Suggestions for revision of Russian army lists

[Zoidfarb]

I agree about the lack of mention of light cavalry in Poland, what little is known of the period is armored cavalry and shield bearers. Another account by Ibrahim bin Jakub notes the importance of the Druzhina during his travels there in the late 900's, he seems to have been impressed by this cavalry. The Anglo-Danish king Cnut also received a contingent of Polish mounted troops from his uncle Boleslaw a few years later. I think these few facts support the idea that the main and best troops were armoured cavalry.

Oh for certain, these were "retinue" troops. Armored superior cavalry in the game's terms.

Since these countries are on the outskirts of European civilization then giving them a lower armour rating (partially armoured) would reflect the difficulty to obtain better equipment in these areas.

I would disagree on this, because the technology (chainmail) was exactly the same, the shields were similar kite-shaped cavalry shields as those used by the Normans, French, Serbians, Byzantines etc. So I see no reason to lower the armor rating of the actual mounted troops. If you got to be a member of the mounted retinue, you would have this sort of kit. If you couldn't afford it, then you would not be part of the retinue to begin with.

And here is where we reach a certain issue related to the game's "point-=based-army-model". The reality was that the Polish drużynnik had the same armor as his German counterpart, but the German Emperor was able to field larger armies with larger contingents, (predominately due to the dependence on church-land-contingents).

Bolesław Chrobry's wars against Emperor Henry II can be summarized as smaller but faster and more nimble Polish armies maneuvering around the much larger and slower main German force, with both sides trying to "game" the local Lusatian and Meisssen power players as well as the pagan tribes to the north.

So it seems the total cavalry percentage was larger in the Polish armies than in German ones, but the total numbers were higher among the Germans. So if both main armies would hypothetically meet at a pitched battle, the German knights would end up outnumbering the Polish cavalry, even though the ratio of cavalrymen-to-footmen would be higher among the Poles.
...which is not something that can be well simulated in FOG:M "points-based-system".

Parts of Scandinavia should be similarly considered.

Scandinavia was poorer than either Polish or German lands. Which was one of the reasons why Scandinavian armies appeared to have less cavalry and later on less armored footmen than Polish, German or Bohemian armies.

So my argument will be that German armies of that era were more similar to Polish ones, than either was to Scandinavian armies.

Which isn't that surprising once you consider the economic realities. The German and Polish lands are both part of the same north European plain, while Scandinavia is much more rugged, composed of mostly poor post-glacial soils.

I agree 100%. I think Eastern European heavy cavalry should be considered shock cavalry and be considered "knights" for gameplay.
The suggestion of lower armour values was a compromise.