This may seem silly, but many nations just are not worth playing... unless you have a latent strain of masochism. Greece, Incaland, and Aztecland are three nations I consider irrelevant to gameplay. No nation bearing the name of Greece existed prior to the 19th century. Even the current leaderhead of what is clearly intended to be Classical Greece (remember that the UU is the Hoplite, not the Phalanx) is a Macedonian. Up until the Unificiation, Greece was a patchwork of city states: in civ terms, a barbarian nation. If you want to call it Macedonia or the Byzantine Empire or the Ottoman Empire, fine, good, excellent. But a Greek nation starting around 2200BC with Athens as its capital is simply silly. The Incas and the Aztecs are interesting nations, with exotic, little understood cultures and mysterious religious beliefs. They occupy otherwise empty areas of the map. They, much like Babylon, Sumeria, Israel, Korea, and the Zulu would be better represented as barbarian states. While culturally important to the modern archeologist (I have committed wordicide!), their main claim to fame is their conquest by another, more violent power: Spain. All three of these nations suck up processor power in order to represent what are, essentially, minor powers that disappeared from the map not long after they ran up against some nation or other. I'm too drunk to think up a better way of phrasing it than that, so pretend I wrote something that sounds better. I would suggest the inclusion of the Scandinavians, and perhaps the Turks, if these nations were removed... but honestly, I think it would be difficult to find more nations worth putting in, regardless of how beloved they are.