This is basically what I do as well. 1.0 and 2.0 can formation together and count as the same faction for spell purposes. Never thought about the blanket bonuses though - good call!

I don't use a cap. There doesn't seem to be a good reason (there are more than enough 2.0 figures that can move 12" and very few 1.0 figures have 7 movement and charge). It's never seemed imbalanced when we've played it. More importantly, capping things is just messy to remember as you're modifying the original value not once, but twice.

And yes, I allow combined abilities. Otherwise I might as well just throw out my cavaliers.

One other thing: I've mentioned it elsewhere, but we errata'd Corpheus and Skyros to have "2.0 charge", which is to say you DON'T double the value for them. Otherwise they're just ridiculous.

Never tried these two. The golem one crossed my mind, just so they could be affected by spells that affect golems, but I just didn't know how folks would take it.

On a different note...
2.0: Objectives; 1.0:Kill 'em all!
The 2.0 mentality of last minute objective dash never bothered me. In the majority of tournaments I played in, I continued with my "kill 'em all" style of play. My logic was simple. If the opponent didn't have any figures left on the battlfield by the end of the game, then they would not be able to control objectives. It made the game feel simpler to me. Because of my habit of wiping out the opponents' armies, most people in my area were afraid to play against me at first. After a while, they developed the same style of playas me. It made local tournaments more interesting.

2.0 Proficiency-Soaring:
I like the soaring proficiency. I believe it adds another dimension to the game. I believe the flight special ability made more sense. Ex: A draconum gets roughed up, maybe he suffers a broken wing. A sorcerer gets roughed up, maybe the sorcerer is too weak to summon the power to fly. What I'm trying to say is, it isn't as realistic. If something takes enough damage, it won't be able to fly anymore. Hence, figures with the flight special ability losing flight. I'm not saying nix the wing speed type. I say introduce a new negative ability, much like either cursed or frenzy. Would "grounded" be a good name? The new ability would not only decrease the figure's point value, but I also believe it would reintroduce the realistic feel of when a wounded figure is no longer capable of flight.

My personal opinion to some points...
First, I agree with the Sigma that the objective tokens are intended to avoid the Hit and Run tactic. Although this is a valid strategy, this is also a little bit "unfair" play.
Also, the ban is not necessary, because the new rules make some old figures not competitive, and these figures will be naturally avoided. the alternative (update the figures of 1.0 to 2.0) should be done figure by figure, maybe with the release of "official" new discs to substitute those into the base (like "replace the old stat discs in the warrior base by the new one of the same collector number"), and small adhesives with swords, wand, wings, shields, damage types or new points values to replace the stats printed directly in the warrior's base, as necessary.
The domains (terrains, wheater conditions etc) is a nice strategy paradigma, once this could turn the power of the batllefield dramatically. Think in a ranged attack based army and in a closed attack based army, in whose army you bet your coins? Now, put a Storm Gale in play (or even a Darkness), in whose army you bet now? If you think that a terrain could destroy your army, play the Clear Terrain, the same for Clear Skies and so on. Your problem is with spell books? Play a Spell Stasis... The domain is a elegant solution to counter invencible armys...
The overwatch and strong flyer are also tactic abilities. I think that these abilities are not intended to give combat advantage to the player, but to help him to position his army before the real combar start or to retreat to a defensive position. For example, a archer with overwatch could advance without being vulnerable in the next turn, and can perform a action in the second turn after que overwatch token is assigned.
The cavalry untis are necessary to any good army, once their proficiences are really usefull, could perform two actions in consecutive turns without pushing, and could perform a Mounted Charge or Bound using any special ability.

A correction (to myself...) the overwatch could not move (it already had been give a ranged combat action...) but could defend strategics areas in the batllefield (that will be important to control... like bishops or towers in chess...)

I would be really REALLY interested in a GOOD balanced idea that combines the good reasons for Objective tokens with the good things about 'kill 'em all' 1.0

I never needed a reason, let alone good ones, to wipe out my opponents' armies. That being said, maybe there should be something along the lines of bonus points or something to that effect for the players who do wipe out their opponents' armies. I always liked the ideas behind some of the scenarios from 1.0 tournaments about controlling a strategic point or area in a game. Give some background and say, this is why it's important, instead of "there it is, go get it."

The main reason a good balanced system might be nice is that while you or I can play like that if we choose to, eventually you run into folks who do play the system with hit and run, or last-minute objective rushes, etc.

Now, while I'd like to hope that we all try to play with people who will be good folks and play by the spirit of the thing, people might have varying definitions of what's acceptable.

More importantly, a decent hybrid is something that can be scored cleanly, as opposed to arguing whether you're scoring more by 1.0 rules or 2.0 rules. And it might be something that can be shared across more than one small play group.

