Actually there is a good reason to not give mounts to every unit.  If you're training units purely for extra city garrison (cannon fodder troops) you don't need to give them mounts.  You may end up disbanding them anyway so why waste resources on them?

I have to agree with the OP.  Why bother to build infantry when mounted troops are always better and cost the same in production and resources and maintenance, except for adding a horse or warg?  I seem to only need 1 stables providing 1 horse per turn to supply my needs throughout the game so horses are not a limitation in any of my games so far.  Once I have horses / wargs I never build combat units that are not mounted, it is a waste of the other resources invested in the troops since there is no extra cost apart from adding the horse or warg.

I know the game is a fantasy game but historically in the ancient and medieval periods a cavalryman and his horse cost 2 or 3 times as much as an equivalent infantryman in western armies.  This game would have a deeper military / economic strategy if mounted units costs 2x the production and hence maintenance since that is based on production costs. 

This increase in production and maintenance would also be a small advantage to the AI which seems to build mostly infantry into the late game even when it has horses / wargs for trade.  They also don't mount their champions on horses even though that makes them much more effective strategically and tactically and they have oodles of spare gold and can afford horses.

JJ

There's no reason to build infantry. The reason for this unrealistic state of affairs is simple - the game assumes that every horse coming out of a stable is a warhorse, which is ridiculous, and that maintaining a cavalry horse it is about as cheap as maintaining a pair of boots.

If I were trying to fix this, I would have three different types of horses:

1. Untrained horse -2 initiative, + 1 move, -25% to dodge, +10 to carried weight

Fresh from the stable, requires a little production (bridle, saddle, stirrups), adds +1 gold (per soldier) to wages

2. Trained horse (same as existing horse)

Significant additional production cost (represents the training it required), adds +2 gold (per soldier) to wages

3. Warhorse (same as existing warhorse)

Even higher additional production cost (more training) adds +4 gold (per soldier) to wages

Well, it does seem odd that horses have no additional costs in terms of upkeep. Makes sense to me that they should have a downside. 'Course, I also thought it was odd I couldn't outfit my pioneers with horses in the design screen so they could get to new city sites faster.

I'm fine with the idea that my ranches are only contributing combat-quality beasts though- why not have a ranch/den generate a gildar bonus to represent selling those that didn't make the cut (or fur coats in the case of the wargs)?

Why not add a special anti-Calvary bonus to spear units on foot though? Wouldn't that make sense, given historical tactics to counter horses in warfare? And if Stardock wants to go down that path, restricting mounted units to shortbows only would seem logical, no?

My suggestions for Infantry/Cavalry distinctions would be as follows: 

• Increased support costs for horse/warg mounted units (reflecting the costs of feeding and taking care of horses/wargs.) After all, horses and wargs need food too.
• Spears should get combat bonuses vs mounted units (this would make spears more useful.)
• Accuracy penalty for Mounted/Mage archer units unless they get some sort of mounted warfare promotion. In fact, any unit mounted on a horse should have some combat penalties for accuracy etc. unless they get a mounted warrior promotion (reflecting the training necessary to fight from horseback effectively; similar promos for warg riding.)

Definitely give Cavalry a weakness to spears.

In real life, infantry has several immense advantages over cavalry, mostly logistical. The ability to field many more troops in the same space, only having to feed and fit 150 pound humans instead of 1000+ pound beasts, etc.

The cost for production and maintenance just needs to be dramatically higher for cavalry.

The only warhorse currently in the game is available through traits.  So should there be a regular horse for movement only, then a lesser warhorse, and then a greater warhorse that is only available through a trait?  Of course you could also add in the other mounts that are already in game as well from that point but then it might get a bit silly.  Ashwake dragon mount anyone?

Its in the code for mounts so its possible to add it.  Not saying it would be a good idea but think of a final tech for mounts that requires Dance of the Dragons as a prereq as well.  Might be worth doing, I think Heavenfall did something like this in his mod.

