And just see how subjective "well-remembered" is. My list of course would be very different from Menzies, and I'd debate strongly whether these last civs are needed for a 43 list. From the list above only, I'd say I'd put the Etruscans and Illyria above Scythia alone, but then that's my opinion. I personally don't get the appeal of Nubia, but my next on the list African civs (Ashante, Dahomey, etc. ..) would be from a totally different region of Africa. There were posters in here saying that Indonesia wouldn't work as a "blob" civ and we need Majapahit or Srijavaia (I botched that name, sorry) and not Indonesia.
See, very subjective topic...
The game is about Civilizations and not political entities, and Civs are going to me more of a blob than some particular dynasty's Empire. The Etruscans would to most come under Rome, rightly or wrongly, as would Illyria arguably, although the region might be worth consideration for a Civ in the future, though Europe is pretty much packed as it is. No doubt any new expansions would still cram some more in though.
Ashanti were also mentioned in my list as Ghana, we already know all too well that they'll go for more recognisable names, which is understandable. It also allows them to cover a more diverse time period than simply one iteration of a Civilization. Dahomy is an option, but particularly in a classical sense Nubia is something that needs to be considered. If I could only pick one of Mali, Ghana and Dahomy though, I couldn't look much further than Mali, to leave them out for the Songhai would be like leaving Germany out for Austria.
You make several good points. The interesting game play is very important, but I don't think it is independent of interesting cultures. For example, the Sioux were nomadic in nature, which is contrary to conventional civs. A creative mind could find a way to incorporate that as a truly unique and game altering civ. Perhaps they don't use cities, or mobile city equivalents and tile improvements. I'm not creative, but I'm sure some people on this forum could do wonders with them.
I also wasnt saying that they are more or less deserving than those cultures of southeast Asia either. My personal preference is to increase the representation of both. All I was saying is that people said America was OVER represented, and I just could not believe that at all.
The Huns and Mongols were nomads, yet they seemingly didn't feel the need to include it in their mechanics. There are also plenty of better options for nomads still.
I do not think North America (or the New World in general) is overrepresented. Fixaris had a good idea with the Pueblo and it is very unfortunate that it didn't work out. It is likely that they chose therefore the Shoshone as there might not have been enough time to work out an idea like you suggested for the Sioux.
Europe is a little crowded now (though thats a fun thing when it comes to EU TSL maps), especially compared to (sub-Sahara)Africa. But you could see it on the positive side that almost all big players in Europe have been represented in the game now, so if a new expansion comes there's a lot more room for civs from other parts of the world.
Not to be cynical, but if they did have another expansion, they'd still cram it with European civs. You'd probably get Belgium, Serbia, Hungary and Italy or something like that. I doubt they'd ever have less than a third of new civs non-European.