Forming Germany should delete the HRE

[Dorevai]

Could be a triggered modifier akin to the papacy ones. If GER exists and isn't the emperor then the emperor gets the modifier that lowers IA. Same, separate, for ITA existing.

I do favor the disbanding of the HRE being highly likely if both GER and ITA exist at the same time regardless if either is emperor.

 

[grommile]

I can readily imagine Emperor Sigismund considering selling the title of King of Italy to Gian Galeazzo Visconti, had the latter lived longer than he did in our timeline.

Germany, on the other hand... yeah, that shouldn't even be available while the Empire is still functioning.

 

[joe9594]

I think that Germany should probably disband the HRE empire (provided the HRE hasnt expanded out into a whole bunch of new non german provinces) but German yshould probably also require alot more stuff to form. atm it only takes a medium sized nation to do it. you should need like 30 provinces at least to really constitute a german nation.

 

[Sandmann]

But how friggin boring it would be to not be able to form Germany or Italy without being big and blob enough to disband the HRE. I really like it as it is. The original sandbox which is the reason why I have loved this game for 15 years is getting slowly abit smaller and smaller for every patch already.

 

[WeissRaben]

The titles of King of Germany and King of Italy were closely tied to the office of Emperor itself, to the point of King of Germany almost being synonymous with HRE, and it would be a direct affront to the office of the Holy Roman Emperor for a vassal to usurp one of these titles.

Forming Germany or Italy while not Emperor should give the Emperor two options:

A. Be a bitch and let a vassal usurp one of your core titles. The new King stays in the empire, but you suffer a massive hit to prestige, imperial authority, and legitimacy. There should probably be some mechanic to encourage the election of a King of Germany as the next emperor, as it represents the real power in the Empire, and any Emperor who lets it go doesn't deserve any of his titles. Really, the only reason to choose this is if you are extremely weak and have no chance of taking on the upstart king.
B. Preserve your integrity and jettison the new king (but not his provinces) from the Empire. You still take a hit to imperial authority, but you can gain it back by reconquering imperial provinces from the renegade. However, said renegade should get a CB on you to claim/dismantle the imperial title, so that if you are significantly weaker than him, choice A. becomes reasonable. A King of Italy could also get the option to remove their provinces from the Empire after a time, as they aren't the heart of the HRE.

About Italy... I dunno. Cologne was, after all, Archchancellor of Italy: if you have good relations with the Emperor, he could just rip the title from the Archbishop and give it to you. You would STILL be in the Empire, and as such still subject to the Emperor, so not being King fits; but the decision to do this should definitely be changed to represent the medieval kingdom.

 

[Sparhafoc]

While it is undoubtedly historically contradictory, I really don't think that events have to follow the real world history. In a parallel universe, perhaps the Kingdom of Germany could form and the HRE continue. I like the open-ended gameplay and don't think it benefits the game to have much of the development of nations on real-world historical rails.

 

[Fluffy_Fishy]

Forming Germany should kick you out of the HRE imo. And so should it be the case with Italy.

I don't see why, Theoretically the HRE could evolve and change and people could leave, while it entirely switches continents. I dont see why we should give ourselves more limits rather than less. I quite like that it works the way it does currently.

 

[Sunspawn]

I don't see why, Theoretically the HRE could evolve and change and people could leave, while it entirely switches continents. I dont see why we should give ourselves more limits rather than less. I quite like that it works the way it does currently.

Within the historically plausible, it should do that. Within the timeframe of the game, it was highly implausible for the HRe to shift away from being a geman-centric construct, thus the nation of Germany within the HRE should not happen. Period.

 

[Fluffy_Fishy]

Within the historically plausible, it should do that. Within the timeframe of the game, it was highly implausible for the HRe to shift away from being a geman-centric construct, thus the nation of Germany within the HRE should not happen. Period.

In CK2 you are given the option to form the HRE as almost any european nation. I know it is unlikely that it would leave germany but I don't see why you have to cling onto historical boundries so stubbornly, EU4 is a historical sandbox not a historical simulator.

 

[Draculdraconis]

A. Be a bitch and let a vassal usurp one of your core titles. The new King stays in the empire, but you suffer a massive hit to prestige, imperial authority, and legitimacy. There should probably be some mechanic to encourage the election of a King of Germany as the next emperor, as it represents the real power in the Empire, and any Emperor who lets it go doesn't deserve any of his titles. Really, the only reason to choose this is if you are extremely weak and have no chance of taking on the upstart king.
B. Preserve your integrity and jettison the new king (but not his provinces) from the Empire. You still take a hit to imperial authority, but you can gain it back by reconquering imperial provinces from the renegade. However, said renegade should get a CB on you to claim/dismantle the imperial title, so that if you are significantly weaker than him, choice A. becomes reasonable. A King of Italy could also get the option to remove their provinces from the Empire after a time, as they aren't the heart of the HRE.

C. get a CB that makes it cheaper (warscore and diplo) to free subdued Princes and return cores and return the offender to his old tag or a Peaceoption that does the same for 60-80% Warscore regardless of size of the offending nation. If not acted upon A or B will happen.

but by the time the emperor already had some CB to restore Princes or return territory

 

[Silver Wizard]

Yes, that is true. Some realms still used formal titles from HRE times, like Hannover calling themselves "Prince-Elector" for a few years before becoming the Kingdom of Hannover, but they mostly abandoned it after a few years, and I don't thing any of them got to WWI with the old titles in place.

As far as I know Hamburg and Bremen still call themselves Free Cities.

 

[Chaos_TLW]

As far as I know Hamburg and Bremen still call themselves Free Cities.

Ah, yes, there are those two indeed, although I guess they would be more of an exception to the rule.

 

[Sunspawn]

In CK2 you are given the option to form the HRE as almost any european nation. I know it is unlikely that it would leave germany but I don't see why you have to cling onto historical boundries so stubbornly, EU4 is a historical sandbox not a historical simulator.

This is an EU4 forum bub. Your argument is moot.

 

[pedrito_elcabra]

Why? Just because the HRE was made up of a lot of German states didn't make it an equal to Germany. The HRE represents a conglomeration of autonomous states all giving their indirect allegiance to a higher authority. Germany represents a large group of regions with almost no autonomy all existing under the direct leadership of a king. Germany should be able to exist inside of the HRE. The kingdom of Bohemia is part of the HRE, why couldn't a kingdom of Germany?

I'm afraid your idea of what Germany is or was doesn't really reflect history.

The German Empire was a very loosely knit conglomeration of semi-autonomous states, each of which still had their bureaucracy, including taxing systems, police forces, and even their own armies until WW1. There never was a kingdom of Germany, much less a centralized one such as you describe.

You're thinking of Prussia maybe, which more of less fits your description. The German Empire of 1874-1914 certainly doesn't, and even Germany nowadays is quite decentralized.

 

[Kapitalisti]

Even if a German state becomes large and powerful enough to call itself "Germany", I have a hard time believing that the Emperor, the Electors and the rest of the members would just go "Well, I guess this is the end of that. Had a nice run etc. but obviously we now have to dismantle this empire that has stood for centuries because that one guy calls himself king of Germany. I mean, it's just common sense."

I'd think it far more likely that the empire would just adapt to the new situation, similar to how they adapted to the Reformation.

 

[grommile]

Even if a German state becomes large and powerful enough to call itself "Germany", I have a hard time believing that the Emperor, the Electors and the rest of the members would just go "Well, I guess this is the end of that. Had a nice run etc. but obviously we now have to dismantle this empire that has stood for centuries because that one guy calls himself king of Germany. I mean, it's just common sense."

Before you can be crowned dei gratia Imperator Romanorum semper augustus by the man over the mountains, you must first be elected Rex Teutonicorum - King of the Germans.

Someone calling their country "Germany" with any credibility at all is basically saying "that title ain't yours, mate, and the electors can stick the Golden Bull of 1356 in their pipes and smoke it".

ETA: I would, however, add Aachen and München to the list of required provinces.

 

[_B_art.cz]

.. all the electors (kurfürsten) where form germany...

No, not all of them.

 

[Chaos_TLW]

Even if a German state becomes large and powerful enough to call itself "Germany", I have a hard time believing that the Emperor, the Electors and the rest of the members would just go "Well, I guess this is the end of that. Had a nice run etc. but obviously we now have to dismantle this empire that has stood for centuries because that one guy calls himself king of Germany. I mean, it's just common sense."

I'd think it far more likely that the empire would just adapt to the new situation, similar to how they adapted to the Reformation.

Like the Reformation, such a thing would create enormous upheaval in the empire, and the Emperor would probably either need to attack and dismantle the contestant or suffer an enormous blow to his credibility and legitimacy.

 

[_B_art.cz]

I agree that it is weird to have a Kingdom of Germany and HRE at the same time. However, please do not forget, that this is a GAME and that situations that can happen in this game (such as forming one true HRE country) never happened...

In my humble opinion, if Germany is formed by a member of HRE than is should stay in HRE, if not, then not. The leader can be the Emperor at the same time, or become the Emperor in the future like any one leader of any other country.

Edit: IMHO, forming Germany within HRE should probably be really disliked by other HRE members.

 

[Torugu]

Before you can be crowned dei gratia Imperator Romanorum semper augustus by the man over the mountains, you must first be elected Rex Teutonicorum - King of the Germans.

Someone calling their country "Germany" with any credibility at all is basically saying "that title ain't yours, mate, and the electors can stick the Golden Bull of 1356 in their pipes and smoke it".

ETA: I would, however, add Aachen and München to the list of required provinces.

Rex Teutonicorum was a somewhat derogatory title invented by the pope to weaken the position of the emperors and the emperors-elect in particular. The official title was "Rex Romanorum". Yes Rex Teutonicorum became more popular after the Italian states were lost (and the name was extended to Holy Roman Empire of German Nation) but in EU4 that hardly ever happens.