[Pocus]

Originally posted by Saber Cherry:
I don't think resources need to be factored into the upkeep system explicitly - that would be a bit confusing. Factoring it into cost, instead, and just using cost for upkeep, seems simpler.

the interest of changing the upkeep formula to take the average of gold+res value, is that you achieve the result of giving added value to LI, without having to browse one thousand units and reevaluate their cost.

PVK:

I don't quite see why better equipped men would necessarily be more expensive to maintain.

I strongly disagree with you. Think of two extremes, a foot knight and a peasant. In dominions it can translate to a Ulmish infantry (say 10-34 gold/res) compared to a milicia (7-2).
Now to think that you need only 30% more gold to maintain a foot knight compared to a milicia is ridiculous (no offence intended against you, I just feel I need to use a strong adjective).

A drafted slinger would get a food ration, and some copper coins each month. A foot knight will ask for at least 2 men to service him (keeping an armor and quality steel weapons fit for battle ask for much time and effort), and I'm not even speaking of his wage.

This would translate in dominions by taking into account the resource cost into the maintenance one. Believe me, it would be a boon to the lighter units, which are very often discarded.

In the pbems I saw (multiplayer environment being the epitome of optimisation), I never saw a single velite, peltast, light infantry, etc. used in war. I think this is quite the proof that something must be done.

Your concern about your Ulmish infantry is right on the other hand. We should not level all units to the same ground. But even if the upkeep would rise, you would still pay the upfront cost of 10 gp, same as a light infantry. But in the long run, you would pay more to maintain them. Seem quite balanced when you compare their armaments.