Very much agree. While it would not hurt to add perhaps a few more civs into AoE2, it has to make sense in the medieval context that AoE2 incorporates.
Many of the civs the OP suggests could be or should be included in AoE2 are more suited for the Ancient World that AoE1 covers, or the Early Modern Era that AoE2 covers, based on historical timeline accuracies.
While the time period of 500 AD-1500 AD is considered by most historical scholars to be the actual “medieval ages” roughly speaking…there were some civilizations that had their own “medieval age” slightly before and slightly after that time period. For instance: the Mayan civilizations, which are represented in AoE2, technically had begun their Meso-American medieval age before the year 500 AD. Also: the Japanese samurai society which was VERY medievalist, did not end until the 1850s, when U.S. Commodore Matthew Perry forced the Tokugawa Shogunate to open their trade to the rest of the world, and forcibly put Japan kicking and screaming into the Early Modern era.
That said, even if we were to put forth some reasonable claims that some other African or Native American (Northern American or Southern American) peoples can have their own civs included…there is not enough architectural style to really justify their inclusion. And the simple reason is because many African and American peoples were primitive stone age peoples, and were mostly hunter-gathered societies (some had basic farming techniques developed, but not to the sophistication of the Incas, the Azteca, and the Mayan peoples, or the Malians and the Ethiopians.
Adding the Inuit/Eskimo peoples for instance in AoE2 would not work, because their “architecture” were literally igloos, or huts made of ice.