For the whole merging thing, I'm a fan of assigning point values to control of objective tokens (each one being one-sixth to one-fifth of the army total, e.g. 50 points in a 300 point game), and that seems to work pretty well. An alternative is 5-10 points per turn of uncontested control, but that's a pain to keep track of throughout the game.

I've always liked the idea of making objectives into one of three victory conditions, like the Mechwarrior system. that way, they are still important, and everyone is happy. Heck, you can even let it be the tiebreaker condition. Just don't base all victory on the tokens.

1.0 charge/bound - double the speeds is what we played with.

Control tokens. Gain a point for each turn you control one. At the end of 50 mins whoever has the most points wins. That makes the center and yours worth something. Its like the hold and capture feel of a WOW battlefield.

MC/C - I think the free strike and 1st stike of the attacker could be simultaneous. It could force you to pick your 1st attack carefully at a 'pawn' figure, but if it hits (changing your stats) you would be forced to use new movement,attack, SA, etc...)

Overwatch. Our group from Fort Wayne tried it, never really used it. I like the new suggestions here. Instead of checking the figure going through the path, give the figure with overwatch a free spin before it fires. If i'm hunting, and i can tell something is moving, but its out of range. I am going to sight it in and fire when i can. This gives that 'area of threat' feel to the stationary overwatching fig.

Strong flier - never used it, don't like the concept becuase it locks down 2 figures. I like lifting the no token restriction, but would like to see it used that your griffin drops off the attacker, and the attacker either gets a ranged or a combat action (yes, including a charge, but not a surge) when it lands. It would have that deep strike threat and make your opponent really guard against the backside threat.

Shockwave: yeah 1.0 shockwave. I love my Dungeons windminion for this one. I'd like to add instead of one pushing damage to the figures hit, make it an action token. if the fig is pushed it takes the 1 damage for pushing. If it has two, and gets pushed, it would take 2 pushing damage. damage would equal action tokens on it -1.

Infiltrate - no token on them at to start. We got here 1st, and I'm going to shoot you!

Add the option to boost magic damage like "magic enhancement(1.0)" to mage blast(2.0).
Rule of three still applies but a mini deathstar would be fun to play against (again).

Oh well, thats my $.02

I agree with your view of infiltrate. Submerged figures don't receive an action token, and they can be placed in any water terrain on the battlfield.

What do you mean by boosting damage of mage blast? I'm pretty sure magic enhancement wouldn't affect mage blast because it is a replacement value.

I'm going way back without rules and working from memory here,
The atlaean demi-magus had an SA that added +1 to ranged damage.
The deathstar was a stormgolem and several of the Demi-magus. you could deal out 7 clicks of damage with an attack. Stormy had 4 dmg and +1 for each demimagus in base. You could also hit 3 targets for 4 (1 for replacement and +1x3 for 3 demimagus in base with stormy.

oops- just found my old mage knight collectors book.

vol 1, pg 17 "keep a few weak demi-magi in contact with the SG to make those multiple attacks really hurt."

vol 1 pg 209 Damage: "Magic enhancement: This warrior improves the damage delivered by freindly ranged combat attacks. (optional) Any friendly figure given a ranged combat action while in base contact with this warrior will inflict 1 extra click of damage to any opposing figure(s) sucessfully hit by the attack."

Its a power boost for ranged attacks.

here's what i mean, a figure with mage blast, could either a) attack or b) give +1 damage to a figure making a ranged attack.

I played with the 'bound-before-bound' deathstar where you army was pretty much Magus & Stormy (+ a *** Utem crossbowman and one * Imp for harassment/lockdowns).

Basically, you Magic lev'd Stormy into firing range, and he blasted away at the best target. Then, once you'd broken formation, the Magus could hide behind the crossbowman and fire Magic Blast to back up Stormy. Two 12-range, 4-damage attacks in a 200 point army was some pretty rough beats for Rebellion-era play. Plus if you needed 5 points, you could just keep the Magus in contact with Stormy since he had Magic Enhancement (if not, it made the crossbowman a bit more of a threat instead).

Man, that was some good times.

I agree that maybe the Mechwarrior victory conditions are something to look at.

Now I get what you mean. You do actually have that sort of option with bow attack type figures. In a ranged combat formation, you can either a)increase the main firer's attack value by 2 or b) Increase the main firer's damage value by 1.

I have a post somewhere in strategies on this.

But I do agree with you, it would be nice for some wand attack type figures to have this ability without it costing an action much like the good old days with ME.

Stormy+5 Demi Magi= 6 damage to 3 opposing figures
-or-
Thunder Golem+5 Demi Magi= 9 damage to 1 opposing figure (w/pierce)

I like the infiltrate without a token and Overwatch with a freespin. These changes will improve the efficiency of these abilities. But I'm do not understand the logic of the free strike during the MC/C...