Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Author Topic: Grey Eminence: A 1-Million Hex Grand Strategy Game With Trailer From 1356-1956  (Read 2224 times)

axiomsofdominion

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

https://nestinars.com/greyeminence/

This is a game by a different set of ex-M&T modders from Demian and Songs of the Eons. I'm pretty hyped about this game since it could shake up the strategy genre but isn't really a competitor for my own game.

It has a trailer on the site and a variety of images some of which I've put in the post. They also have an excellent semi-technical post on the fancy advanced Unity data oriented architecture they are using. They have some hired employees as well as people working for free until they start making money.

Presskit:
https://nestinars.com/presskit/

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Pretty interesting if they get it out by early next year as planned.

Complex simulation of populations and characters, pretty interesting government/religion/culture stuff.
Logged

LuuBluum

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

Wait, out of curiosity which set of M&T modders is this? Unfortunately I'm not too familiar with their names, only their online usernames.
Logged

axiomsofdominion

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

Wait, out of curiosity which set of M&T modders is this? Unfortunately I'm not too familiar with their names, only their online usernames.

DGL, Mepper, and PelPel they said.
Logged

LuuBluum

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

Ah, I see. I don't think I had too many interactions with them back when I was on the team. Then again I wasn't exactly the most contributing of members, so that may have been on me.

Maybe I'll hop on by their discord, in case they happen to need history help with 14th-century ME. I think I still have most of those resources...
Logged

axiomsofdominion

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

https://nestinars.com/news/dev-diary-2/

Dev diary on population. A bit thin IMO but decent as far as dev diaries go.
Logged

Mkok

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

Seems interesting, wonder how the hardware requirements will be. But any new grand-strategy game is welcomed, and if it can really provide such huge boost in performance it might make a good proof of concept at the very least :D And maybe even for a great game, but it seems it is still far too early to say anything.
Logged

Culise

  • Bay Watcher
  • General Nuisance
    • View Profile

I never got into MEIOU or D&T as much as I did Magna Mundi.  Still, I am intrigued enough to post to watch.  It's a genre with few strong competitors and an actual historical or semi-historical strategy game is always going to pique my interest.  The timeline feels very over-ambitious and I'm not sure how well they can deliver, but it does seem worth a look at least.

Plus, of course, the attempt to turn Magna Mundi into a stand-alone game was a royal fiasco (in the sense of the Battle of the Three Kings).  It would take quite some doing for M&T modders to do any worse than that.
Logged

Salmeuk

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

the bureaucrats and their 'history' - I question the insistence on granularity of simulation in such grand strategy, when so often this results in restrictions on player agency. Under the hood might as well be invisible. Many grand strategy games I play require relearning 'how the world operates' because every single dev has their own idiosyncratic (and generally flawed) take on culture and history. In some universes, I operate like an efficient military hierarchy with direct control, while others work to simulate mixtures of class and power within society.. isn't it strange we've come to judge our games of epic warfare and conquest, on the veracity of their bureaucratic simulations?
Logged

LuuBluum

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

the bureaucrats and their 'history' - I question the insistence on granularity of simulation in such grand strategy, when so often this results in restrictions on player agency. Under the hood might as well be invisible. Many grand strategy games I play require relearning 'how the world operates' because every single dev has their own idiosyncratic (and generally flawed) take on culture and history. In some universes, I operate like an efficient military hierarchy with direct control, while others work to simulate mixtures of class and power within society.. isn't it strange we've come to judge our games of epic warfare and conquest, on the veracity of their bureaucratic simulations?
Given the origins of particular game, I can tell you that the features here are more-or-less the expanded wishlist of the M&T team when no longer limited by the practical concerns of beating EU4 into submission.

As for the specifics of why the extreme granularity? The idea is to have, more or less, a simulation more than a game. What would be most preferable from the perspective of the devs is that, in a simple observation game with no player interaction whatsoever, that the world would roughly follow the trends of history. "Railroading", or forcing particular outcomes to take the contours of history regardless of actual circumstances, are a crutch to make up for a lack of simulation. Given that they're making their own game, I imagine the expectation is that they can remove all such crutches by... well, increasing the granularity of simulation to the point where history repeats because history is represented. Within reason, of course; not all historical events were certainty, but if nothing else true historical outcomes should at least be possible.

The challenge, of course, comes in defining what sort of gameplay the result should have. Is the player's goal to buck history and shape things for themselves, or to try and follow the contours as best as they possibly can? When you run into such overwhelming representation and simulation, actually interacting with the game state can feel downright impossible. Drowning in a sea of numbers can be downright exhausting.
Logged

axiomsofdominion

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

Well "history" is impossible after like 20 years because small random chance builds up. This would be true in a rerun of real life as well.

As far as bureaucracy well, that is the winner of wars. Even for Alexander.
Logged

lastverb

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

So a supreme ruler with wider, earlier time frame? I wish them good luck and hope and it doesn't have so bad AI.
Logged

Mkok

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

I dont judge my epic wargames by their bureocracy, I judge my bureocracy simulators by their warfare submechanics  ;D The only reason most grand-strategy games are about conquest imho is mainly since they are too simplified to offer enough mechanics in times of peace, so they are geared towards war being the focus. One thing is such games are easier to make, since war mechanics tend to be more straightforward, they tend to allow for worse AI (as all it has to really do is send armies to march generally in your direction). Good AI is hard. And I guess hardware limitation would be a real thing then as well, since I imagine you would need detailed simulation of large amount of characters and other things, which would probably require a lot of hardware power. Just look at CK2/3, they have relatively simple mechanics, cover not even half the world and they already stretch hardware to the limits...

And simulating real history would be very difficult, maybe if you got a really good simulation of the real world, but doing that would be near immposible and definitely impractical to run. Any simplification would add differences, and as a single flap of butterfly can change everything drastically over a long enough period of time this would easily build up. Not to mention we still dont even know if our universe is deterministic.
Logged

axiomsofdominion

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

I dont judge my epic wargames by their bureocracy, I judge my bureocracy simulators by their warfare submechanics  ;D The only reason most grand-strategy games are about conquest imho is mainly since they are too simplified to offer enough mechanics in times of peace, so they are geared towards war being the focus. One thing is such games are easier to make, since war mechanics tend to be more straightforward, they tend to allow for worse AI (as all it has to really do is send armies to march generally in your direction). Good AI is hard. And I guess hardware limitation would be a real thing then as well, since I imagine you would need detailed simulation of large amount of characters and other things, which would probably require a lot of hardware power. Just look at CK2/3, they have relatively simple mechanics, cover not even half the world and they already stretch hardware to the limits...

And simulating real history would be very difficult, maybe if you got a really good simulation of the real world, but doing that would be near immposible and definitely impractical to run. Any simplification would add differences, and as a single flap of butterfly can change everything drastically over a long enough period of time this would easily build up. Not to mention we still dont even know if our universe is deterministic.

Ck2-3 are terrible optimized and designed.

An even more key issue though is being real time. Making good AI in a real time game is just extremely hard, even if you had a good design. That is why I personally chose to be turned based. You are a lot better off that way for having cool non-war mechanics.
Logged

Mephansteras

  • Bay Watcher
  • Forger of Civilizations
    • View Profile

Worth keeping an eye on. Thanks for bringing this to our attention!
Logged
Civilization Forge Mod v2.80: Adding in new races, equipment, animals, plants, metals, etc. Now with Alchemy and Libraries! Variety to spice up DF! (For DF 0.34.10)
Come play Mafia with us!
"Let us maintain our chill composure." - Toady One