Currently, the king's demesne is basically the backbone of his army, everything else being nerfed.
Additionally, rebel dukes may have been empowered by the capital duchy bonus which applies to them when they go independent (e.g. temporarily independent as rebels against their king). On the other hand, loyal dukes supply you with the arbitrary nonsense 50% limitation which directly contradicts the descriptions of levy laws and crown laws in the tooltips, which have not been adjusted to reflect this duct-tape fix*.
* I don't want to be antagonistic, but it's hard to call the arbitrary 50% modifier an example of professional design, especially if you consider that it appeared out of the blue, contradicted existing concepts of the game, and the tooltips were not adjusted, which means they continue to mislead players as what's going on (e.g. vassals supposedly obliged to provide their all or only allowed to keep small retinues).
The result is powerless kings who need two loyal dukes per each rebel to somehow make it even in army size (retinues would complicate this equation). However, the king is going to be somewhat broke, while the dukes with large demesnes or multiple titles will likely have a better treasury. They will be hiring mercs. The loyal dukes will not.
The next winning claimant is likely to be one of the dukes or a count or courtier. This will lead to an endless cycle of broken kingdoms. Broken not because of vassal plotting or disloyalty or whatever, but because of a gaming mechanic which makes victorious claimants mice in the cats' playground.
Part of the problem is the idea of keeping royal children's claim lists neat, so they only get kingdom claims without any duchy or county claims to reflect their being potential heirs of the entire royal domain (demesne) and not only the overlordship over the kingdom's dukes. The claimants need to have such claims in order to gain some real land.
Also, it makes no sense to leave deposed rulers as powerful superdukes when they are defeated and have their crowns torn off their heads. (Especially something like 100% war score, king imprisoned etc..)
The lack-of-claims problem compounds with the levy nerf problem, resulting in artificial chaos in kingdoms.
Please fix. Wars of the Roses are fine but not when they result from a broken mechanic (e.g. a duct-tape antiblobbing nerf (levies) or a not-so-well-designed anti-cluttering device (awarding just the top claim)). Especially considering that this is likely to lead to external interventions. For example France is going to be hit by the HRE with de iure claims and perhaps even claimant wars within de iure France. England would be another candidate to hit them (though itself being hopelessly broken by such rebellions).
Basically, right now, a single claimant war can throw a kingdom into centuries of irretrievable breakdown or even put it out of competition for the rest of the game.
This does need fixing. And as sorry as I am to say this, the current situation does reflect some really serious issues with the design or rather the way designing is approached. As in not enough analysis, not enough thinking, too much duct tape.
Additionally, rebel dukes may have been empowered by the capital duchy bonus which applies to them when they go independent (e.g. temporarily independent as rebels against their king). On the other hand, loyal dukes supply you with the arbitrary nonsense 50% limitation which directly contradicts the descriptions of levy laws and crown laws in the tooltips, which have not been adjusted to reflect this duct-tape fix*.
* I don't want to be antagonistic, but it's hard to call the arbitrary 50% modifier an example of professional design, especially if you consider that it appeared out of the blue, contradicted existing concepts of the game, and the tooltips were not adjusted, which means they continue to mislead players as what's going on (e.g. vassals supposedly obliged to provide their all or only allowed to keep small retinues).
The result is powerless kings who need two loyal dukes per each rebel to somehow make it even in army size (retinues would complicate this equation). However, the king is going to be somewhat broke, while the dukes with large demesnes or multiple titles will likely have a better treasury. They will be hiring mercs. The loyal dukes will not.
The next winning claimant is likely to be one of the dukes or a count or courtier. This will lead to an endless cycle of broken kingdoms. Broken not because of vassal plotting or disloyalty or whatever, but because of a gaming mechanic which makes victorious claimants mice in the cats' playground.
Part of the problem is the idea of keeping royal children's claim lists neat, so they only get kingdom claims without any duchy or county claims to reflect their being potential heirs of the entire royal domain (demesne) and not only the overlordship over the kingdom's dukes. The claimants need to have such claims in order to gain some real land.
Also, it makes no sense to leave deposed rulers as powerful superdukes when they are defeated and have their crowns torn off their heads. (Especially something like 100% war score, king imprisoned etc..)
The lack-of-claims problem compounds with the levy nerf problem, resulting in artificial chaos in kingdoms.
Please fix. Wars of the Roses are fine but not when they result from a broken mechanic (e.g. a duct-tape antiblobbing nerf (levies) or a not-so-well-designed anti-cluttering device (awarding just the top claim)). Especially considering that this is likely to lead to external interventions. For example France is going to be hit by the HRE with de iure claims and perhaps even claimant wars within de iure France. England would be another candidate to hit them (though itself being hopelessly broken by such rebellions).
Basically, right now, a single claimant war can throw a kingdom into centuries of irretrievable breakdown or even put it out of competition for the rest of the game.
This does need fixing. And as sorry as I am to say this, the current situation does reflect some really serious issues with the design or rather the way designing is approached. As in not enough analysis, not enough thinking, too much duct tape.