The point is that the hero starts as a "dumb newbie," but fights in the final stages like a true "hero."

Then a fair question arises: why create different types of "dumb newbies" if the player will still develop them into whatever they want? What's the point of these 100-500 generic characters that can be developed in any way, when the difference (within each Faction) will only be in their special ability? A very small difference; the special ability will never account for even 10% of the character's development (unless it's overpowered).

The very essence of NHF loses its meaning: we've added new heroes and special abilities, but the difference between them is actually becoming smaller (more overlap in starting perks, identical stats and their distribution, identical chances for development).

Regarding the "chess" analogy, that's not the point. The fact is that underdeveloped heroes don't have enough differences between them, and therefore there's no point in creating even more of them. We're not talking about giving heroes level 21 or 20-30 perks at the start (full development). We're talking about making the starting data significantly more distinct by adding a couple of additional starting perks.

It would be better to strengthen all special abilities N times.

Enhanced starting perks can be seen as an enhanced (strengthened N times) comprehensive special ability. If there's a will, there's a way, and a corresponding point of view can always be found.

Well, okay, in NHF, the addition of new heroes is only for quantity, that's clear enough.

Now let's return to ASW itself, separate from NHF.

Regarding the classes themselves, if there's a will, an excuse can always be found. You can find 6 combinations of magic, you can find 12, or you can find 15 or 30. Everything (the search for ideas) depends only on the desire. You can not even base it on magic, but find dozens of other fundamental differences.

Added 15 minutes ago

Let's assume that the academics will have a mage and an alchemist. The first actively uses all schools of magic, the second, for example, supports units by increasing attack and ranged attack (mages have 3 ranged attack stacks!), and focuses on synergy instead of spellcasting. Where is the alternative? The alternative that existed before classes simply means that each of these choices will be available for the class.

The point of dividing into classes is specialization and stronger development in one direction or another, depending on the class. If versatility and a large range of available development options are required, classes are not needed. If a range of effective development options is required, then classes are very desirable (even if it means sacrificing some of the versatility in terms of development options in favor of choosing between classes).