling. But if the core of the game is rotten, even those things cant pretend that there is a living game there and the support is more than just selling the last remains of the corpse.
On this side of the world we call it “tribal gatherings”, most ethnic groups in America do, even today.
The kingdom of Portugal was founded in 1139
That is why the Teutons exist in AoE2
Sundjata founded the Mali Empire, and the Huns, which I reiterate is a bad reference, have historical records from the hand of European civilizations such as the Roman.
Stop playing the game if you don’t like it anymore. Support, which means also game performance improvements, isn’t free.
In another thread you said you were Polish asking for a Polish civ. So what are you, native or polish?
He is both. It’s a bit complicated. You should ask him himself for details 11
XVI is the correct Roman numeral
I’m a mutt of many ethnicities.
Yes, I already corrected it; I had a slip.
Interesting. I have Spanish, Italian, Chinese, British, Berber and probably German ancestry. Curiously, so far I have not found Inca ancestors 
(Although my ex-girlfriend was 90% Quechua, 5% Amazonian and 5% Native North American, or at least that was the result of a DNA test
Koreans, Burmese, Aztecs and Spanish have their campaigns in the 16th century. Burmese and Aztecs reached their zenith in the 16th century. Noryang Battle was in 1598 so it makes sense to add Mapuche. Araucans had horses in 1553 and learnt battle formations unlike other natives.
So the 5 nomadic civs, Bulgarians and Magyars partly
Mapuche(and Muisca) have the most history recorded of any Native Civs that aren’t in the game.
I know you didn’t quote me but:
Koreans, Burmese, Aztecs and Spanish have centuries of recorded history before those campaigns, they were regional powers and also the Spanish have the Cid campaign. (And they were also empires or kingdoms with governmental organization)
It is a lie that the Mapuches had cavalry battle formations, especially in the 16th century. Mapuche tactics were mainly guerrilla and hiding in the woods, they only attacked when the numbers were very in their favor. The only battle in which there is a record of using large-scale cavalry was at the Battle of La Albarrada (and one of the few Mapuche pitched battles) and the result was disastrous.
which?
Error, there is much more information recorded from other American civilizations (various kingdoms and empires included). The Mapuches have been the ones who have had the most publicity around here, I suppose it is by users who belong to the country where the Mapuches live.
" By 1570 they had learned the use of infantry formations, similar to the Spanish Tercio, that allowed them to defeat Spanish cavalry in the open field."
Tatars, Huns, Mongols, Cumans, Turks
Which?
Bibliographic source?
By the way: It is not a cavalry battle formation, and you mean that in 1570 they just learned to perform formations?
All these civilizations had a government organization and traded in gold, among many other things.
The list is immense, but I leave you the reference of EU 4
I also leave you the list of Indigenous Peoples belonging to Central and South America separated by current countries.
https://mtci.bvsalud.org/listado-de-pueblos-indigenas-de-los-paises-de-america-latina/
I asked for an exact example. We never heard of the Otomi Empire.
Neither Cumans or Huns.
I meant Infantry battle formations.
It is that they have not been advertised here … But it does not mean that they have not existed.
Ehm … I really want to tell you a lot of things, but preferably I’ll just ask you one question:
What do you think these civilizations looted when they razed cities?
OK
And the bibliographic source?
Page 360
I’m still asking for an exact civ, which had more history recorded, was a major powers, had dozens of known important people, had many wars recorded.
The Battle of Purén, where 100 or 200 Spaniards went to attack 1500 Mapuches.
So, is this proof that the Mapuches learned to carry out military infantry formations in 1570?
Do you know the destruction of the 6 cities by the Shuar, the Chichimeca 300-year war, the Yaqui who stopped the Spanish army of Hernán Cortés and who also fought against the Mexicans and the USA? To the Charrúa who were in contact with both the Portuguese and Spanish Empires, the Guaraní Jesuit army or the Tupí?
With all due respect, you must open your borders. Do not lock yourself in nationalistic passions. Regards.
What do the Charrua, Tupi, Shuar and Yaqui correspond to based on the following to be more important than the Araucans?
And that’s why I said from the beginning:
Some of these civilizations do not fit in AOE2, however I would like to see them in AoE 3 
