• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
The 4th crusade is impossible in this game unless the Basileus ends up being a Catholic heretic (or could a Fratticelli pope declare a crusade versus a proper Catholic?) and a minor version with some kind of war for Constantinople, wherein at least the City falls.

Or the Byzantine Empire turns Muslim. Which I've seen as early as 950 AD.
 
No not yet.

The closest I've seen is actually on my current play through with an 867 AD start date. It at this moment in time consists of 4 counties just under Croatia, so it'll be interesting to see if it does collapse entirely.

It was broken up in two large holy wars from Muslim invasions. However thanks to a Catholic Crusade I have since captured Greece from the Muslims and I'm moving towards the capture of Anatolia.
 
In vanilla, no? Modded -- yes: particularly in CK2Plus, where it will disappear if below a certain size and without Constantinople.

Really, I think that should be a vanilla features: empires below a certain size (with certain exceptions like the Aztecs, Mongols, ERE and Latin empires holding Constantinople) should lose imperial tier.
 
Really, I think that should be a vanilla features: empires below a certain size (with certain exceptions like the Aztecs, Mongols, ERE and Latin empires holding Constantinople) should lose imperial tier.

Agreed, though I wouldn't except ERE. Any feudal lord down to less than 6 counties attempting to wield an empire title would be laughed out of their rival's court and be the butt of every tavern joke if they took it seriously. In one game I have a "Bulgarian Empire" with Norfolk, Suffolk and Gotland as its only constituents, and a "Spanish Empire" holding d_Champagne. National liberation wars sort out some of this naturally, but the loser in such a war should also lose the empire title, IMO.
 
Cathar Sicily somehow made the Byzantines partially convert to catharism, then they were conquered by orthodox Bulgaria and various muslims (and I also inherited the county of Smyrne as France but it was pure fortuity).
 
Agreed, though I wouldn't except ERE. Any feudal lord down to less than 6 counties attempting to wield an empire title would be laughed out of their rival's court and be the butt of every tavern joke if they took it seriously. In one game I have a "Bulgarian Empire" with Norfolk, Suffolk and Gotland as its only constituents, and a "Spanish Empire" holding d_Champagne. National liberation wars sort out some of this naturally, but the loser in such a war should also lose the empire title, IMO.

The ERE was left with a single city and they were still allowed the imperial titulature by the courts of Europe, even if nobody could be bothered to care what the emperor had to say. That's why I think a fair compromise would be that they'd lose the right to that title if they lost the capital, a city which was pretty singular in Europe.
 
The ERE was left with a single city and they were still allowed the imperial titulature by the courts of Europe, even if nobody could be bothered to care what the emperor had to say. That's why I think a fair compromise would be that they'd lose the right to that title if they lost the capital, a city which was pretty singular in Europe.

For the ERE, I totally agree. An ERE emperor without Constantinople is just a pretender; the others are harder to make a case for.

Perhaps part of forming an imperial title should include establishing an imperial capitol which would need to be controlled to keep the title.
 
The ERE was left with a single city and they were still allowed the imperial titulature by the courts of Europe, even if nobody could be bothered to care what the emperor had to say. That's why I think a fair compromise would be that they'd lose the right to that title if they lost the capital, a city which was pretty singular in Europe.

I'd agree, on the condition that if the ERE does not exist, there exists a way for claimants to restore the ERE as they did historically after the 4th Crusade (if only briefly).

For example, add a decision to restore the ERE for anyone who has a claim on the title and holds Constantinople, and give anyone with a claim on the ERE a CB that lets them reclaim Constantinople. (both of which would, of course, require that the ERE title have no current holder).
 
I have seen them completely disappear. But only once.
 
In my current game, 867 start date, in game year 1066, the Byzantine Empire is well on its way to reforming the Roman Empire. It controls almost all of the Balkans including Greece, Bulgaria (except for one county still called the Kingdom of Bulgaria, modern day Rumania, Hungary and Austria. It has title claims on most of Italy (and controls the southern tip of Italy anyway). It also controls much of the Middle East, including Syria (Jihads have been going on for Syria since the late 9th century), and its continuing to expand in every direction, and nobody seems able to stop them.

This is completely different from the last game I played in which the Byzantine Empire was down to a couple of counties in Greece by the year 900.