User avatar
lodilefty
Posts: 7578
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 3:27 pm
Location: Finger Lakes, NY GMT -5 US Eastern

Whites recognize independance options? Help us help you!

Sun Jul 29, 2012 2:45 pm

This set of options confuses me, probably because I am fairly clueless about the historical context...

A huge issue is the AI killing it's NM by taking these options.

Current Options:

1. Whites recognize the right of others to be independant:
Starting December 1918
Must have 20 EP to activate the option
+1 NM every turn that the option is NOT taken.
If selected, immediate -30 NM, and options for Balts, Finns, Ukraine, Caucasus and appearance of Yudenich Army become possible.

2. Each of the "Join war" options cost Southern Whites different amounts, and generally unlock troops, unblock country, and may add troops:
All may be available starting December 1918: different conditions for Option "ON" for each...

the cost to Southern Whites is:
Balts: -5EP, -100 Money, -5 NM
Finns: -5EP, -100 Money, -20NM
Yudenich Army: -5EP, -150 or -100 Money, -5NM or 0 NM [variables depend on location, territory control status]
Ukraine: -10EP, -5NM
Caucasus: -5EP, -80Money, -10 NM


So help me!
WHY would the mere act of announcing that others may also be free REDUCE White NM?????
WHY would the entry of Allies reduce Whites NM?????

Seems backwards!

Once we sort this out so that I understand the context, I can properly adjust what needs adjusting [if anything] and THEN adjust the AI choices to avoid "AI Suicide"...
Always ask yourself: "Am I part of the Solution?" If you aren't, then you are part of the Problem!
[CENTER][/CENTER]
[CENTER]Visit AGEWiki - your increasingly comprehensive source for information about AGE games[/CENTER]

[CENTER]Rules for new members[/CENTER]
[CENTER]Forum Rules[/CENTER]

[CENTER]Help desk: support@slitherine.co.uk[/CENTER]

User avatar
le Anders
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 9:46 pm

Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:01 pm

lodilefty wrote:
So help me!
WHY would the mere act of announcing that others may also be free REDUCE White NM?????
WHY would the entry of Allies reduce Whites NM?????

Seems backwards!

1. In my capacity as a historian, my guesstimate is that the idea is that the Whites fights to preserve/restore Imperial Russia. The territory of that empire includes the territory they just accepted as lost forever through that decision. That would annoy quite a few imperialists and people with financial interests in recovering those territories. Like France recognizing the independence of Bretagne... or the UK recognizing the independence of Scotland.

2. The Whites are, in some regards, nationalists. It's a big blow to national pride to have to accept or ask for help from foreign devils which used to be their subjects.

IMO, the NM penalty might be a bit too high, but it still needs to cost some NM. It could also cost some Victory points.

User avatar
PhilThib
Posts: 13705
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2005 5:21 pm
Location: Meylan (France)

Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:21 pm

le Anders wrote:1. In my capacity as a historian, my guesstimate is that the idea is that the Whites fights to preserve/restore Imperial Russia. The territory of that empire includes the territory they just accepted as lost forever through that decision. That would annoy quite a few imperialists and people with financial interests in recovering those territories. Like France recognizing the independence of Bretagne... or the UK recognizing the independence of Scotland.

2. The Whites are, in some regards, nationalists. It's a big blow to national pride to have to accept or ask for help from foreign devils which used to be their subjects.

IMO, the NM penalty might be a bit too high, but it still needs to cost some NM. It could also cost some Victory points.


That was exactly the point of Seb, the original designer. The initial idea was that the original historical Whites would never have taken this decision, as this was like selling the family's jewels...unacceptable, and not a single inch in their mind...although opinion would (and did) change when the situation become too dire...

Now I would tend to adjust this 'historical' decision with the interest of gameplay, and we could do the following

First Case: White NM is high

* For the player, I would keep the options as they are now, and I would make them cost much more in EP's (double) and VPs (at least 50 loss)
* For the AI, I would reduce the possibility she takes the option to a very little % (5?), or even to nil when some conditions are met (like very high NM, key objectives controlled)...why renege on principles when winning? :confused:

Second Case: White NM is low
Clearly, the whites are on a losing trend. So we are in a situation where we face a "all is lost, so let's save what can be saved..." kind of analysis...

