+1 to the above idea as well- at least as a supplemental idea.

The way things are now, Governors are in no danger of being overpowered.   More like never used.  I think that Path of the Govenor should give you a +1 exp per city level per turn bonus (managing a bigger city is more difficult, therefore more exp), but preclude you from having access to some of the more powerful combat skills that are available after you choose your path.  When considered over a period of time, 2 or 3 exp per turn isn't really that much experience, considering that a combat champion can gain hundreds of exp in one fight.  Govenors don't need a boost, they need a crash cart.  I think they are a neat idea, but they are too useless to even be properly tested and balanced at this point.  They do need more skills though.  I think no one has realy given much attention to Governor skills because so few people even bother using them.

An alternative would be to change the Adventurer's Guild so they give +1 exp per turn, are buildable in multiple cities, and perhaps even be upgradeable to +2 or +3.  I'd have to have a closer look at the numbers to see if this would actually be OP or not.  I think it just sounds OP because the current incarnation is so underpowered (aka useless).  I have never ever EVER built one and you would have to be really bored or on glue to think it would be a good deal.  Think about it.  They are only useful if you leave a champion there doing nothing or governing.  Why would you build them in every city if your champions are always exploring?  You build them where you plan on stationing your Governors for some time.  There are far easier ways of gaining exp for combat champions.

One or the other of these, maybe both, would make Governors a viable strategic choice.  Other suggestions, like a penalty to combat exp are good, and work within the existing system.  Basing exp gain off of total city output might be difficult to balance.  If you really tweaked out a city, it could yield crazy exp, not to mention making the calculation understandable to players.  City level scales well, has a predictable maximum and pacing and encourages governing the major cities, not using governors to supercharge your spammed cities.  You could still move an experienced governor to a small city, but you would sacrifice potential experience to boost a smaller but strategically important city.  That sounds like a tough decision, which is what makes good strategy games.

Very good thread. I also find Governer heroes a waste of time BUT I like the idea of them and would like them to be useful.

Several possible ideas have been suggested but I think something simple like this:

Path of the Governer heroes (only) get 0.5XP per turn per level of the city they are garrisoned in. This should stack with Adventurer's Guild if you manage to build it. Possibly it should be split if there are two or more Path of the Governer heroes in a single city.

The 0.5 value could obviously be tweaked until the devs think it is balanced such that governer heroes will slowly fall a little bit behind their succussful adventuring colleagues but still be gaining enough levels to be useful and interesting.

I'm thinking they should slowly fall a bit behind because they aren't risking wounds and can earn experience consistently unlike combat heroes who may need to rest to regain HP or walk some distance to find the next fight.

Well I like the idea of building improvments in Cities giving Governers XP. But the solution to your (I hate  micromanagement stance) is simple. If idle the governer still gets a base XP depending on the prodution the city normally produces (but not as much as building improvements and training units.)

Now you will probably say that due to not gaining as much XP while idle "makes" you have to micromanage well I say too damn bad. You don't need to micromanage to gain XP under the system I purpose. So if you 'feel' the need to do this well that is just one of many desicions one has to make in a tactical game.

Also the Governer should get a lot of XP for defending a city as well.

I disagree that Governor = crappy champion.  Governor should be a viable, even attractive path choice.  Otherwise, why bother?

I Love the ideas in this thread, here is my take on the thread.

Split the experience combat and governing.

Path of the Governor and all "governor" traits removed form the combat experience upgrades.

Governing experience received by governing, 1 point per city level / divided by the number of heroes present.  Administration building starting with the bell tower would provide +1,+2.. experience divided among heroes present.

Governing traits should include:

+5, +10 per grain (common)

+1, +2 soil (grain for those not following the other thread) (rare)

+5, +10 per material (common)

+1 +2 Materials (rare)

+1, +2 Essences (rare)

+1, +2 Growth (common)

Adventures Guild should remain a combat experiences getter.  But is obviously needs a boost.  Might I suggest +1 level for trained units and +1 experience for heroes.

I agree the governor class needs to gain benefits over time while they are stationed in a city. Otherwise the "class" makes little sense.  As it is now, their unique benefits apply to being stationed in a city, and they cannot unlock those benefits unless they are outside of a city adventuring. I can't remember the last time I actually had a city get attacked in these games. Certainly not on any consistent enough basis that they could reliably gain xp from defending a city.

I don't think you should limit "Governing XP" to only level 4 heroes with governing trait, that would be very restricting again, I just think you should reward heroes a tiny bit for being idle and helping a city with unrest/growth, And I hope to see some governing traits that give for example 2 production per material.

Sincerely
~ Kongdej