1. I am against balancing the map in the way it is proposed. I understand that those who have spoken here are simply worshipping angels, which is fundamentally wrong. For example, on popular map templates – Jebus, HL+U – the number of such structures may not have any significant meaning. If a player finds 6 conservatories on their starting location, that is not a reason to be overjoyed, thinking that victory is guaranteed. As for balancing the skirmish map, I am skeptical about the possibility of balancing it in principle.

2. I am against increasing the experience gained by computer players (I haven't heard any convincing arguments in favor of this yet). I played several games with 200% HL+U, and I didn't notice any particularly serious problems. The lack of experience will lead to the computer players becoming like plush toys, busy building economic structures; essentially, this is a UNION.

3. An alternative would be to create some specific map template where such changes would be implemented. In my opinion, mirrors are sufficient, but it is, of course, possible to try to create something in between a mirror and a normal random map.