* For the player, I would keep the options, and REDUCE the NM cost by at least half, BUT would make them cost much much more in VPs (may be -50 to -200 VP each)
* For the AI, I would leave the possibility that she takes the option as it is now, and make here pay like the player

Special Cases
I would see a few of them...

* Finns: don't offer the option for them to join before 1919 or even 1920....they had their own civil war to win, and that was a bloody affair...they felt no real interest in intervention once they had won...and in all cases, make the possibility rather slim. May be allow it ONLY if the Balts have been selected before (the Finns did send support to the baltics)

* Ukraine: recognizing their independence would be like removing 2 limbs for the whites...I would not allow it at least before full German evacuation, and even not before the Reds try to invade her...so at the earliest Mid 1919...

* Yudenich: I would make it slightly less costly, but not allow it before 1919 too
Image

User avatar
le Anders
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 9:46 pm

Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:30 pm

PhilThib wrote:* Ukraine: recognizing their independence would be like removing 2 limbs for the whites...I would not allow it at least before full German evacuation, and even not before the Reds try to invade her...so at the earliest Mid 1919...

AFAIK, the "recognize Independence" option isn't available until the Germans are out anyway.

* Yudenich: I would make it slightly less costly, but not allow it before 1919 too

What is "Yudenich"?

Yorick
Conscript
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 1:28 am

Sun Jul 29, 2012 4:49 pm

I think a good way to make the option viable for the losing White player would be to imitate how the Fatal Years mod balanced the issue: make recognizing independence have only a fairly small NM cost initially, followed by periodical big NM hits, so that the Whites need to achieve a decisive victory with their new forces as soon as possible before the White cause crumbles down.

A southern white player with high NM should either have Recognize Independence blocked or have to pay a much bigger cost for it.

Baris
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1914
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:50 pm

Sun Jul 29, 2012 8:11 pm

I haven't seen Yudenich option. Fatal years aproach is good.

User avatar
Xaloc
General of the Army
Posts: 610
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:14 pm
Location: Majorca

Sun Jul 29, 2012 10:51 pm

I haven't played FY, so I don't know how the mod handles the issue exactly, apart from what is explained here, but the proposal by PhilThib sounds OK for me.
By the way, which is the possibility the AI take the option now?

User avatar
Old Fenrir
Sergeant
Posts: 65
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 3:59 am
Location: Moscow

Mon Jul 30, 2012 3:50 am

An interesting theme. I am writing a small treatise on it.

User avatar
Pat "Stonewall" Cleburne
General of the Army
Posts: 639
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Kentucky

Mon Jul 30, 2012 2:21 pm

I like Philtibs idea. Also add in some $ cost or desertions to the volunteer army to represent the hardcore elite and officers getting pissed off. Denikin always refused to consider independence options. Maybe remove him from the game if selected?

User avatar
le Anders
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 9:46 pm

Mon Jul 30, 2012 4:07 pm

Pat "Stonewall" Cleburne wrote:I like Philtibs idea. Also add in some $ cost or desertions to the volunteer army to represent the hardcore elite and officers getting pissed off. Denikin always refused to consider independence options. Maybe remove him from the game if selected?

That actually sounds like a good idea. However, adding a % chance of Denikin resigning would probably make a lot of White-players happier than removing him outright.

User avatar
lodilefty
Posts: 7578
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 3:27 pm
Location: Finger Lakes, NY GMT -5 US Eastern

Mon Jul 30, 2012 4:28 pm

First revised version almost ready:



  • Revised conditions for the “Whites Recognize Independance” options
    • Recognition event only after completion of German withdrawal
    • Costs of all “Join” options generally increase [more VP, more EP]
    • Finns can only join after start of 1920 AND only if the Balts have already joined
    • Generally, the AI will only choose the options if losing the war [NM low, NM lower than RED] and with low probability
    • The AI has a 1% chance to choose the initial recognition event even if winning [NM>125 AND NM>RED]

