To be honest, I thing they originally might have thought that it would be long. But you dont include all the balancing that they have done to speed up the campaign not the least speeding up the rate at which skills level.
Let's face it, they won't be adding anything or fixing core issues or adding depth anymore - just fixing obscure crashes/bugs. All we have are number tweaks now only; whether we think they should be inherent in the base game or as a mod.When you put your focus on it it only takes you around 2 weeks or less, to get to the lordhunting stage. Its going to be difficult to stretch out the early game much, as long as the goal is to get an army. Thats why I think it will be better to fit in another partial goal, worth aiming for, instead.
My fundamental point here is that goals just need to be reasonable.
No, but same as originally, the cost of chest armor should not be what it is currently if other elements of the 'value' of money is better imposed to bring them more in line. Armor costs as they are are solely a money sink, same with buying lords or player ransom (just %scaling to the player). So, on to your point, if it takes a player 10 days to get 500K (from all current avenues) to buy that 250K armor; with an adjusted cost measure, it's the same as if it takes them 10 days to get 20K (same avenues) to buy that same 10K armor.No, I dont want to spend say a year grinding bandits to be able to afford a cool chest armor for one person. Thats just too slow progress. On the other hand, it doesnt really matter that you can/could buy the entire world with little effort through a combination of trade/smithing.
Except, now with other factors like tweaking troop wages or other income or cost modifiers, those costs come more in line as a 'middle-ground' for balancing.
As it is now, the player can easily accumulate more money than they know what to do with it while still maintaining a 150+party of T6 troops, a few roaming parties, and uncapped garrisons; but still net a decent amount of denars (not even accounting smithing, tournament loot, or even battle loot) creates that dichotomy. Especially since the only other cost 'hindrance' is if you accept that scaling ransom dialogue as a prisoner (who would? just wait another minute or two to escape). Sure, you lose inventory too but I think for most people, that's mainly just food and horses (both of which you never need to buy after a few short hours in game). Fairly sure the player can donate money now too; that clearly won't **** up their precious economy 'balancing'.
It's exactly the same as with influence, I always end up having way, way more than I can or have avenues to 'spend' it on; only thing is dumping it to other clans.
Long, roundabout to say, yes, there should've been more features/goals/depth to spend money on or different play-routes; but we both know TW also won't be adding more on that aspect. So at least tweak the numbers among the current half-assed features.