Balancing upgrade cost

[alpaca]

Well I only tested this for infantry so I can't be sure, and I didn't test any specific stats but overall performance with upgrades.
Btw, I did a few more tests with a bit more realistic situations where I pinned two (ai controlled) units of FFK with upgrades and charged them from behind with a unit of cavalry (light cav, huge charge bonus).
The result was that I was able to closely beat them when they had 3 exp or 3 armour and I usually lost when they had gold weapons (this was because I could only charge so often and a charge is more effective if you have an orderly cav line). They routed slightly earlier without the experience upgrades but it usually was a thing of around 15/46 whereas the other guys had 20 or so left when they routed.

I think sensible would be to make armor and experience about the same price (which is 24% of the unit price as a rule of thumb that applies to most units) or maybe the armor for about 22% and make weapon upgrades maybe 1.3 or 1.4 times as expensive so maybe 32-40% of the initial price.
The performance of weapon upgrades is considerably better in battles too (played two or three of them since the time).
And for archers I wouldn't suggest buying anything else than that because of the bug I mentioned ;)

There is however a balance problem between different kinds of units because obviously for units with low attack a weapon upgrade is even more worthwile. So I'd put them to the top of the scale with maybe 40% or even slightly more while the units with the highest attack could go a little cheaper.
Likewise for armour upgrades on low-armour units.

And yes, it is more a discussion than a question but I always have problems to put it somewhere because there's no real section to use for that kind of stuff (it's not a real tutorial either, more of an observation) :)