Cost detail as of July 30:

Recognize others: 30NM, 15EP, 50VP === Gain 1NM per turn if not chosen
Balts: 10NM, 10EP, 100 Money, 50VP
Finns: Only after Balts are chosem, only after 1/1/1920, 20NM, 10EP, 100 Money, 50VP
Ukraine: 10NM, 10 EP, 75 VP === Lose 1 NM per turn while in effect
Break UKR Alliance: 10EP === 1 time gain of 1 NM
Caucasus: 10NM, 10EP, 80 Money, 50VP

Note: the Yudenich Army [aka Northern Army] remains unchanged, as it doesn't really depend on the Recognition of Independance, but rather interacts with the other options only in terms of the arrival location. It only activates after June 1, 1919, and is only available if the REDS do not own [all of] Riga, Talinin and Kaunas regions. The cost to NM is negligble. The AI has a high probability to select the option.

These changes will be in the next beta release [likely tomorrow...].
We need testing on them before we tweak or change any other items....

Thank you for the inputs! Stay tuned!

Tech/Modder note: The options are now using some new code that actively "reads" the option entry to create the tooltip costs info! No more "The tooltip differs from the Actual costs" or "The actual cost differes from the conditions tested".
Yay! :p ompom:
Always ask yourself: "Am I part of the Solution?" If you aren't, then you are part of the Problem!
[CENTER][/CENTER]

[CENTER]Visit AGEWiki - your increasingly comprehensive source for information about AGE games[/CENTER]



[CENTER]Rules for new members[/CENTER]

[CENTER]Forum Rules[/CENTER]



[CENTER]Help desk: support@slitherine.co.uk[/CENTER]

DarkGarry
Lieutenant
Posts: 106
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 9:16 pm

Tue Jul 31, 2012 4:49 am

Good points, I generally agree - good revision. Few notes:
1. If Whites does not select Independence +1 NM every turn is TOO MUCH. They are getting tons of NM after Germans retreat from Rostov, Odessa and Sevastopol. +1 NM per year for every option sounds more fair I think (approximately as it is now)

I suggest to change Join Anarchist conditions for Red as well. Historically it happened and the price for cooperation with Reds was not that high. Anarchists were instested in Red support to get from them weapon and ammunition and of course military help against Whites.

1. I suggest make condition for Anarchists to join - 5 NM onece and some EP(+VP may be). May be 1 supply per turn(like historically). Remove - 1 NM per turn condition, it is too heavy!

2. If independence of Ukraine recognized - Anarchists join Red side for free.

3. If anyone attack anarchists or take their ground they join Red side for free.

DarkGarry
Lieutenant
Posts: 106
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 9:16 pm

Other events

Tue Jul 31, 2012 5:00 am

Other events -

1. I suggest allow Recruit Internationalists (elite troops) once per year.

2. Remove trigger to allow Red Verdun - make it available anytime, but building should take longer - it is not quick to fortify city, like 1-2 months sounds fair.

3. Some new event like Propaganda campaign for both RED and WHITE to allow converting VPs into NM(VPs+EPs+money), otherwise what VPs are used for? Promotions does not consume even 10%. Make it available couple times per year. That is a way to recover part of NM losses from Requisitions and Conscriptions, it will make war last longer (more fun!!!).

User avatar
Old Fenrir
Sergeant
Posts: 65
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 3:59 am
Location: Moscow

Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:52 am

Wrote this. I hope it will be possible to read it. :)

In general, as far as I know, the situation with the recognition of national borderlands independence was approximately as follows.

a)
To begin with, we should to see, who formed the core of the White movement (not counting the Cossacks). Whites was a fairly diverse and friable confederation, consisting of people of very different political orientation: from the Socialist-Revolutionaries and liberal republicans to monarchists and people completely apolitical, but who hates Bolsheviks regime.

One of the very few things uniting them, other than dislike of the Bolshevik regime and the desire to destroy it, was the fact that most of them were a)Russians and b)the patriots and nationalists. Well, more or less. The most popular slogan of the White movement - "For the united and undivided Russia!" And we are not talking about the handful of imperialists, or people with financial interests in the territories torn away, but about the majority of people who formed the backbone of the White armies - officers and volunteers from the youth of the educated strata of the population . Who would have perceived such a move by their leaders (recognition of independence of new national states) as a betrayal of national interests.

