What's your feeling towards new civs? - Poll results!

Hi all! After a short break I wanted to analyze the results of the poll I proposed last week. First of all, I got 376 votes, which I feel it's a small sample for such a big community. Pity, I would've liked to see many more people voting. Second, I know the poll was a bit biased, because the community's concern is more about a) bugs and game issues and b) global civ balance - new civs not being OP or underwhelming, and I bypassed those important worrisome issues.

So, assuming that, civs are well balanced, game issues are fixed and any new civ doesn't feature strange techs for AoE2:

- 27,1% of the voters are against any new civ. I won't enter in discussion about the reasons (if they have) to reject any new civs, but there's a portion of the community who is against new civs. I'm a new civ lover, but I must admit that, especially if unfair balance + strange techs and bonuses (like those for Burgs and Sicilians) + bugs + bad pathing... happen, there's a lot to think assertively about new civ rejecters.

- 72,9% of the votes were pro new civs.

- 10,6% agree with any new civ, even stretching historical accuracy, even including tribes or civs without stone masonry. That means that 1/10 wants 100 AoE2 civs. I must admit I like to create new civs, I even have presented a 23 civ concept series. But, tbh with myself, North American civs (never forget that Puebloans had a great stone masonry), Tongans and maybe even Mapuches (there is few information about them, and I'm 70% sure that they didn't have stone masonry, but they defeated the Incan army, so that means a structured society, and they still exist today and fight for their rights) shouldn't have a place in actual AoE2.

- 27,4% of the votes would add a couple of expansions (2-3 civs each), maybe representing Africa and Asia. +100 people mean as many opinions. In my civ concepts, we had for Africa Yorubas, Kanembu, Somalis, Nubians and Bantus, and for Asia Georgians, Songs, Afghans, Thais, Bengalis and Nepalese (though neither Armenians nor Indian split or more Steppe civs like Uyghurs). I think it's a fair historical success to include any of these in new expansions, because of the under-representation of these areas.

- 34,9% of the votes (me among them) agree that IF BALANCE IS FINE, any historically accurate civ should be included in AoE2, and don't mind about Europe being "over-represented" if all identities are included. I feel this path would lead to many more strategies, and more bonuses that could give still more intensity to this wonderful game.

As always, Reddit is a place for discussion. So, any opinion is welcome.

Thank you very much for your votes, and I'll start working on new content for the community.