Okay, so just read through the design (but not the thread). I have not read past the base fighter you presented yet onto archetypes or anything else. Thoughts in order:
This is a big one... Here we go!
Saves: A part of me is on the fence about reflex. The iconic fighter in my mind is the durable old soldier who might not be very fast moving. I would be happier with good will for both theme and value.
Fighters are masters of physical combat. They should have good reflexes. There's an argument to be made about a good Will save, but that same argument can be made for pretty much every class. A situational bonus to certain effects (fear, fatigue, mind control) fits better IMHO.
Skills: I would much rather see Stealth over Appraise. There are a bit many knowledge skills and none of them have a space between knowledge and the type. This goes about triple for history and nobility. The flavor of a noble fighter is great, but better suited to traits and archetypes. An archetype can also steal social talents which would be cute.
Stealth is a better skill, but not as universally fitting as Appraise. Not all Fighters are black-ops infiltrators, but they all should be good at evaluating weapons and armor. Kn(History) and nobility gives the Fighter knowledge about great battles, legendary warrios, military organizations, etc. All of that is also fitting for nearly every Fighter out there.
Besides... You get to choose two class skills to customize your Fighter to whatever archetype you want. ;)
Fighting Style: Nope. Nope all this. I don't think anyone has ever said the problem with Fighter is that 1st level. And while I think dipping 1st level Fighter is outdated by other classes and archetypes this is way overboard. It also does not restrict your second feat to being a combat feat.
Basically, either I am playing with house rules that say these feats are freebies, or I am not. Having them handed to me in this way is overboard big time especially at a level where they are not needed. I'm happy with just my usual feat here thanks. If anything, a choice of terrible feats (like tower weapon proficiency and aquatic combatant) in place of your tower weapon proficiency would be better.
The bonus feat is not really a bonus if it has to be spent paying feat taxes. Fighting Style is meant to allow players to get those taxes out of the way and actually gain an extra benefit. If your GM gives you these for free... Good. If you don't, here you go! You're welcome!
Why would I give them a terrible option? The whole point of this homebrew is making Fighters more effective. Switching Tower Shield Proficiency for some crappy feat is completely pointless.
You're right about it not being limited to a combat feat. That's a mistake. Thanks for pointing it out.
Practice Overcomes Talent (Ex): I get the idea here, but I would just nix the words "Prestige Classes." Prestige classes should be Prestigious. I know, they are not, they generally suck. But, that's a fault that should be fixed in Prestige class design and not one that should be fixed on the fighter's end. In theory the idea is you NEED what you qualify for a prestige class with to be effective.
They are still just as prestigious. Fighters simply have an easier time qualifying for them. After all, they are supposedly elite warriors. Besides, this doesn't let them skip on feat/BAB/level/skill ranks/etc prerequisites... Just attributes.
Last but not least, fixing PrC design is far beyond the scope of this homebrew.
Weapon Training: Early access is a nice thought, 1st level is too early. By a long shot.
"CMD vs disarm, dirty trick, steal and sunder while wielding it." Grammar needs help here. Perhaps, "CMD vs disarm, dirty trick, steal, and sunder attempts while wielding it."?
Fighters are ironically the one Full BAB class that gets no bonus to attack rolls at first level (maybe Gunslingers as well? I don't remember right now). I thought that deserved fixing. I'll improve the gramar.
Combat Prowess: I'll be honest, I looked for combat feat, saw it, and then said okay. I... don't get why these can't just be combat feats that have a required Fighter level. Pretty much every other class with an effective Fighter level could use better high level combat feats. This just feels like a design space that makes things more complicated for no reason.
What's the point of Combat Prowess replaces Combat Feats with Fighter level requirements? Couldn't tell you. I tried reading through some of them at various levels and while balance might need tweaking on quite a few they just sound like combat feats to me.
Basically.
Why aren't Rogue Talents just feats that require levels in Rogue? Why aren't Rage Powers just feats that require levels in Barbarian?
