The game needs a system of low level fightings and escalation

[Pendables]

People have been saying this about every Paradox game forever and I don't think it's ever actually been done

 

[Benismann]

Such is the danger in strategy game design of scaling expenses with incomes…
I know the idea is that it makes it easier to balance, but I’m not sure it really works in practice. Seems to me as you add more and more percentage based expenses via mechanics and events it becomes impossible to account for all the potential imbalances.

tbh gold gain/loss form events makes it awful to balance gold in general.

 

[DiabloDeVille]

Nah, in CK2 you were still forced to raise your entire levy because the AI would certainly do so. The scenario you describe only applies fopr when you're fighting a OPM, or when you already control half the map.

With how long it took to gather all forces, you would get border skirmishes at the beginning of the war

 

[HP Delron]

While I agree in principle, think about how this would feel as a player. Imagine, you are the top liege. Your neighbour's vassal declares war on your border vassal. Because it's a small-scale border skirmish you don't get called into it. Your vassal loses the war, and your realm loses territory without you being able to intervene. Would that feel like good, rewarding gameplay?

Could give the player control over the military aspects of their vassal while such a skirmish is playing out? This makes vassal-skirmishes another kind of player content and would incentivize pre-emptively building military buildings for vassals and propping them up with gold for mercs etc..., at least the important border ones.


You lose the zero-interaction territory loss, even if it would still feel bad to be unable to use "All your stuff" so to speak.