I've been thinking that perhaps each (or maybe just most?) hero should have a quest associated with them that you should have to successfully complete for them to join your faction.

I like the idea that heroes start off better then your average individual unit and gradually get stronger. A "Warrior" heroe, IMO, should always be one step ahead of the default or average soldier or a small group of soldiers. They should be survivable, strong, resourceful, but not superhuman or invincible. I've tried to address this in the "Abilities and Traits Mod", if you haven't checked it out already.

Secondly, we do lack a good variety of heroes. This shouldn't be a problem because we can mod the game; we can add new heroes. I suggest that everyone here make one or two heroes and submit them to the "Community of Heroes Project". If half of the players did that we'd have enough interesting, fun, and unique heroes to go around.

We could even have a Fallen Heroes Modpack if we had enough heroes.

I don't think heroes should be simply "super units", but they do have to be better than individual units in the way they level up.

Regular units should automatically increase HP and combat stats, while heroes should get to choose stats to improve and some kind of special abilities (not necessarily every level).

Some heroes will still be better than others since they will have better initial stats and abilities and maybe different development options.

At the same time, some heroes will be physically weaker than most regular units since their ficus will be on non-combat skills like economy bonuses.

The point is not strength differences between units and heroes, the point is that regular units are just "sword man" or "archer" while a hero is an actual unique character, different from other units and heroes, and the uniqueness (not necessarily the power) gets bigger every level.

I would like to see heros give units in armies they command access to battle actions. Example: Hero A knows the Shield Wall and Charge Action. Units in the amry he commands (ranks highest) could select either of these actions or none each turn.

Charge - +4 attack, -2 defense for 1 turn, if start turn not adjacent to enemy unit. (must be unmounted)

Shield Wall - +4 Defense, -2 movement for 1 turn, if units equipped with a large shield (must be unmounted)

Calvary Charge - +4 attack, -0 defense for 1 turn, if start turn not adjacent to enemy unit. (must be mounted).

A player selects a battle action for his hero to learn at specified levels. The battle action's available are based on their inventory. A hero without a large shield cannot learn Shield Wall.  A hero without a mount cannot learn Calvary Charge.

1. Warrior Hero - Gains a new battle action every 2 levels (i.e. at 5th level warrior hero knows 3 battle actions)
2. Adventurer Hero - Gains a new battle action every 4 levels (i.e. at 5th level adventurer knows 2 battle actions)
3. Merchant Hero - Gains a new battle action every 5 levels (i.e. at 5th level merchant hero knows 1 battle action)

My thinking in having them determined by heroes is that only the heros (a general) would give units a command to use a shield wall or to charge.

An army without a commander (hero), or with a commander lacking the knowledge of when to issue those order would suffer. There units would not know  when to properly charge or adopt a shield wall. They might know the drill, but would not receive the orders to use these tactics.

Thus making the assignment of hero's to armies more important. An army without a hero would lack the coordination and timely use of tactics that a skilled commander can use to achieve victory.

Funny thing to say for a "hobbit king" but I completely agree!!

I agree the current heroes are bland and not very useful... looking forward to the Master of Magic mod where they are unique and potentially powerful.