Again, the point here is not that acceptance of aid of aliens is offended national pride (Whites willingly and without any moral suffering accepted aid of Germans, the Entente powers, ethnic forces - the same Estonians, Ossetians, Circassians, Poles, etc.). The problem is, that the selling the Motherland - it is not good. And Baltics, Caucasus, Ukraine, etc. (Poland and Finland - some special case, see below) was perceived by significant part of the Whites as an integral part of their Motherland - Russia.

b)
Further, it must be said that the attitude to the recognition of the independence of the various national state formations, formed in 1918 and early 1919 on the outskirts of the former Empire among the Russian educated classes, who formed core of the White movement, was various.

The attitude to the independence of Poland in its ethnic boundaries was generally calm, even indifferent. Russian society of the early 20th century, partly sympathized with the idea of Polish independence from purely altruistic reasons (As it may sound funny, but it's true. In addition, Poland had a long tradition of statehood.), partly considered Poland as alien formation, rather casually included in the Russian state, the possession of which brings more problems than good.

Finland had a long tradition of autonomy within the Russian Empire (why Alexander I needed to give it to her - I do not know, but nevertheless it happened as it happened). Accordingly, her independence did not cause particularly strong protest.

Attempts to tear away from Russia the other territories were definitely perceived as evil.

c)
Further, it must be said that "young democracies" were by no means sweet, kind, white and fluffy. It was quite savage and insolent young nationalist regimes that do not suffered from excessive modesty, love for peace, tolerance, but often suffered from overestimation of their strength and have desired under the guise of the Civil War cut off a piece of the former metropolis.

Finland had the desire to create a "Greater Finland", tearing off Karelia from Russia. Poland had a great desire to get hold of Belarus, Ukraine and Lithuania, and it saw herself as a new regional superpower. Estonia had the plans on the Pskov region. Georgia - on the Sochi and Abkhazia regions.

Such desires, naturally, were not greeted with sympathy by the Russian national center which was represented by the Whites.
It should be added, that the most of new states has pursued a policy of national oppression of the Russian population. Which turning sometimes into ethnic cleansings. For example, in Finland in the April-May 1918 in the first days after victory of the White Finns, they have exterminated more than a thousand of Russian civilian people (including women and children), most of which had not participated in the conflict on the side of the Reds and were tuned quite friendly. Purely on the basis of nationality. All of this was known to the Whites, and it also does not facilitated co-operation.

d)
Last, but not least. It worth saying also, that in the military sense (with the exception of Poland and, to some extent, Finland) new national states did not constitute a serious force. And active participation in combat operations of most of them, even in the case of formal declaration of war to Reds, was more than doubtful. Separatists in any case by no means have been interested in the active assistance to the one centrists against the other centrists. They were interested in how to get at minimum cost maximum concessions not care from what side. As well as in that the winner in the struggle between the two centrist factions was maximally weakened.

In fact, it was about to get for a big price a weak and unreliable allies.

As a result:
e)
The situation with the joint performance against the Bolsheviks, has evolved respectively. In the range from the armed confrontation between the Whites and a new national states (e.g. UNR, Georgia) to the temporary cooperation against a common enemy (e.g. ZUNR, Estonia).
The independence of Poland and Finland have been recognized by Whites. But this had nothing to do to cooperation against the Reds, since Finns wanted for such cooperation the Karelia, and the Poles - half of the European part of Russia. With a bit predictable result.

On recognition of the independence of others, even in times of catastrophic failures of the Whites, there simply had no serious conversation. Although, the possibility of autonomy was not denied. Here Whites simply have played for time, and in response to the demands of the Allies, who wanted to combine pleasure with business (with one hand - to consolidate the anti-Bolshevik forces, on the other - to chop from Russia plenty of small “bantustans”, controlled by them) - have got off with platitudes. When the British all the same managed to make Yudenich recognize the independence of Estonia, Yudenich "off the record," said, " We will take Petrograd, and then we will turn to the Tallinn." While Kolchak, as Supreme Ruler of Russia, refused to recognize the independence of Estonia at all.

