What would it take to Fix (Melee)Light Warbeasts?

To be fair as well, there are several different weapon setups for lights. There is a difference between the several different Cyclops, for example. Only the Savage is borne down by a lack of a greater role taken over by literally any cheap Heavy.

Even comparing them against Light Warjacks tends to fall flat as most Light Warjacks trend to carry two weapons, while the damage Light Warbeasts tend to only have one.

Make them more efficient animus can be a solution. Light warjack and beasts are already take the support role and avoid the direct combat role. They are one of the worst pick for the direct combat role in the game as well.

There are some light beasts that CAN fight and a few of them are actually decent line combat models. But most lights are not. Also their point is expensive than the most other support lines so only for the support is hard to call a proof either.

Well, being a light makes them weaker statline and weapons than their heavy counterparts. Because they have the resource management system their basic weapons are usually weaker than the combat solos. So... perhaps allow them to fight as much as a combat solo even without fury seems worthwhile. After all they usually costs two solos, so it isn't bad that much.

Around +1 point of ARM may a solution? It doesn't change their fate when they face the enemy heavies, but the change makes them more durable against units.

Give them a sure role that mimics a heavy seems not so bad. See Hunter, that has the similar gun with a Defender. Although it results Hunter overshadows Defender, though.

I think they need a good mix of price and abilities and a good supporting caster.

Let's take a look at Dervish spam: Cheap light with 2 attacks that has good movement to come around, and with Amons Synergy in the back, able to kill almost anything.
Vyros2 and Griffon spam: Cheap. Fast. Synergy.
Una2: similar abilities.

Now about Trollbloods:
Back in mk2 they had a theme force called 'Elemental Evolutionary' (something like that ) which gave a discount on the element lights (cheap) played with Calandra (re-roll dice aka damage buff). Now they can all shoot as well but my point is they became cheap enough that you could spam to a point where attrition became viable with the list.

I think lights at around 7 points makes most sense. Like the Basher - they almost nailed that melee light. Niche ability you would want in a lot of lists, but only 1 initial and a crit effect makes sure that it's not reliable enough = see no table time.

The problem is also the fury mechanic. You can't spam as effectively as with warjacks, due to control area, fury and limited fury management.

I like the new CoC lights. 6-7 points, fragile but with solid output, just as a light should be.
I think the animus of melee light warbeasts is too much of a drawback but PP value it too high.

On paper, I remember reading a warjack with 1 focus is supposed to function about as well as a warbeast that runs hot. A 'jack with 2 focus should function like a beast with a 2 cost animus/spell on it.
keep that in mind in terms of hitting power of 'jacks vs 'beasts. it's also why jack spam tends to work better than beast spam - the 'jack only needs to start its activation in the caster's control to get loaded up, a beast needs to stay inside to max out fury.

If light beasts had their cost cut in half you'd never see the end of light spam lists. Just look at the Gorehound, it sees a lot of use at 6 points. 3-4 point lights would be absolutely insane.

Same thing with buffing their innate damage output to a heavy's level - it'd shift the game to be focused around delivering your little baby Longinuses to the opponent's heavies, or, more likely in that type of meta, their Caster. Heavies would become completely redundant, because this is a game based on delivering the first strike, if you can pay half the price for the same firepower, you can jam the heavy with one beast and then finish it off with the second. or outgun it, if it's ranged, since you're packing twice the heat. or kill it on the alpha, because that's the one advantage lights currently have. again, no thanks.

As for durability or utility - just look at the Binki brigade. Destroyers cost 14 points and see some use, mainly as a meme build though, but if you could get that amount of durability for 7 points they'd crush the meta. Alpha strike or not, there's realistically only so much a player can chew through.

There's no such thing as a model that's so bad you wouldn't want it for free, assuming we're not talking about req options. I don't like light beasts as req options either, I think those should continue to be a way to steer the player towards fielding hard support models.
So, free models: even models like Cask Imps are decent picks. A light beast for free is crazy.

I also intentionally didn't bring up the subject of Synergy earlier -  while you need to consider the fact that it exists, I think it's a design mistake to build lights entirely around the spell, because it means there's no reason to play them unless it's a Synergy caster.

Half the price is too cheap but I see your point.

Another idea could be to remove animi from lights to compensate for the cheaper potential cost. Then give them long leash or some other minor ability, since controlling square zones on either flank is often difficult in Hordes.

I think what has been forgotten here is that lights are very hard to remove for their cost. You see this in brawlmachine a lot, if I put a light somewhere then the oponent has to commit something big to remove it, or they won't remove it.

I think it is this defensive role that makes lights good. They lose out against heavies and win against infantry or if they have to contest something while shooting or supporting.

This does not translate well to 75 points, where there are more resourses to remove them plus a armor cracking meta, but maybe their cost/toughness still helps them out. If I play a real game on a table, suddenly it feels very good to have that piece still standing around in turn 4!