Doesn't help you if you're pursuing a millitary path and not a magical one, which people have previously campaigned to make a perfectly viable path to victory. Only it's not if your big army gets completely steamrolled by some god mode teleporting champion because people want champions that can fight hundreds of units at once single handidly.
This conversation has been derailed by teleportation. Ever since Frogboy's example, that's been the core complaint from people who want champions to be mildly glorified soldiers. So let me say this in bold: teleportation is the cheese. The problem you have isn't at all with powerful champions, it's with champions who can show up at your door out of nowhere and knock it down. I hope to all hell that it will be absolutely and completely impossible to ever do that. Teleportation is way too easily abused, and needs severe limitations or to be left out entirely. I'm not quite as concerned about teleportation within one's own territory, but even then it should be expensive or limited (only teleport to closest town, maybe). You should absolutely not be able to teleport within enemy territory, or at the very least it should be prohibitively expensive and range should be miniscule.
I wouldn't want the AI to be able to teleport up to my door, whether it be a powerful champion or an army. Even more, I wouldn't want to be able to do that to the AI. There is nothing at all that the AI could do to defend itself against a player who can teleport powerful units or armies around willy nilly, that would be completely broken.
People asking for super god mode champions in Elemental are just heading down the same path, and in this instance I'm really glad it's Stardock designing the game and not you guys.
You're the only one throwing around the word "god" here, Tridus. No one here at all, as far as I can tell, is advocating unbeatable champions that can only be stopped by other unbeatable champions. As far as I know, I'm the only one who ever really even gave numbers at all, and let me restate them:
If late game armies could reach well into the thousands, as was the plan up until recently apparently, then a champion that can hold his own versus a few hundred up to maybe a thousand troops is not that ridiculous. If I have a handful of armies of 1,000-5,000 troops, plus my own champions, my own fantastical creatures, and my own magic, and a champion that can take on something like 500 troops challenges me, then chances are that champion will die. I wouldn't need my own champion to kill it, I could kill (probably even utterly annihilate) it with an army), and either kill or hinder it with magic. Or I could kill it with a Slag, or some other fantastical creature in my employ.
If army sizes are going to max out at ~400 soldiers, then clearly a champion that can take on ~500 soldiers is not ok. But a champion that's been a significant investment of an empire that can take on 50-100 soldiers on his own? Is that so unreasonable? If yes, we will have to agree to disagree. If it sounds reasonable to you, well - how about that! That's roughly the same ratio as in the previous example!
I guess I can't speak for others, but I don't want to be able to develop an unbeatable champion as part of some infallible strategy that always works. But I do want to be able to focus my energies into training up some extremely powerful champions that can take on decent fractions of a large army. Doing so, of course, would mean sacrificing in some other area - perhaps the gildar used to buy their equipment or recruit them could've been used into equipping an army or developing my cities farther, perhaps my sovereign will have less essence and thus less magical ability...
I'm worried about artificial army size limitations, though. ALL army size limitations end up in Stack of Doom problems, and I thought that we had gotten past that. If I can only fit a finite of units (by which I mean, squads/platoons/legions, etc), then there will be a major advantage in amassing an army composed of all your most powerful troops; such an army would be undefeatable by anything but another Stack of Doom.
With max army sizes of 200, or 400, whatever, regardless of how many troops I can actually maintain, then massing hordes of poorly armed/equipped troops would be a dismal strategy. If I'm confronted by a max-size army (let's say it's 400 for now) of upgraded troops, then even my 800 peasants might not do much. After all, I can only send in my peasants 400 at a time, and his 400 troops, each with leather armor and real weapons will probably win pretty easily. And he'll probably beat my next group of 400 peasants almost as easily as the first time. Whereas if I could've sent my 800 peasants at once, maybe I'd have had a fighting chance! But no, arbitrary hard caps forbid it, and thus an entire strategy is irrelevant. The only advantage to fielding inferior units is that you can field more of them, but with arbitrary army size limitations, that one advantage is lost somewhere in mid-late game (at least on larger maps).