It should be noted, that the Reds in this matter were much more flexible. They have originally proclaimed the right of nations to self-determination. And as true internationalists, they were not shy about handing sovereignties to the right and to the left, when it was dictated by the "revolutionary necessity". Then, after a while, when "the revolutionary necessity" disappeared, and instead it appeared "the revolutionary possibility", in one or another independent country suddenly happened [s]orange[/s]... [s]rose[/s]... i.e. socialist revolution. At the request of the working people, in order to stabilize the situation and prevent a humanitarian catastrophe, a peacekeeping contingent of the Red Army entered, and the proper People's Government coming to power. And again, at the request of the working people, the country is integrated into the Soviet Union.

[hr][/hr]
About the implementation of all this in the game.

Historically, such a variant of action was virtually impossible for moral reasons for the leaders of the Whites. And it would have very painful consequences with a "technical" point of view - it would have caused strong discontent in the army and the splash of the Cossack and others separatism. I think a big penalty in NM, simulating these effectsis, is quite justified.
But the fact, that to the player is given such an opportunity - it is, probably, right thing. But here it is very desirable, that the balance made this event a last straw for which falling Whites can clutch for salvation, but not a thick log, which will almost certainly break the back of Reds.

From my point of view, version of this events from Philippe Thibaut appears preferred.

The only things I would suggest:
1. Troops of national formations (except Finns in Karelia and Poles everywhere) should receive penalties, when acts outside of their native regions. Like the Cossacks, but even greater.
2. Remove the first general event with recognition of the abstract independence of all. And distribute the cost of it in NM on the "local" events of entry into the war of national subfactions. Because:
a) Recognition of independence and joining the war on the side of Whites of Finland and the Transcaucasian republics, for example, - things did not somehow connected to each other.
b) In this case, the fact of entry into the war of one or another subfaction is primary. The recognition of the independence and/or territorial concessions - no more than a necessary condition for this.
3. From the perspective of historical accuracy, right to take such a decision should have Siberian Whites (Kolchak as Supreme Ruler of Russia). In the case of defeat of Siberian Whites (NM fall below a certain value), the supreme power goes to Denikin, and the right to make such decisions - to the player of the Southern Whites. From the perspective of gameplay, in order to decision took effect, the second faction of Whites should confirm the decision.
4. When making a decision on the granting independence to one or the other country, the decline of NM should affect not only the White faction, whose leader makes a decision, but also the second White faction too. But in a smaller (e.g., two times smaller) volume. Costs in EP and victory points is only up the faction, whose leader makes a decision.

p.s.
PhilThib wrote: * Finns: don't offer the option for them to join before 1919 or even 1920....they had their own civil war to win, and that was a bloody affair...they felt no real interest in intervention once they had won...and in all cases, make the possibility rather slim. May be allow it ONLY if the Balts have been selected before (the Finns did send support to the baltics)

As far as I know, the civil war was ended in Finland in May 1918. So, in Summer of 1919 the Finns are quite ready to intervene. And they have a very definite interest for this - Karelia. By the way, in reality, in the 1919 - 1921 just occurred Finnish intervention and attempts to seize Karelia.

p.p.s.
On the rights of offtop. From the perspective of historical accuracy, Poland in the main line of campaigns should be the fourth separate faction in the game (Poland is large enough for that), managed either by particular human player or by AI. But not by White player as now. Since with her appetites (as mentioned above), Poland in any case could not be an ally of either Whites or Reds. The Poland's could become an interesting game faction with the opportunity to play on the struggle of Whites and Reds and come out from the Russian Civil War as the actual winner. Pushing back to second place the Red or White Russia and becoming a regional superpower. By the way, I think, this feature would ensure completely wild popularity of the game in Poland. :D

User avatar
lodilefty
Posts: 7578
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 3:27 pm
Location: Finger Lakes, NY GMT -5 US Eastern

Tue Jul 31, 2012 12:13 pm

Thanks for the inputs and ideas!

