Suggestion: Give all mounts a small attack bonus, to make mounts in general more powerful, but give wargs a bigger one (they're predators, after all).  Have all mounts keep their action point bonus, but take away the warg's world speed bonus, as they're really not built to carry large loads long distances.  Then maybe give wargs a movement speed bonus in forests, as that is the wolf's natural habitat?

Wargs -> faster forest movement

Horses -> faster plains movement

Wargs -> large combat bonus in forests, small combat bonus on hills, no change on plains

Horses -> large combat penalty in forests, small combat penalty on hills, large combat bonus on plains

Wargs -> base movement 3 (4 in forests, 3 in hills)

Horses -> base movement 4 (3 in forests, 2 in hills)

Something like that? I like it.

We definatly need a lot more mount choices....even if it is just some sort of art change to the current ones with more stats.  Mounts are to cool in the game to be so rare.

Actually it may interest you all to know that it has been mentioned in another thread that a resource tile can be made into a variable tile able to have more than one possibility for building an improvement on it.  I'll try and find where I was it written in at but it was by a stardock person so it should only be neccessary to modify the tiles to give the other option for now or repupose them as suggested.

Horses are too useful to simply use for food, this sounds like a better idea for an Empire use of refugee camps. It is just a "modest proposal", and perhaps you could build a "farm" there.

Edited one thing on your post in bold, flipped the horse move values for forest and hills, but something along those lines, yes.  However, the specifics are not all *that* important, what's more important that each receives a bit of flavour.

well, it depends when exactly in the medieval period you mean. true, attacking the front of a solid pike formation was suicide, but the ability of cavalry to outmaneuvre infantry, neutralise missile troops and give the allied infantry the advantage through a flanking maneuvre won a lot of battles. it most of the cases i have studied, infantry were a powerful, yet dependable constant, and cavalry were the big unknown.

mounts that only give speed bonuses are pretty worthless atm. generally i am in no hurry to enter melee where my units can be counterattcked: almost always better to try and kill things before they get to close range. more combat speed just means sooner counter attacks and more of them.

Well ... it was an "organized and prepared" pikemen force that defeated cavalry. A pikemen force that was charged from behind, or charged on all sides, was just as dead as the swordsmen. (but not quite as dead as archers or siege crews)

.. an extra attack maybe, when mounted?

Wargs get a "bite" attack, and horses get a trample/stomp attack?

Pikemen only defeated cavalry when the cavalry commander was foolish enough to charge right onto the waiting pikes. More likely to happen in close quarters with limited room to maneuver. Where there was room to maneuver, the cavalry would be used to flank the pikemen and go charge the annoying archers in the rear, or any other softer and strategically important targets.