Kias

Yeah, alliance should supersede NAP

I think reducing the horse/warg income further and increasing the production/upkeep dramatically are the best solutions, as that would balance out the benefits of mobility and buffs mounted troops already represent. If you can afford it, sure, mounted troops are superior. But on a cost/production scale, you could pump out and maintain three infantry for the cost of one cavalry. This keeps them from completely replacing the infantry aspect of the game with minimal impact on re-balancing combat

While I like how the weapons are currently implemented, it would be pretty awesome if multi-unit formations were a thing. Maybe make it something re searchable or even a faction trait? So, if a unit is adjacent to friendly units, they can activate the formation as an ability or something? Not completely sure how it would be implemented, but it would be really fun to see formations slowly become a dominant tactic as the tech level progresses.

I am sorry, but I am just not seeing how champions are useless. I feel like they are working better than ever. Yes, they can no longer be an army unto themselves and need troops to support them. Sure, if you try to roll around with just a sov/champ crew like in FE, you are going to get stomped. However, having 1-2 champs in an army makes an incredible impact. Sure, some spell lines/traits are more potent than others, but the level of support, utility, buffs/debuffs, etc. that

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 incom

Yeah, removal of the spell tiers would be a mistake and would remove important choices and gameplay elements. I like that I can't "do it all" in the current system and that even two champs of the same class can end up being very different depending on how I spend trait points.

One of the strongest aspects of FE/LH is creating one's own faction and sovereign. I really enjoy the variety of options available as strengths, but for weaknesses we only have a handful of choices. Expanding on the weaknesses a player can choose could allow a little more diversity in developing a sov/faction, and maybe even grant an additional point for spending if players are allowed to select two weaknesses for each, creating more robust combinations. Below is a list of potenti

I like the idea quite a bit! More options are always good, but it would have to be tested quite a bit to make sure nothing was unbalanced. Definitely worth exploring!

[quote who="parrottmath" reply="3" id="3337462"] My best suggestion for this is that the monsters take the town and live in it until you can send a hero to free it open again through a quest / tatical battle and reverting the control to you. But that never got any thumbs up or down from the devs... they hid their true feelings about that system.[/quote] Not sure why this got kind of overlooked, but this strikes me as an excellent solution. When monsters invade, have them turn yo

I would like to see something done to interact with the ocean tiles, but I think that would be better left as an expansion/mega patch of its own. It would be a whole new element of gameplay that, while having awesome potential, will only detract from the experience if implemented poorly or partially. Once Legendary Heroes is finished being ironed out, I would be super excited to see focus shift on to the potential for sea/water interaction, lost isles, sea beasts, etc.

Yeah, don't understand the logic behind losing access because another sov is building the wonder. Going for Wonders should be a risk, and if you get beat out, you lose the time put in to the project. If I am lagging a bit in research with a production focused sov, I should be able to have a chance of pulling in a wonder by dropping Set in Stone on whichever city and trying to crank that building out before Captain Conclave builds his.

I just don't see the early game income and other problems outlined in the OP as being a problem. There should be a cost associated with the growing power of recruiting new champions and units, and there is plenty of buildings/spells/options to balance the early cost out. We may want to clarify by what we mean by early game though, as by the time a player gets that second or third champ, then that is well out of early game. As was mentioned earlier, I feel the

[quote who="emmagine" reply="4" id="3332910"] Swarm does *not* attack for the other units. It lowers the defense of the other unit. It needs to be offset though. Each adjacent defending unit should reduce the swarm effect by an equal amount. [/quote] Yeah, this is a good idea. Could be hard to implement though. May be easier to just give an equivalent bump to defense for each adjacent friendly unit.

I am a bit confused here, as I believe the swarm bonus just lowers an opposing units defense. Sure, there is an attack animation, but the units are not actually attacking. Also, the weapon abilities do not trigger the swarm mechanic from what I have seen, which makes for a solid balance.

Alternatively, just keep it super simple and have units stationed in cities cost 0 upkeep. This way, players can station whatever type of unit they want in their cities by developing the military unit and moving it over there without weighing down their economy. If you want to keep it scaling, have city size determine how many defender units it can support (i.e. grant free upkeep on).