I'm actually against the concept as well and would prefer they do something else. However, I think I see why they are going this direction from a programattic perspective, which is why I started thinking of "well IF they go this way, what are some things that would make it more palatable.

I REALLY do not like the upgrade with no cost. It should be easy to add some significant costs.

I would prefer that units have to get to an appropriate city to get upgraded. My educated guess is they are trying to keep from having thousands of unique units running around in the game and having to track inventories of each of those units. My guess is that they are trying to treat unit types somewhat like ship designs in Galciv2. They want all swordsmen under your control to be identical, same with pikemen, archers, or whatever unit you can create (including the ones you design). Makes the game much more manageable from a programming side.

I can live with it as long as things like spellbound swords can be differentiated from regular swords.  That would defeat the purpose of having them...

I'd rather they had to be re-equipped with actual stockpiled weapons moved to their location, and trained if equipped with a different weapon type.  I'm guessing I wont get it though.

Well, one way to solve the problem of having to track every individual unit is to train squads of units, each of which is identical and thus significantly reducing the problem. Each of these units would still have their own identification number or whatever, but to find out equipment information it could just point to the squad-wide information. Splitting a squad would be like creating a new squad.

This is one thing I want to avoid. In almost every game I've ever played, once you research higher tech, the older becomes totally obsolete, and it gets old. It'd be awesome to have the option to produce lesser quality equipment even once you can make higher quality stuff. Its advantages would be higher production rate, lower production costs and lower maintenance costs. This would add a great deal of depth, I think, at a reasonable cost of complexity. I'd prefer if this were true regarding all equipment, but as long as it's the case regarding special vs. standard weapons (ie, "Flaming Swords of Death" vs. Swords+X) I'll be satisfied.

Now, onto the hard part... How to handle upgrading with such a system. I think the best way is to require uniting troops with their new equipment. This can be done by sending the troops to a city with a store of the equipment or the ability to produce it, or by sending the equipment to the troops. The latter could require the target forces to remain stationary while the equipment travels, or not - I don't know which would be best. Either way the logistics could be largely automated. When you click upgrade, and choose what to upgrade, a list of possible methods and their time requirements can pop up and the highlighted route displayed on the map (including both troop and caravan movement, if relevant). When you choose your preferred method, the computer will make what needs to happen happen. There could even be an option for your troops to return to their previous location when upgrading is complete.

In the case of actually retraining (or further training, if possible), troops should have to be sent to an appropriate settlement - but again, the computer should assist you in finding appropriate destinations and getting your troops there (and back).

I'm more or less with psychoak in hoping to see the normal upgrade process require direct connections between warriors, armories, and training camps. And I also don't really expect to ge my wish.

That said, the idea of using spells for field upgrades makes pretty good sense to me regardless of how the economic/production system gets implemented. If we do end up with something like Camp 3, it seems almost a necessity, at least for those of us who like to see narrative holes plugged in our game settings. Ignoring magic in this context (or almost any other?) would be like ignoring fictional technology in GC2--a very strange idea.

Pidgeon, are we related?

GW, I'm ok with having teleport casters warp the actual resources out to the troops, if you have to make the teport casters. 

I want to ignore magic, as in poof, the unit goes inactive for two days while resources are magically transported with no means of getting there.  I don't want to ignore magic, as in I researched a badass teleportation ability, outfitted some guys with it, and sent them out with my field armies to keep them supplied without needing caravans.

Supply lines add a lot of depth, vaporware supply lines defeat the purpose of having supplies.  The poof it's magic system works great in games where there isn't anything to ignore, like Gal Civ.  You make ships.  All you do as far as the components are concerned is research them.  If they actually existed, and were stockpiled in places, it would be damned irritating to be able to upgrade a ship in deep space without having a little supply ship run out there with the parts.

You have to be careful about that.  I'm a right wing crazy with a foul mouth and no manners.

Yep, I definitely think we're of quite similar minds here, if different typing styles. I questioned the idea of ignoring magic not out of love of deus ex machina tricks but because magic is both the narrative lynchpin of the game story and the fundamental context for the game mechanics.