The point is to make it sound cooler and give more freedom to the designer and players. Making them feats means they are expected to follow the same standards and limitations of feats... And most feats suck.
Solo Tactics: This level feels flooded with stuff and solo tactics feels like the weak link. Granted, bravery isn't that good, but it just feels like too much too fast. Maybe bump to forth or fifth.
Solo Tactics isn't all that good... But it fits the class. Remember: Fighters aren't just Warrior+. They are masters of the battlefield. And as such, they can take advantage of their allies' positioning and actions even if their allies themselves aren't trained to fight in formation.
Man-at-Arms: I did spy enough of this thread while scrolling down to post to notice people talking about this. I'm going to echo and say the flavor and necessity eludes me. Sure, magic item dependence sucks, but this feels like the wrong answer. I don't think Rock, Paper, Scissors is necessarily a bad thing design wise. Being relevant all the time feels like bad d20 design to me. I'd argue they should only get the first affect to count any weapon they wield as magic. The last effect might be savable a bit by rolling into higher levels of armor training as an additional bonus.
I answered this in the post just above yours. Linking so as to avoid making this post even longer.
Fearless/Vigilance: Neither of these feel bad, just crowded in at the same level. Again too much for something that's not really a big problem. Especially when next level is meh.
Good point.
Martial Mastery (Ex): This is SORELY needed. Enough so that it should probably be either a feat or found at an earlier level. I can see it at 9th, but I wanna see it sooner. Actually, honestly I would rather this as is, but also have a new combat feat that gives 2-3 additional weapons per weapon focus or other feats that only apply to one. That would cover the breath of problems that need solved better if both this existed as is and there was a feat that was similar but different.
To be fair, most characters only use 1~2 types of weapons anyway... I think this is more about flavor than crunch. It's a good ability, and very fitting to the class... But not particularly powerful, IMO.
Levels 13, 17, and 19: Wait, where did my class features go?! A moment ago I could've sworn I had too many. Now I barely get any. Welp, okay time to go on towards a different class... Oh, wait is this supposed to be the point of combat prowess? Punishing me if I convert to Brawler after you starve features?
You have a point about levels 13 and 17... And I'll probably move a couple features to those levels. But 19th levels gives you Weapon Mastery! That's huge!
Aside from that... There's no punishment here. If you want to take levels in Brawler, you're free to do it. Nothing forces you to build a high-level fighter... But if you don't, you don't get any of the goodies meant for high-level Fighters. That's kinda of the whole point of class-based systems.
Overall: The outline here is okay, but lacks refinement. Too much comes online early and too little comes online late. The class feels top heavy and overly bogged down. There's a lot of good concepts on class features here, but the class balance is a big problem.
Hopefully my reply will clarify my design choices and the intention behind them. Anyway, thanks for the feedback.
About a common Fighter complaint, this does nothing for the social side besides 2 more skill points, but... Ehhh. Plenty of other classes only have skill points towards that end. If something were to be done I can only imagine it being Intimidate based.
They also have a better selection of class skills (including the ability to choose two of them) and some nice Combat Prowesses. And there's a whole archetype focused on leading your allies in battle!
Ugh... I really want the Warlord's abilities Lead by Example and Strike as One to come online earlier... But I'm not sure how to make them fit the class feature progression. ><'
Maybe fusing Unity and Scouting to open up space...
Gahh!
So... Some people suggested turning the Paragon archetype into its own class. I finally got around to doing it... It's far from finished, but if you'd like to take a look at its very early version... You can find it here.
I appreciate all feedback you guys are willing to give. I'll create a proper discussion thread for it once it's closer to completion. :)
The Vanish ability breaks off mid-sentence. Your text has various leading issues too (the spacing between the lines).
I guess the text formatting suffered along the many copy/pastes and editing. I'll take a closer look and search for typos soon.
Thanks for pointing it out. :)