Yeah, the Auroch is half the cost, cant be capped at 1 wound and has a higher max damage output.Dude there is a HUGE difference in power-level between a M20 courtesan or a flying Bloodthirstier and a frenetic Auroch.
Are you serious? The question is not the maximum damage but the counter tactics. One chaff and an Auroch is stopped and sent away, you cannot chaff something flying. Auroch do not need to be managed by a champion you have chaff but a Bloodthirstier cannot be chaffed.
Since I was replying to you saying "there are no monsters harder to kill than three character-monsters" there was no reason for me to include non-monster types. But by all means move the goal-posts rather than explain why other much lower damage output things need to limited by duels while more dangerous and cheaper options do not.Moreover you purposely excluded lords without mounts which often have 1+ 4++ and thus are much harder to kill than monsters. Monsters and characters are simply not the same types of units and have not the same counters usually.
The challenge mechanic is there for beefy characters as well as characters on monsters. It seems to me that you conflate characters on monsters/Monsters characters with monsters when in fact they are closer to smaller characters than monsters.
Actually lords and monsters characters are played a lot. By this change you obviously improve them, why doing so if they are already very powerful? Or do you deny that Courtesan, Bloodthirstier, Vampire Counts etc... do see a lot of plays?
It is totally possible to remove challenge but do you really think that a shift to a more character oriented meta is something healthy/needed? Especially considering some faction that you may not play and do not have such: Empire, SE.
My point is that characters do not need a boost, many others deserve it before them. Just remember the ferox hunters or SA cowboy days, they were in every list and got toned down. Going back to it seem a stupid move.