As for actual balance discussion, since it's already broached:
I see KGB's point about the Barbarian, but remember that 70/3 is only possible at level 6 right now. With my proposal, it's also level 6 but the hero isn't useless at early expand. Moonknight, I'm looking at the actual current stats of the Barbarian. The game in which we are playing together has the outdated version (where incidentally HP was 5 points each, if people really want something outdated to get upset over). I cannot say if there is a display bug, but the old game originally showed 3hp, 5 for +1, and the new game has always shown 2hp, 15 for +1. My understanding is that Snotling fixed the stat display and gain in our game, but heroes generated before the fix still have the 3HP.
KGB, within Warbaron's system, the proper implementation of xp scaling would be to give Barbarian a low learning ability. Maybe 80, with +5% per purchase instead of +10. It's also a bit silly to examine the Barbarian flying around on his own in a vacuum. Trading that for a level 6 hero on the front line is an important consideration. You might as well compare him to a level 4 Valkeria with a Griffon doing the exact same thing, which is far more likely and more easily done.
Peeps, the biggest thing to consider here is opportunity cost. We need to take the time to actually compare these heroes with the others, not just get upset over their new untested abilities. With the Barbarian at strength 2, it's risky to do anything with him early on. Remember that hero XP is a precious commodity. If you sacrifice your expansion to level these heroes like Barbarian and Horse Lord, you've already balanced the scales.
Igor wrote:For my opinion, absurd is when +25 leadership at level 4.
This hero is not for ruins, like Valkyria. His task is to lead army group to opponent's rear. And no defence of him.
My offer shown in previous message seems to me as very reasonable, if we don't wish to get another demon.
Igor, I won't address your direct statements of arbitrary nerfs without any testing for two reasons.
1) You keep stating falsehoods as if they are truths, and then move to conclusions without any evidence whatsoever.
2) You haven't tested the heroes, and just because I suggested a nasty way of using the Horse Lord you're ready to implement an arbitrary nerf that wouldn't actually solve the problem. This is called alarmist behavior, and we need time to see the heroes in action before throwing a fit.
To elaborate: The Horse Lord has 12 starting UL, making him the most obvious hero for ruins ever. Heroes don't start at level 4. He
does not have 25 leadership at level 4. There are three false statements in two sentences, one by assumption and two outright. It's 25 on one selected terrain type at level 4, and he never has any influence on battles within cities (where most battles take place). The only thing needed to fix this hero is to make it costly to level him (in time or opportunity cost). The most reasonable options are to remove his high UL, making it hard for him to gain xp (since he can never support normal battles within cities), to scale his XP (which is an entirely new system for Warbarons), or to reduce his base Learning ability (which is not as effective as removing his UL, but leaves him more fun to play).
Anyway, why are you ignoring the Assassin? He is the one who is going to be giving you fits if you don't have him and your opponents do. He's the one who is going to be dominating small maps. It's very short-sighted to overlook a hero with +10% group ambush per level and a lot of other goodies available. "Does he have extra move? City chaos? Ambush? Is he hiding another hero? What did my opponent choose?" Since we're just going to assume that level 4 is so easy to get on a support hero, consider that he has 50% group ambush at level 4. Goodbye to your expensive units.