The battle of Nicopolis in September 1396 is regarded as one of the last crusade attempts (according to wikipedia). A piebald army of Europeans(English, French, Burgundian, German, Hungarian, Venetian, Croatian, Bulgarian etc etc) was routed by a far larger Ottoman army.
What if Nicopolis hadn't been such a rout? i.e. the Ottomans are weaker or there is a stronger Europaen contingent (the dukes of Lancaster, Orléans and Burgundy were supposed to go along, but all refused to leave, citing peace negotiations between England-France). It doesn't even have to be a victory for the Crusading army, simply less of a defeat than it was OTL. OTL, there were massive losses on the Crusader side, not so much because of the battle itself, but due to soldiers taken captive (the king of Hungary, Sigmund of Luxemburg very nearly was, for instance). Of these captives, 300-3000 were then executed.
So, what if the battle at Nicopolis is less decisive?
What if Nicopolis hadn't been such a rout? i.e. the Ottomans are weaker or there is a stronger Europaen contingent (the dukes of Lancaster, Orléans and Burgundy were supposed to go along, but all refused to leave, citing peace negotiations between England-France). It doesn't even have to be a victory for the Crusading army, simply less of a defeat than it was OTL. OTL, there were massive losses on the Crusader side, not so much because of the battle itself, but due to soldiers taken captive (the king of Hungary, Sigmund of Luxemburg very nearly was, for instance). Of these captives, 300-3000 were then executed.
So, what if the battle at Nicopolis is less decisive?