Keep in mind, thhe [game support] objective for now is fix bugs that just don't work or seriously imbalance the game.
Making changes willl be slow, as play-test is needed before changinging too much....

Many interesting modding ideas here!
Always ask yourself: "Am I part of the Solution?" If you aren't, then you are part of the Problem!
[CENTER][/CENTER]

[CENTER]Visit AGEWiki - your increasingly comprehensive source for information about AGE games[/CENTER]



[CENTER]Rules for new members[/CENTER]

[CENTER]Forum Rules[/CENTER]



[CENTER]Help desk: support@slitherine.co.uk[/CENTER]

User avatar
Carnium
Posts: 2115
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 2:08 pm
Location: Slovenia

Tue Jul 31, 2012 1:07 pm

A short term solution would be that Whites have no option to recognize independance(s) when/if they are winning. As it was already said this option was only a last ditch solution for the Whites.

Baris
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1914
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:50 pm

Tue Jul 31, 2012 1:44 pm

I think Southern whites can not win without alliances even it will be hard against AI.

Old solution was also satisfactory. Even versus AI from playing through all beta patches , Southern whites were a challange as the best NM they can get 60-70 with only balts alliance in 1919. Second Alliance should hamper Southern whites military operations badly.
5 more EP requirement and -50 VP is ok but I think especially Siberians need slight nerf about their regional policies.

DarkGarry
Lieutenant
Posts: 106
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 9:16 pm

Tue Jul 31, 2012 1:59 pm

Baris wrote:I think Southern whites can not win without alliances even it will be hard against AI.

Old solution was also satisfactory. Even versus AI from playing through all beta patches , Southern whites were a challange as the best NM they can get 60-70 with only balts alliance in 1919. Second Alliance should hamper Southern whites military operations badly.
5 more EP requirement and -50 VP is ok but I think especially Siberians need slight nerf about their regional policies.


I doubt. Before, I was able to beat AI with left hand and closed eyes. It just poorly recruit and defend

Baris
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1914
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:50 pm

Tue Jul 31, 2012 2:59 pm

Good for you. Red recruitment not bad in latest betas. In my game as SWhites, Reds declare war on balts and form 80k men and defeated my baltic+northwhites army about the same size. At that time seperate Red brigades were invading other baltic regions. Where as AI is not so much focused on Siberians and could not properly defend that front against human player. Against AI versus AI, Reds much better against Siberians from previous patches.

DarkGarry
Lieutenant
Posts: 106
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 9:16 pm

Tue Jul 31, 2012 5:26 pm

In previous patch played Drang campaign for German side - a German Army went route Minsk-Smolensk-Viazma-Moscow and met only garnisons on it's way. AI algorithm just poor - you should not attack it, just maneuver and move forward. I'll recheck latest patches if it better.

User avatar
ERISS
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 2118
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 10:25 am
Location: France

Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:26 pm

DarkGarry wrote:I suggest to change Join Anarchist conditions for Red as well. Historically it happened and the price for cooperation with Reds was not that high. Anarchists were instested in Red support to get from them weapon and ammunition and of course military help against Whites.

1. I suggest make condition for Anarchists to join - 5 NM onece and some EP(+VP may be). May be 1 supply per turn(like historically). Remove - 1 NM per turn condition, it is too heavy!

Red making allying treaty with anarchists is political failure (bolshevist is the only proletarian party..), but it pleased the red soldiers as red and black soldiers were brothers, they drink together (so Trotsky had to slander with huge propaganda to brake the treaty). So Red allying with Ana should cost mostly VP, money, some EP, and no NM, then some EP and few money per turn.

User avatar
Pat "Stonewall" Cleburne
General of the Army
Posts: 639
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Kentucky

Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:50 pm

30 NM sounds a bit high for the initial recognize event. 30 + 20-30 more for the actual countries. How is a losing white player supposed to use these? And you lose the NM/turn gain. Less NM and more EP cost would make more sense to me. Caucasas and Ukraine are the 2 weakest options. Lower their EP/NM cost some.

Return to “Help to improve RUS”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests