Hello is there something like empire decomposition? What i mean is: if empire holds just few provinces it should cease to e ist. This should only occur only for non de jure empires.
Disintegration of empire
- Thread starter nuf
- Start date
-
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.
no there isn't. the next best thing is an outside power usurping the empire title. which brings up a question, if you have 2 empire titles, are you able to destroy one of them?
You can destroy any title higher than Count so long as you have at least two titles of that level OR it is lower than your highest tier title.
Kings can't destroy Kingdom titles unless they have extra, but they can destroy all of their ducal titles, for example.
So yes, an Emperor who usurps another Empire could destroy the new one (or make the new one his primary and destroy the old one).
Kings can't destroy Kingdom titles unless they have extra, but they can destroy all of their ducal titles, for example.
So yes, an Emperor who usurps another Empire could destroy the new one (or make the new one his primary and destroy the old one).
CK2+ once had this feature. I remember it causing problems for the Ottomans, as they had the Turkish Empire title yet they didn't have the needed amount of provinces to maintain it.
.png){kind=avatar}
We think it should occur even for de jure empires, if they cease to have more than a few provinces. Automatic disintegration of petty empires into kingdoms is on our TODO list.
But how do you deal with late-era Byzantine Empire, Latin Empire, Empire of Trebizond, etc?
Surely the Byzantine Empire would get a free pass though? As long as they still control Constantinople they'd be considered an empire even if that's the only thing they had. As history proved.
If they lose the capital and have below a certain amount of provinces, then sure they'd probably be considered a successor kingdom or something. Simply destroying the highest title without making sure they also had a kingdom title or giving them one would lead to giving all ducal vassals their freedom which wouldn't make any sense.
Maybe they should be given a titular kingdom if they don't have one already.
.png){kind=avatar}
What, then, is the 2-province-minor of the Roman Empire? It's definitely not an empire.
It is by law. even if eradicated, since it still exists de jure. That is the exact point of DJ realm in the game. The emperor of such empire would probably be named a petty emperor but that's another story 
Judging only on size is quite arbitrary not to say gamey. but i doubt we can agree on this.
Judging only on size is quite arbitrary not to say gamey. but i doubt we can agree on this.
It is by law. even if eradicated, since it still exists de jure. That is the exact point of DJ realm in the game. The emperor of such empire would probably be named a petty emperor but that's another story
Judging only on size is quite arbitrary not to say gamey. but i doubt we can agree on this.
It would be judgement on de facto size as a percentage of the de jure size of the empire. If you couldn't even come to 1/8 of the requirements for creating or usurping your de jure empire, you are not that de jure empire.
It would not make any sense for the actual, real empires, the HRE and the ERE.
However, it may make sense for the other empires - for example, I am sure that in the much more fluid political world of medieval Islam, nobody with two provinces could stake a claim to being an emperor.
However, it may make sense for the other empires - for example, I am sure that in the much more fluid political world of medieval Islam, nobody with two provinces could stake a claim to being an emperor.
I think the issue boils down to whether someone sees the name of the title as a reflection of what the holder might think or what the world in general might think. Of course the individual holding a two province Roman "Empire" is going to continue to think of themselves as the Roman Empire, but for most of the rest of the world those two provinces would be seen as a pathetic remnant at best, if not an outright pretender. I personally come down on the side of titles reflecting the broader perspective, just as traits seem to mostly reflect how a character is seen by others rather than how they see themselves.
I do think an argument could be made for certain empires to be persistent, though I'm not sure I'd necessary agree with such an argument. But there is room for it to be made.
I do think an argument could be made for certain empires to be persistent, though I'm not sure I'd necessary agree with such an argument. But there is room for it to be made.
That doesn't make any sense, it would punish you for expanding the De Jure area if you later lost it again and I'd argue the Byzantines spent most of their lifespan with less than 1/8th of what they once was. Even the west who didn't like them and didn't consider them the true Roman Empire did consider them an empire until 1453.
Maybe for the unhistorical empires, if De Jure is given to them, it might make some sense. There should be an amount of holdings that make you safe regardless of De Jure percentage.
The actual Roman Empire is never de jure in the timespan of this game, so that's not really an issue. And, yes, a minimum amount of holdings would gate any demotion to a kingdom. Also, this is only slated for AI empires.
Well in their final century they were less than 1/8th of even that. I just think in the case of ERE and HRE their empire has nothing to do with size, only with the blessing of their respective religious heads. As long as the pope decrees that the HRE is an empire it IS and as long as the Patriarch of Constantinople is supporting the emperor of an unoccupied capital then it IS an empire.
Their leaders would be widely accepted as true emperors even if largely inconsequential, but they'd still have the prestige. So what would be the point in removing the title by event?
Except no religious leader would plausibly decree an OPM count an emperor, and the game has no scripted sequence / mechanic to deal with that situation. This would be the scripted sequence / mechanic. It doesn't make sense for some AI to continue holding such a ridiculous title when their empire is obviously gone.
And, indeed, in their final century, they were less than 1/8 of even their previous de jure territory. Final century.
An even greater problem imo is the fact that i can't found an empire, even when its large as let's say HRE, because "there is no de Jure" or i miss some stupid requirements. I conquered playing as Croatia a huge amount of HRE and Poland as well as Pommeria but:
King: "Well lets call it Empire of Croatia!"
Chancelor: "We can't my liege."
King: "What? Why?"
Chanceler: "Some weird cosmic rules dictates that we can only form Etelköz!"
King: "But thas the magyarian aboriginal homeland AND they are finno-ugric people and we are slavic with complete other culture, language and genetic history?!"
Chancelor: "We should have conquered them instead heading north."
King: "..."
King: "Well lets call it Empire of Croatia!"
Chancelor: "We can't my liege."
King: "What? Why?"
Chanceler: "Some weird cosmic rules dictates that we can only form Etelköz!"
King: "But thas the magyarian aboriginal homeland AND they are finno-ugric people and we are slavic with complete other culture, language and genetic history?!"
Chancelor: "We should have conquered them instead heading north."
King: "..."