I like the idea of both reducing the amount of horses/wargs gained and having an income cost (in horses) associated to the created units. This could either be a hard cap per resource (i.e. one horse pasture supports 'x' horse units) or a continuous drain. The second option rolls both solutions in to one, as having a horse units cost .02 horses/turn as upkeep creates a cap (that can be temporarily surpassed if you have an abundance of horses/wargs) and also reduces the horse/warg income as the player builds more horse/warg units.

So yeah, would love to see a horse/warg special upkeep for mounted units. It is silly that you reach a point where everything is mounted and infantry pretty much cease to exist.

But this should resolve in late game. Also, there will always be city militia.

I really think the easiest solution is maintenance. In this way it can be tweaked and modded easily. 

SBFMadDjinn's suggestions above do seem good to me.  I have always thought the bonus structure on mounts was a bit off.

I agree. Food upkeep would make sense.

I think that it would be balanced if mounted units would get:

+ 2 initiative (horse) or + 5 initiative (warg)

+ 2 movement (horse) or + 1 movement (warg)

- 20 dodge vs. melee and ranged attacks (horse and warg)

Charge: + 3 movement and + 40 dodge vs. melee and ranged attacks for 1 turn, cooldown: 2 turns (horse) or 4 turns (warg)

Mounts need some downside, so that you want a mix of units.  Classically infantry holds the line, and calvary charges.  I'd think that's a good basis for how the units roles should be defined. 

I would try to do stuff like the following: 

- make infantry the only units able to  have "guarded" status.  The theory being mounted units do not actively defend or hold the line.  Calvary stays out of combat with superior speed if they don't want to be engaged.

- give mounted units very high dodge versus ranged units any time they move 3+ tiles away from their location last turn.  The theory being they are moving around, they are hard for ranged to shoot at.  They lose the bonus if they aren't moving.

- Do NOT give large initiative bonuses for being mounted; rather give reduction to initiative penalties from wearing plate/chain.  I.e. we don't want a a mage wearing leather armor getting 2-3 times as many turns just because he's on a mount; but we do want heavy plate wearer to not be penalized as much when on mount.

- give mounted melee a penalty for attacking infantry units holding melee weapons stacked two rows deep.  Calvary doesn't like to charge direclty into formation.

- give mounted ranged weapons a 25% penalty to accuracy; its harder to fire a well aimed shot from a horse or worg.  Besides ranged should be slow; gives infantry something to protect and calvary something to mow down.  Plate and chain should effect both accuracy and initiative of ranged weapons.

- give maces a chance to dismount.  Currently all mounted units are 100% immune to prone, and currently everything is mounted by mid game, denying maces a chance to use their passive effect.  If dismounted, unit should suffers large initiative penalty until next turn, in addition to being prone and losing mount for remainder of battle.

Actually, this is a really fantastic idea. I think it would help balance out mounted units a little bit, as it would give them a downside. As many people, myself included, have pointed out, currently mounted units have no downside. This is silly. Fix!

yeah, there's no need to give upkeep costs a whack when an easy to do solution is right in front of you.  Start with that, and then move to more complicated items if it's not helping.

sxyz123 has a couple idea's that are complimentary to my list, but a few might not work too well:

So basically boost mounted with the double swarm bonus, but only if there's infantry there?  Seems a bit of a push/force to have mixed units, but does make a little sense.

I'd disagree with this thought line.  Cavalry will charge where I tell it to, and that's right into a formation (as all units are formations).  Plus, it's metagaming exploitable.

This I can agree with, given that there's traits and commanders to boost accuracy.  Though, I don't know anyone that plate armours (or any actually) an already slow ranged unit (bow has the big initiative penalty).

This I don't like as it's not really true in any sense.  Ie, If I swing a hammer at someone on horseback, I'm more likely to kill them than dismount them (or kill them while dismounting them).  If anything, the mounted unit should count as an easier target to hit for hammer units ->give them increased accuracy vs. mounted.

But maybe to keep it simple, hammer units can 'daze' mounted units, instead of making them prone. 

Keeping in mind that not every single weapon type needs to work vs. mounted and vice versa.  I'd be ok if spears are the pro anti-mounted units while maces are the pro anti-infantry units.  Swords get counter attacks (vs. anything but spears and special attacks) and axes get splash/multi-target hits.

Also keep in mind when talking about mounts that they aren't all the exact same.  There are Horses, WAR Horses and Wargs.  WAR Horses should be better than either horses or wargs, given that it's a trait choice to have them.  We need to balance out the actual mounts as well, which can bring them in-line with infantry types at the same time (but they should ALWAYS be better, just in different ways).

I admit spears are more "anti cavalry  in a realistic sense.   But spears got so many bonuses already -- armor piercing, immune to counter attack, multi-target impale ability and kraxis has one handed ones.

As for realism of maces knocking you off a horse....  Yah, its a little unreal for a foot soldier to probably do it, since he's so low to the ground.  On the other hand, if the other guy is swinging a mace or flail also on horse back, those were great weapons for forcing the other off his horse - it would depend on the height they are swung at to force a dismount.  But anyhow, my suggestions are more based around my perception of balance than realism.

Maces were historically really good against heavy armor, because they created impact hits that affected you even in your armor.  And the sharp points on the ends, e.g. the spikes on flails were good at  puncturing armor because of all the weight behind them.  But spears got pierce attack, in this rock/paper/scissors division of weapons in game.

This is kind of all I meant. I just want SOMETHING to be good against mounts so I have some justification for not making everything on horse/wargback.

The real issue is too many horses/wargs that are too inexpensive to maintain/train.

Cavalry training is traditionally expensive/time-constraining.

Agree indeed.