Something I found strange: Out of the Baktrian homeland provinces, only Baktria itself allows the recruitment of the three basic Psiloi unit types. While it may be that Baktria was more densely settled by Hellenes than anywhere else east of Mesopotamia, it seems strange that there would be both A) significant numbers of "pure" hellenes of such low class as to only be able to serve as psiloi [given that the Greco-baktrians and their Indo-greek offshoots were a small, ethnically distinct ruling class lording it over non-hellenic people, one would expect that every hellene that was willing to settle in that distant land would be granted at least enough land to make them Klerouchoi Phalangitai] and B) the toxotai would at the same time stick to their weaker bow type while the locals are using composite bows. Is there any direct evidence of Baktria using hellenes in such a lowly role?

There are other strange things about recruiment in type I provinces:

Only Dayuan, Baktria and Aria allow recruitment of Pelastai and their heavier derivatives, the thureophoroi and thorakitai.

Full Pezhetairoi are only found in Baktria. Sogdia has no phalangites at all, while allowing Agema, prodromoi and Hippotoxotai, but no Kataphraktoi. Dayuan (right next to it) allows Kataphraktoi, but not prodromoi or hippotoxotai, and no phalangites better than Pantodapoi.

Kophen has no Indohellenikoi Peltastai, but the Indohellenic regular and noble hoplites are present.

More generally, I can see why you went with giving the Indian provinces a unique flavour, but it does seem strange that a faction cannot recruit all its factional troops in its homeland provinces when at maximum development. Perhaps Pantodapoi Phalangitai, at least, should be added to the Indian provinces. Unless you are planning an Indian version of the Machimoi.

If any of the (seeming) inconsistencies above are deliberate, I would like to know the justification for them.