If the game is so straight-forward and poorly design that there's only one optimised option for every single circumstance, then it's the game's fault.

Strategy games are meant to be, basically, you get the dice you have throw at you at the start of the game. You have a randomized land around you and you need to adapt to the circumstances of the land using your brains and tactical skill. With this game, it's pretty much "roll to get land now roll to decide if you can actually do something with that land".

There's too much randomness.

Pretty much what Cdr said. Even with the controlled randomness of HoMM, it's still a poorly designed system that would've been better with a proper talent tree (isn't that what they did later on anyway?).

Personally, I'd really enjoy talent trees with a small chance of picking up a rare/epic trait from time to time. But, if I had to give up random rare/epics for a true talent tree, I'd absolutely do so.

Optimising randomness has been part and parcel of 4X games since the beginning. Giving a choice of 6 feels about right with the amount of traits on offer as long as they are legitimate choices, and removing legitimate choice is where the rares let this randomness control feature down. There shouldn't be an option to choose between a +2 Strength or a +4 Strength. That is not choice, that is relying on dice to give you out-and-out better stats. As you mentioned, the rares are simply a better option almost all the time, giving you not 6 choices, but 1 or maybe 2.

All choices should be balanced, however rarer ones offer more specialised situations or more risk/reward. Instead of +2Str as Common, +3Str as uncommon and +4Str as rare, you can have something like +2Str, +3Str/-1Dex, +4Str/-2Dex. With something like this, the rare choice does give opportunity for a more specialised, hard-hitting character, but is still more or less competitive with a 'boring' +2Str for general characters. Rather than making a new path come with +8 stats (which makes the choice a no-brainer over anything else), simply give the path itself. You are giving a choice of future opportunity vs short term solid gains.   

Rares should tantalise the player to consider the possibility of taking this character in a new direction, or push the character into risky territory, whereas commons should help the character stabilize and maintain their current role. I don't mind some of the other options of always giving a set stat gain or a limited choice of uncommons / rares, but I don't think the current system is as broken as some make out. If changing of rares and uncommons made each selection a hard choice between 3-4 out of the 6 for the current character, I'd be happy. 

Mage and warrior are both worthless compared to assassin.

Assassin helps you build up a ridiculous dodge such that enemies simply don't hit (while you crit for ridiculous damage ridiculously often).

My sov solos the whole map with assassin.

It is a little too random right now. I posted some options for improvement here:

https://forums.elementalgame.com/416767

Notice the clear appreciation of Balder's Gate.  

On the topic of hero level ups, is it possible to do so via any other means than combat? I actually want to have some administrators, but sitting at home running the household doesn't do them any favours does it? They HAVE to go slaughtering to gain levels which doesn't allow any flexibility. It just seems wrong that a hero who has chosen the 'path of the governer' must still be a killer to gain levels.

Maybe there could be a variety of xp streams? Perhaps base xp requirements per level could be doubled, and a hero could earn double xp by performing the action that is associated with the 'path' they have chosen? No prob if they get another 'path' later and get double xp from both paths, I don't see that would be unbalancing.

Warriors/assassins/defenders could get more xp for dealing/taking damage as appropriate.

Casters could get more xp per mana spent and/or for damage dealt by spells.

Administrators could get xp per building built/unit trained, population ganied int he city they are overseeing.

I think that hero's with an administrator perk should get 1 xp every 15 or 25 turns. that way they will level up over time even if you just leave them in your city to help with production.

I generally like the current system/perks (and the randomness of it) - however, I don't like that the "path of..." doesn't restrict you at all.   Does it make sense to restrict you to just 2 paths?  This way you can have dual class but still makes it so your choice limits you somewhat.

Mozo

I think you should have seperate XP systems and seperate levels for combat, and adminstration... maybe magic too.

So, do some questing and you are now level 10 combatant (same traits as now)... but you are still a level 1 administrator. Administer a city though and you level up as an administrator. They two are just seperate.

Have the number of people in a city determine its administration XP, up to a cap determined by your current level (lower level admins learn slower if dumped in the capital) and where each city splits the admin XP between present heroes, so for ideal growth you want 1 admin a city. But moving high level admins into a city lets them all give bonuses while not going up in level.

Very interesting thread. Once again, we got a discussion about Randomization or Not. First of all, since this game is strongly supported in randomized elements, I find that applying it to hero development should be part of it. I understand that affects a lot the idea of designing the hero that the player wants to have. But this way helps in trying different combinations, and I see it as each hero has his own "personality",  with its good and bad things. Aiming for the "perfect" hero (warrior, mage...) in each game is boring at long-term.

Remember too that this system allows to add new traits in the future (expansions or mods) easier, than if the upgrade tree was closed with determined options.

Now, the problem is that if the idea of randomization is good, at the end the different choices are not so big. Each path would beneficiate of some more upgradeable traits (those with I,II,III,,,,) that were related with the path. There are already some, but some more would increase differentiation. I mean, all assassins will have almosts the same traits, so what I guess was intended to give variety, results in an assassin that is 'brute' and other one that is 'impulsive', for example, and the rest of traits are more or less the same....

Finally, one of the things I really miss from old MoM, and I think it would give FE a little of more variety in Hero Upgrades, is the Stat Point that the player could assign to hero's stats. Now, each level gives 2 HP and I think +1 accuracy (correct me if I'm wrong): that is 3 stat points per level. I would change this. I think the player should assign at least 1 or 2 of those 3 points (lets keep the +HP untouchable if you wish). If the player could assign one stat point per level, that is 10 stat points at level 10. Not too much, but that would give a little of more control to the stats...

Well, you can definitely mod that in.  Might still get some random choices to fill out the five available slots, but your tree traits will definitely be on there.