Too many troops

[No idea]

The number of soldiers we get in this game is totally out of reality. No ruler during the middle ages had at his disposal such huge numbers of men. I am not talking about manpower or any other related concept. I am just talking about real facts. In my current game I own England, Wales and Ireland. I can field (me, retinues included, and my direct vassals) by 1250 around 70.000 men. And that having into account garrisons don’t count in this game as men you have to pay for. It´s completely out of reality. A century later English kings during the 100 years war couldn’t afford more than a few thousands for a field army (6.000 in Crecy, IIRC). Around 3 times that number if we take the men in garrisons into account. But in this game you get 4 or 5 times more men than IRL (and that not having into account men garrisoning your own castles). And that not having into account that, even after fielding such huge armies, you usually have enough money to pay for mercs or holy orders. So more men into the struggle. It all feels like Vicky 2, were you press the mobilize button and you get huge masses of men ready for the slaughter.

 

[Isaios]

You're at least some thousands off about Crecy. More around 10-12 thousand, twice-ish that on the French side.

Third Crusade saw the Germans with some 100.000 men walking around (untill their boss went for a long swim).

Anyway, this has been discussed to death repeatedly. Some rather nice threads from around June I think. Check them out.

 

[Malibu Stacey]

It's a bit 'gamey' the way you can barely field a few thousand troops in 1066 then even with loads of wars & diseases everywhere, a few centuries later you can field hundreds of thousands just because everyone builds a bunch of new buildings in their realms.

Also this means mercs are ridiculously overpowered at the start of the game and comedically ineffective from mid to late game. Most counties can field more troops than the mercs max retinues far too quickly (a single rebelling county tends to get the same if not more troops than a merc company has). Considering the amount of troop stacks which are hot dropped by aliens on to the map during wars for independence which have tens of thousands of troops per stack, a merc company who can field 5-6k troops is pretty dumb.

 

[Isaios]

It's a bit 'gamey' the way you can barely field a few thousand troops in 1066 then even with loads of wars & diseases everywhere, a few centuries later you can field hundreds of thousands just because everyone builds a bunch of new buildings in their realms.

Also this means mercs are ridiculously overpowered at the start of the game and comedically ineffective from mid to late game. Most counties can field more troops than the mercs max retinues far too quickly (a single rebelling county tends to get the same if not more troops than a merc company has). Considering the amount of troop stacks which are hot dropped by aliens on to the map during wars for independence which have tens of thousands of troops per stack, a merc company who can field 5-6k troops is pretty dumb.

That's a far better point. Might have been better if the buildings were more along the lines of the Training Grounds or the Cultural Building. Increasing the quality rather than the quantity (as much).

 

[No idea]

You're at least some thousands off about Crecy. More around 10-12 thousand, twice-ish that on the French side.

Third Crusade saw the Germans with some 100.000 men walking around (untill their boss went for a long swim).

Anyway, this has been discussed to death repeatedly. Some rather nice threads from around June I think. Check them out.

Those numbers are believed to be an exaggeration by many historians. Apart from that, one thing is actual combatants and a whole different one is the mob size. Medieval armies (and also far previous and later ones) were followed by a lot of people. Especially during Crusades, armies were followed by large numbers of pilgrims and non combatants. So, even taking your number as correct, that 100.000 people figure is not a valid point, IMHO. Let´s say only a third of them were actual combatants. In game, being the HRE Emperor, you can field 2 or 3 times that number of men by 1190.

Again, taking Crecy. Around 12.000 men on the English side. Twice that number on French one. In game, by 1350, you can easily field EIGHT times those numbers of English or French. Even if we taken into account English and French garrisons (which, in game, are not taken into account as men you have to pay for) we still get medieval kings with several times the real life number of men at their disposal.

 

[Isaios]

Can? Certainly. Maybe the English King didn't WANT to? Or to translate game-terms, his vassals loathed his posterior with a virulence and passion usually reserved for ingrown toe-nails.

I'm aware of the inflation many historians see any time they look at a primary source, and in many cases I can also see their point (if I were the chronicler of a monarch with some self-esteem issues and practical unlimited power over the powerless, I'd take steps to keep my intestines where they belong), but unless one can prove the primary sources wrong, I find it ridicolous to NOT accept them as true. Or true-ish.

Now, I agree that troop numbers are probably too high, but that's not an all that important issue, what IS important is if the troop numbers are realistic relative to other nations. So you might field twice as many troops as you should have been able to, but as long as you opponents are also able to field twice as many, it doesn't matter. (Except in the aesthetics etc.)

 

[Hootieleece]

The problem is that the Clausewitz Engine which is used in CK2. Is Designed for Nation-State Warfare of later times.

The games basically thinks of every County.....as a separate nation.

And When you put Medeival Style mechanics over that base......You get the OP Kingdoms and Empires.Crown Authority Law is too easy to raise and too powerful as to levy contributions.Even with Autonomous Vassals Law the HRE can raise a large percentage ALL of its vassals troops.On Autonomous Vassal Law at minimum Vassals should get an event that gives them the right to refuse the Call up.....(with appropriate maluses and punishments)

Also Higher CA should actually give tax money instead of more troops.....Scutage(Shield tax) thus making retinues and Mercenaries more valuable.

 

[Lord Finnish]

Battle of Manzikert in 1071 had 60,000-100,000 soldiers involved
When Alexios Komnenos gained power, one of the first things he was put up against was 40,000 Cumans.
When the Robert Guiscard and Bohemond invaded Dyrrachion, they had 30,000 troops.

If anything, this game has too few troops.

 

[cywang86]

I kinda wish there's more emphasis on Population in CK2, or eu3/hoi3.
Instead of a flat increase of troop from buildings, you get a higher percentage of troop from population instead.

This, plus some policies and buildings that increase/decrease the population increase rate and max size would make the game a lot more dynamic and rely less on RNG traits of your heir/vassal for the opinion for levies.

 

[Arizal]

I agree with cywang86. Without doing a Victoria system here, it could be good if we had more idea how much people we have under us.

I would also add two more ideas :

- I think we should be able to reinforce garrisson with our standing troops (I don't know why a garrisson is impossible to raise)
- Mercenaries shouldn't be troops popping from nowhere, but something like deserters or professionnal soldiers, living in devastated kingdoms and reinforcing with their prestige, so that they could be buyable in the right circumstances.