It sounds like each of them will be more distinct now, actually. Mages can't block incoming attacks unless they're using a shield, which requires branching out into the warrior archetype. If they make heavy armor seriously hinder spellcasting then that will go a long way towards balance as well. Marksmanship is under stealth as usual, but there is the implication that daggers will actually fall under stealth now. As long as they give each skillset its own distinct advantages and disadvantages, I'm sure it will be fine.

The Skyrim system would be balanced by the fact that you only get 50 perks. So no matter which type of character you play, you still have to decide which perks you are going to use.

...why does it seem like someone always has to be worrying about something, so they start makin up problems to worry about?

seriously... its a single player game, a roleplaying game, where most people are gonna try roleplaying.

some people might just have one character stay in a single town and have them work like an average person, occasionally going out hunting or something.

i know im gonna do that with atleast one character, maybe have him move around a little, if i feel he/she should have a change of scenery.

i dont worry about builds, i just go with what i like, and thats usually a blade mage... i'd select all the magic schools i could, as well as the longblade/blade skill in morrowind/oblivion.

i like to give each of my characters a little mix, and i only occasionally tried pure types if i felt like trying something new... i have to say, playing a pure warrior/mage/thief was alot harder than my usual thing.

The main issue I think, is when it is so unbalanced that it is broken. It is a single player game after all, and there should be no "wrong" choices in how you build your character, aside from doing something incredibly asinine.

If someone were to play a full blown pure warrior, mage, or thief type character so to speak, one should not be more viable than the other. And one should not be more frustrating than the other. Some people obviously will, stick to one character throughout the whole game, and there should never be a situation where you end up feeling that you "gimped" your character by not choosing to branch out.

I don't think players should be "herded" into being "a super godly I can be the best at everything" type character due to style or archetype imbalances.

Because there is nothing in the world so good that it can′t get better So people like to discuss how things could be better, even if the main feature of TES becomes a lot better (namely, role playing), people still want to discuss how they can bring the other aspects such as combat to be as good as they can be.

So people will look at the problems no matter how minor and discuss them.

@OP - It's nearly confirmed that Speechcraft and Mercantile have been combined into Speechcraft. The screen showing the skillset of the mage shows "eechcraft" on the far left side when in full resolution. This was noticed a long time ago and has been fairly concluded based on the number of skills per archetype. See older threads about the skills if you want a more thorough explanation.

As for your reasoning about the Warrior having a "bloated" skillset in Skyrim.....I think you're missing the point of the change to 1H and 2H. To be fair, the change from Blade and Blunt to 1H and 2H skills doesn't reduce the skill count, but it does simplify the skill concepts themselves, at least. Yes, most people use only one type, but with perks unique to 1H or 2H, there will be incentive to use both based on the combat situation. In Oblivion, without perks, and with only Blade and Blunt, it was bloated. In OB, why would I put down one of my perfectly good swords to attack something with a mace or axe? But in Skyrim we'll have better reasons to use a claymore or 2H axe or warhammer because of the perks associated with the 2H skill. The same goes for the 1H skill, as well. I think Bethesda's got it right on that one, giving a "Warrior" double the combat options of the other 2 archetypes(i.e. Mage with magic and Thief with bow). ***Also, the secret bonus of making the change to 1H and 2H is that Bethesda can now add polearms/halberds/spears to the game in the 2H skill, thus keeping only 2 melee weapon skills, while actually adding more weaponry to the Warrior's arsenal.
They are trending towards the complete removal of any skills that "bloat" a character's skillset. Bethesda ditched Athletics and Acrobatics, removed Mysticism as a skill, and will combine Speechcraft and Mercantile. This is a great thing imo, and I'm excited to see how it will work.

EDIT: Snipped to make a new thread

I am also worried that the warrior/combat build is weaker than mage or stealth. I hope they balance this, but it should be a little tolerance of slight differences since it is a singleplayer game. Only a little imbalance if it has to be in IMO though.

I never felt warrior were weaker than stealth or magic user in Morrowind / Oblivion. :shrug:

Bingo. That's the question, and you've already listed some possible answers. Most kind of you!

Here's my rendition of it:

New Warrior Skill:

Tactics
-Bashing: Can open locks, Simply aim at a chest and power swing at it. Damage to your weapon (You can only repair in towns) would prevent abuse.

Not only that, but with bashing, a warrior could use his surroundings to his advantages. Smashing your weapon into a boulder, you could send it hurtling onto an unsuspecting dragon! That's something that neither the Mage nor Thief can do!

-Intimidation: Good for combat, good for persuasion