[SaS TrooP]

"And yes we are aware Moral does not change but you SHOULD NOT be deviating far from 70. You don't want hordes of artificially low exp and mor troops otherwise you end up in a situation where they are so cheap you can buy far more of them than you should."

- this issue has been already solved updates ago, as you dramatically restrained the deviations of costs-to-exp what effectively removes any numbers-over-quality like approach. Personally I am not sure if I am fond of this decision, but I rarely play aything even attempting to be "balanced".

By the way, using the example of "67 over 70" is kinda more important than you think :P It is mostly about your units having increasing chance of reaching the mighty 75 of EXP what gives any "heavy" main weapon a 4th shot. If you play PBEMs, tank company with at least half crews with 75+ makes a difference of about ~6 additional shots per turn. If you play modern with accurate weapons, it potentially can kill at least a platoon more of enemy vehicle force. And it is just one turn!

Anyway, sometimes EXP and MOR might go up and down.

Dunno, take Poland for example, where I happen to be somewhat oriented :V
First number is EXP, second is MOR
40s - Poland should roughly be at 62/55. There was demobilization, but some experienced troops were left. Army was historically focused on fighting Cursed Soldiers as well as some UPA Ukrainians, so morale should be low, as it was effectively a civil war with Soviet unfluence.
50s - It should go down to about 55/60 level, as the nation was rapidly demobilizing and army got underfunded badly since economy was shifted on rebuilding.
60s - It should dramatically rise up, roughly to 67/70 I believe. Political situation was kinda stable and the military respected. It was well funded by that time and reached a mighty 400.000 troops on stand-by. It was golden era of People's Army.
70s - it should go down to about 64/64. Here the focus again shifted towards economy, it was getting kinda underfunded and political turmoil of 1970 turned the army much less popular (there was a massacre in Gdańsk conducted by the army)
80s - well Martial Law early on in 1981, rise of civil unrest. Developing economioc crisis, limited funding and restructurisation of many elite units diminished the army and its capabilities. So it should go down to literally like 60/60 at most. LWP was not a good and motivated fighting force really, and half of the army received only very limited training. For example my father spent 2 years as infantry conscript and for that time he fired 60 ROUNDS. It was actually me who taught him how to use AK rifle, like 20 years later :V
90s - no NATO, but restructurisation, first serios foreign missions. It should rise to about 63/68.
00s - Yugo and Kosovo experience kicks in with Iraq participation. NATO member, massive officer exchange and so on. Here we should observe the rise to about 68/75. The army recovered from its bad PR, too.
10s - Probably should stay kinda the same. This is where I would take an overall look. NATO does the trick, organization level is fine, but there is serious after-commie influence yet with good number of inconsistencies. Troops are ofthen underpaid, but the profession is respected.


Aaaand I could do it with pretty much nearly every single nation in our lovely OOB.

Aaand there are very weird occurences sometimes. For example, Bulgaria stays on low EXP/MOR even though they massively train with many western allies, while at the same time ANGOLA - generally failing to success at any campaign agaisnt he SADF - enjoys the EXP/MOR close to 70 both. Effectively a single angolan army squad remains better trained than eg. Norwegian troops.
There might be some subjective discussion, but pelase, let's be reasonable. Where is the logic behind that really?