The best kinds of feature improve usability and reduce the need for micromanaging, but at a modest reduction in cost-efficiency.
Agreed, I just don't consider "double" to be "modest."
Perhaps a 50% or 25% increase in cost is "modest."
So, if it costs 40 gold without a warchest for the knight.
50%: Knight pays 20 gold, Sponsor pays 30 gold (20 gold + 10 gold or 50% of 20 gold)
25%: Knight pays 20 gold, Sponsor pays 25 gold (20 gold + 5 gold or 25% of 20 gold)
You're welcome to do that. Indeed, I would be glad to see some armies try that.
And then have everyone assigned to them complain about always having to deal with the manual gold redistribution, and look enviously at the other army, where the Duke just dumps 1000 gold in the war chest so they don't have to worry about it.
I don't think those complaints will be as much of an issue for those armies that want the success. This is primarily for smaller realms that NEED the efficiency to beat larger realms. Large realms, don't need efficiency because the game mechanics give them *most* of the advantages. All else equal.
I think the number of players just makes efficiency important enough to matter right now.