I am the same and I'm sure majority of the players do this if not all. and thats why end game tends to get bland.

I will have to see what I can work out for mounted units for cost wise.  Graphic wise I am very limited in mod regards to what is already in game and barely at that.  Still I agree that there should be a tertiary mounted horse unit.  The problem with this is that you also have to consider wargs and where do they fit in as both empire and kingdoms can use either so wargs need to fit somewhere in the equation.

so something like te following for progression wise:

Riding Horse ==> Light Warhorse ==> Wargs ==> Heavy Warhorse ==> Random awarded mounts.

Riding horses                 = +1 to movement and +10 to hit points 

Light Warhorse               = +2 to movement and +15 to hit points

Warg                             = +1 to movement, +2 to speed, +20 hit points

Heavy Warhorse             = +2 to movement, +1 to speed, +25 to hit points

and so on......

These are totally arbitrary numbers.

Also should riding a horse increase your dodge or not?

The additional hit points represent the ability of the mount to shield a unit but should they also have dodge or not or should it be reduced from where it currently is?

I am not so sure... the high movement things seem essential -- wiping the map with 2 move armies would require a lot of them.  The powerful champion thing seems essential.  Fighting a multi-front war is a good recipe for disaster.

But, after that?

My subjective opinion is slightly different but along the same path.  If you're adding hit points, I don't think you should get the dodge too.  In melee reduces short range mobility (i.e. dodge)., and in ranged you're a bigger target.   Since you can't get unhorsed as someone else mentioned, you might actually get hit MORE.

Riding horses                 = +4 to movement and +0 to hit points and -5 dodge

                                    = 120 gold to purchase, +1 gold/turn upkeep, (per unit), 2 turns of production

Light Warhorse               = +4 to movement and +10 to hit points +3 to attack and +1 speed and -5 dodge

                                    = 200 gold to purchase, +3 gold/turn upkeep (per unit), 4 turns of production, special building required

Warg                             = +2 to movement, +2 to speed, +15 hit points and -0 to dodge (thinking wargs are agile, i.e. +2 speed)

                                    = 175 gold to purchase, +2 gold/turn upkeep (per unit), 3 turns of production

Heavy Warhorse             = +3 to movement, +1 to speed, +30 to hit points, +5 to attack and -10 dodge

                                    = 300 gold to purchase, +5 gold/turn upkeep (per unit), 5 turns of production, special building required (maybe limit to 4 troops in a unit?)

For all mounted:

Special trait required - "mounted training"

Create new weapons - Light lance and Heavy Lance - only useable by troops with "mounted training" and a warhorse.  Light for light, Heavy for heavy.   Heavy piercing damage, 2h, (either knockback or # of tiles traveled = multiplier/addition on damage)

Limited weapon list - No daggers, longbows - possibly other limitations.

If a 4 troop of heavy warhorses cost +5 turns of production, a special building and 20!!! gold per turn, is it worth it?  Heavy lance could go with a mulitiplier - with the idea that a troop of heavy knights knocks out an enemy on first turn. 

I think personally I would usually go with pure mobility - riding horse and light warhorse.  Not sure if that kills the whole idea then

The required mount training can't be implemented at this time as the only prereqs that work with gear at all is a level requirement which is only for hero gear.  The gold cost would only be hero purchases make sense cost wise and I like the idea of adding hit points and reducing dodge instead of increasing it.  The hit points I listed were so that when you include the pony mount that is a quest reward it still has a hit point bonus of +5.

For as far as barding goes it would make an interesting accessory that could only be used by mounted units and adds additional armor and I like the idea.  You could even do different tiers of barding based upon cost or horse type.  

I have a thread that goes over the problems associated with creating a mini class such as mounted units.  The basic problem is we can design them but the AI will likely not be able to use them effectively.

Great ideas all around now if we can get some support to make them happen, and be used by the AI as well.