Levy Support Costs

[Pzt_Dragoon47]

One should not also forget that by all rights your heavy cavalry/knights should disband after 40 days.

Mercenaries were a very big part of this era, especially in the early ages of lacking crown authority the ability to have a force for combat that won't whine and complain as long as they were getting paid was a lot more reliable than a feudal knight who by right can go home after an allotted time. Levies were untrained peasants bolstered by semi-professional soldiers and led by nobles on horses, the true combat power of the age. As a duchy one can afford the expenses necessary to use them but it also means less money used on other things and there's only so much that 3,000 mercenaries can do against the late game castles and when someone has hired a company they do not sell their sword until the other house is finished with them. They're a valuable and limited commodity and apparently they are even more expensive in the full game which means that it would take a substantial enough amount of time for a count to afford them and it's money one could use to build lists and breed their own knights or upgrade their castle.

I think I'll play at least half a game of the full version before I start complaining about imbalance if it isn't dreadfully obvious. I will say that the AI could probably use mercs more often but with the limited number of them I'm not sure how that would affect game dynamics.

 

[louie97]

One should not also forget that by all rights your heavy cavalry/knights should disband after 40 days.

I thought after that point you had to pay them or something. I think most important western European medieval wars involved knights and lasted longer than around one month.

 

[Pzt_Dragoon47]

It could be extended to 90 days in times of war but it still ran the risk of the knights expressing their dislike for you. After that, the fun began I would expect. Wasn't meaning to be accurate in any form by that statement, suppose I was a bit snarky at the time of the post.

 

[Secret Master]

It could be extended to 90 days in times of war but it still ran the risk of the knights expressing their dislike for you. After that, the fun began I would expect. Wasn't meaning to be accurate in any form by that statement, suppose I was a bit snarky at the time of the post.

Your vassals already start disliking you when you raise their levies too long. Wars that drag on for years will see your vassals pretty pissed if you keep their levies up the whole time. And vassals that dislike you give fewer troops overall and less revenue, so abusing your vassals in the long run will result in less overall military strength.

 

[richelieu1628]

That might work.

However...

There is a certain point where they will start to swarm Scandinavia and the Russian Princes (they won't attack the Empire since they aren't stupid). Remember that those warrior cult troops can be used offensively, too.

Personally, I don't mind the Baltic Pagans getting wiped out early. The recently conquered penalties are so severe that it's still 20 or more years until it pays off. Go ahead and form Lithuania; you'll still just be a duke in terms of revenue and manpower for a couple of decades.

That is true, and a lot of pagans get that building where the balance could go totally out of whack. The mongols, say.

But if you just buff up the Baltic Heavy Infantry Camp building, it seems to work okay. I made it so that they get that one from the start, and about doubled the benefit. They usually get into one big fight with Poland at the start (when Mecklenburg and Pommerania fall), and mess Poland up good, but then they mutually leave each other alone for the 50-60 odd years that I managed to play in my couple of teaser games so far.

 

[hitchens]

Why are leavies too cheap, according to what standard? I'm pretty sure the cost varied from country to country, for example in the case of Norway all free men were required to serve in war time in exchange for not being taxed during peace time. the cost is fine, the cost of mercs on the other hand could be raised significantly.

 

[Rob de Hard]

The whole military system is broken and dumb.

CK1 actually had one. Ck2 doesnt bother.

The whole idea of levies in ck1 was way way smarter and more realistic. You had to have laws which favoured either building up a vassals military capability, whilst providing governmental autonomy if you wished to use armies someone else paid for.

In CK2 you dont pay for your own levy which makes no sense whatsoever to me .. and your vassals dont care at all of you use theirs.

I'm stumped as there doesnt seem to be any logical or entertaining relationship between the laws, crown authority and waging war. Centralisaton/high authority should dramatically reduce military strength, and make war crippling expensive. The upside is stability and economic strength.

The whole 'strategy' element of CK2 seems to be absent. It just boils down to not a lot.. marriage a bit, have kids, repeat. Pretty boring already tbh!

 

[Cymsdale]

The whole military system is broken and dumb.

CK1 actually had one. Ck2 doesnt bother.

The whole idea of levies in ck1 was way way smarter and more realistic. You had to have laws which favoured either building up a vassals military capability, whilst providing governmental autonomy if you wished to use armies someone else paid for.

In CK2 you dont pay for your own levy which makes no sense whatsoever to me .. and your vassals dont care at all of you use theirs.

I'm stumped as there doesnt seem to be any logical or entertaining relationship between the laws, crown authority and waging war. Centralisaton/high authority should dramatically reduce military strength, and make war crippling expensive. The upside is stability and economic strength.

The whole 'strategy' element of CK2 seems to be absent. It just boils down to not a lot.. marriage a bit, have kids, repeat. Pretty boring already tbh!

Are we playing a completely different game? I have to pay for my own levy, and when I use my vassals they start moaning and groaning about it after a short time. Not only that, but they start begging me for money to help maintain them.

 

[zxc]

I think the levy costs are pretty good currently. In the first few decades, you can afford them easily and the main limitation is manpower; but after 100 years and a lot of improved infrastructure within your realm, the cost really does ramp up and outpaces your income.

As for mercenaries, I think it's a bit trickier. Unless some changes are made to make it possible to go deeply in debt like the rulers of Europe did in history, the mercenary costs should not be insanely expensive. It seems to me that the main issue people are facing are that if they save for a few years, they can afford enough mercenaries to beat a larger realm in a war, but the AI doesn't respond in kind. Perhaps if the AI kept a sort of 'bank' of gold reserved for wars in which it's outnumbered, whereupon the AI hires out mercenaries of their own. I mean, if you saved for years and hired out a ton of mercs and declared war on a strong AI blob, and they suddenly hired out a bunch of mercs as well, you'd have a much harder situation on your hands.

 

[milman]

I think it is ok. If we talking about levy of 1000 soldier it looks it is cheap but wait till you need 10k or 20k soldiers in some wars, you will be quickly out of money.

And i dont even go in wars, managing your earls and dukes is pretty interestring. This game was never about war, there are many better games in that aspect from CK1 or 2 so that isnt important at all for me. If i want to wage war i would play some other games.