Heroes differ from rank and file units in being able to use all manner of looted equipment, which often exceeds what you can find at the shop.  They also can't die, receiving only an injury when defeated.

While it is true that the rank and file troops often do the majority of the damage, heroes are more versatile, they can gain new traits and even change equipping before a fight.

I remember not so long ago people were complaining that heroes are OTT, overpowered, and that there is no need to build armies since you can steamroll through the whole map with just heroes...

There will be no absolutely "balanced" solution to this issue, IMHO. I LOVE the customization and individuality of heroes, but since this is not an RPG but rather a strategy game I also love having to reinforce them with suitable armies and troops, and having them play a more supportive or surgical role in the process.

Lest we forget, heroes are the only ones who can do quests and they can change equipment and artifacts on the fly. I personally don't mind that a single hero, no matter how legendary, can no longer take down a batallion of troops.

I hope the OP suggestion to remove them completely is a hyperbole just to show that they should be reinforced - in any case, let me say for the record that I DISAGREE.

Perhaps the only thing that I would change is to give them specific "heroic" abilities versus single monsters (dragonslayer, demonslayer etc.) which should then also be improved to have a decimating effect against ordinary troops...

NOOOOOOO!!!...    If you remove HEROS ... How will I get to LOOT and STEAL thier spells from them???

The heroes now lead troops into battle like the Jedi led clone storm troopers into battle in pre empire days.

I really think a Hero XP Pacing slider would be a great option.  That way those who want faster leveling and more powerful heroes can crank it up and those who are happy with the current lower powered heroes can turn it down.  I know this can be tweaked in ElementalDefs.xml but maybe just stick the option up front.... at least it would save a lot of debate about it.  There's never going to be a setting that suits everyone.

Defenders and assassins are not worthless they can both be made unkillable fairly easily. Defenders can get a massive amount of health, especially ironeers, and reduce damage from most troops to pretty much nothing. Assassins never get hit, period, make it a wraith and they can solo the map on auto-resolve.

A level 20ish defender with a lightning hammer can actually put out some OK damage, with other good gear they can do like 50 damage per hit, which can outright kill a lot of the crappy troops the AI sends at you (even companies), and militia. Armored targets, with levels and health bonuses, a crushing blow will make a noticeable impact on. It's not great damage obviously, but it can help, and their main job is to be in the middle of the enemy absorbing blows.

Assassins can pretty easily do double that damage, built right they can almost do as much damage as a company. Again while being impossible to kill.

Depending on how the Reap change in .80 works warriors might also become useful, if it becomes 10 health gained per hit they might be able to hold their own in a fight with the right equipment. I haven't tried their overpower skill yet, I'm guessing warriors can destroy pretty much any enemy troop, no matter how well geared or leveled. More damage to trained troops than assassins, but less damage to single targets.

All that is ignoring the tactical spells most of them can cast, regardless of being a mage or not. Also keep in mind we are still playing with mostly FE champions, the better ones have not been updated to LH yet, we'll see next patch how they do. Just look at the spider guy champion new with LH, he comes with a +5 health per level trait, that's huge. I've been hoping to get the ghost champion, I'm guessing she is immune to physical damage, which is basically game changing.

I never understand these "please remove one of the essential elements of the game" posts.

A "give a hero the pink slip" option wouldn't be a bad idea.

Heroes could be immune to Swarm bonus, that would help them considerably. Or there could be a tech upgrade which gives Heroes "bodyguards" so they have more "people in their unit", which would have a % chance to soak the damage instead of the Hero when damaged.

I think it might be interesting to have heroes die, and then be dead.

But maybe provide some Life spells that resurrect them, or Death spells that zombify them.

I have a better idea! Instead of removing heroes, what about fixing them?

Problems are solved, not avoided.

This, indeed.  Honestly, I rarely set my heroes to level up as Assassin, Defender, or Warrior.  They've made Warrior better, and Defender will be better in the next patch, but really, why would I want a hero that doesn't cast spells or augment my troops?  I know that the basic spell trees can be cast by all heroes, but if they're spec'd out for combat...  Plus, they can't learn new basic spell trees unless they visit Pariden (or you have The Decalon).  

I did have one really good Defender hero once.  He got a mace that did bonus damage based on the number of units in the stack.  He was hitting for over 100 damage non-critical.  Plus, with his armor, he was practically unkillable by physical attacks.  Him and the Storm Dragon just decimated my enemies... mostly the Storm Dragon, but he helped.

I think that heroes just need to be more interesting than any trainable units.  Mages certainly are.  My sovereign is always a mage.

Unfortunately, sarcasm is often misinterpreted on forums and mailing lists when there is only text and no measuring of body language.