Will there be more DLCs / expansions for this game in the future?

[Erenussocrates]

I've seen something on the original game's DLC list that can destroy worlds (I don't know if this game already has something like that) and it kinda looks exciting. I also wonder if this game is going to get any new gameplay concepts as DLCs that the original game didn't get.

[Vivisector 9999]

No new DLCs are planned. The developer has recently mentioned that he hasn't thought about this game in literally years, and today is focusing everything on Heart of the Machine.

[Erenussocrates]

So content-wise, is this game missing some stuff from the original?

[x-4000 (Chris McElligott-Park)]

This game is complete, and the DLCs set that is here is all there will ever be for it.

In terms of missing things from the original game, yes and no. This game has massively more things than the original game, and just richer. In many cases, this sequel implements the same general idea from the first game in some new way that is a lot more interesting, under a different name.

There are some features from the original game that sounded cool on paper, but nobody used or everyone hated, and we skipped those. Exodian Blade and Defender Mode come to mind. There is nothing like that in the sequel.

In terms of things that destroy worlds, there are a ton of options for things like that in the sequel, more than in the original IIRC. Everything from Zenith Miners (both games, but way better in the sequel), to some other various mechanics.

The champions from the first game were really popular, and have not been implemented in the sequel. They were way too off the normal path. Instead, there is the giant Necromancer faction, which is like champions, but on the main map, and far more intricate and powerful, and a whole other playstyle. There are also "ark only" types of factions that you can do in the sequel, which are kind of like a lite version of champions from the first game.

Overall, the sequel is far larger, and implements a ton of new stuff, and reimplements everything that was worth reimplementing. There are absolutely things that are in the original game that are not in the sequel, but we didn't bring those forward for a reason.

At this point, Arcen is just me, as a solo dev. All of my time is on the current game, Heart of the Machine.

[Erenussocrates]

But a "new way to obtain victory" like what it says for the Exodian Blade sounds like it brings a very welcome new breath of fresh air to the game other than just doing the exact same stuff each run. I hope there are new ways of getting victory in the sequel too at least.

Also, different topic but, will the story in Heart of the Machine finally start exploring or getting a glimpse on what existential cosmological horrors the AI is primarily focused on in the AI War games?

Edit: I'm also really sad that there are no nukes in AI War 2, if I've gathered correctly? Sometimes the balance isn't as worthwhile as the flair and oomph that it adds to the satisfaction of the gameplay.

[Dismiss]

Originally posted by Erenussocrates:

But a "new way to obtain victory" like what it says for the Exodian Blade sounds like it brings a very welcome new breath of fresh air to the game other than just doing the exact same stuff each run. I hope there are new ways of getting victory in the sequel too at least.

Alternate victory methods in aiw2: crashing a nomad planet (add nomad planet as a faction), showdown devices (specify to spawn them in galaxy settings), imperial spire transmitter (add Fallen Spire faction).

I always thought that it might have been interesting to have an "abandon the galaxy" endgame where you have to like, mount thrusters on your home command station and fly it to an intergalactic wormhole, before closing it behind you--one of my mod ideas that I never quite got around to!

Originally posted by Erenussocrates:

Also, different topic but, will the story in Heart of the Machine finally start exploring or getting a glimpse on what existential cosmological horrors the AI is primarily focused on in the AI War games?

It was mentioned that hotm dlc might explore that.

Originally posted by Erenussocrates:

Edit: I'm also really sad that there are no nukes in AI War 2, if I've gathered correctly? Sometimes the balance isn't as worthwhile as the flair and oomph that it adds to the satisfaction of the gameplay.

There actually are nukes and other warheads that cost AIP when used, in aiw2. But, they are rather tedious to acquire. They come from hacks you perform on the "Gray Spire Dyson Sphere" faction.

You might try out my mod Outguard Party and try using the Apocalypse Warhead (hehehe). Normally you'd still have only a chance of it being available, but you can also set one outguard to start the game with in the outguard category of settings, which is shown when the mod is enabled.

[Erenussocrates]

In a AI War Fleet Command review, I remember reading about a nuke that was able to destroy like almost all planets in the galaxy (only the human and AI homeworlds remaining), is this still available as an option among the vanilla nukes?

[x-4000 (Chris McElligott-Park)]

The mark 3 nuke is kind of a joke in AI War 1. It makes the game almost unplayable, and is unlikely to result in being able to do much. I can't remember if there is an equivalent in this sequel or not.

But that nuke was explicitly a "table flip" options (I'm angry and I'm going home). In AI War 1, a lot of units of the AI that are strongest are immune to that kind of nuke, and you just chopped off all your manufacturing capacity, so they pretty much kill you immediately after this. There's zero practical application other than showing your frustration.

---

On the subject of the cosmological horrors that the AI is fighting, that was something I was thinking of for DLC someday in Heart of the Machine, but now I'm starting to think that it's smarter if I just never fully explain that bit.

The universe will shrink a lot if I ever explain that particular thing. Tolkien, for all he explained in depth, never explained certain aspects like "the nameless things gnawing at the depths of the world," even in his letters.

I've had three different concepts over the years for what cosmological horrors the AI is fighting out there, and they all have strengths and weaknesses from a storytelling standpoint. But I think that the strongest storytelling is actually not to explain it at all.

HotM does get into some other lore for other Arcen games, though, in various ways. Already in the current build (not released yet, but it exists for launch), it explains some of the background of what was going on in Bionic Dues, but you have to do some fairly complex routes to find that. Later on, during early access, I plan on having some pieces that get into the nanocaust origins, among other things.

---

On the subject of multiple endings, Dismiss already covered that. But, in a general sense it's one of the weaknesses of the core design of this game, that it is set up a bit like Chess. So you always have the opportunity to go for the enemy king to win. The fact that the game is not built (neither game is built) to have other victory conditions that exclude the normal victory being an option is an issue that is kind of fundamental to their design.

In other words, in both games, by the time you can get these other victories, you could have easily won the "usual way" quite easily. That's deeply frustrating, but there's no real design solution for that.

A lot of the design of Heart of the Machine draws from this well of frustration in myself and went completely the opposite direction. There is no king unit, there's no global victory condition, etc. A game has to be designed from the ground up a certain way for that to work, and the AI War series is not. HotM is.

[Dismiss]

Originally posted by x-4000 (Chris McElligott-Park):

The fact that the game is not built (neither game is built) to have other victory conditions that exclude the normal victory being an option is an issue that is kind of fundamental to their design.

In other words, in both games, by the time you can get these other victories, you could have easily won the "usual way" quite easily. That's deeply frustrating, but there's no real design solution for that.

As you have said, having multiple simultaneous victory conditions can have balance issues, but an easier thing would be to have the choice of victory condition as part of the lobby setup. Then, in that game, it IS the only way to win.

This could be enforced in lots of different ways, whatever is appropriate. Maybe you cannot enter ai homeworld planets (this flag exists, used by tutorial). Maybe you can kill overlords but the game doesn't actually end (galaxy settings and faction configs support these, now). Maybe the AI homeworlds are simply buffed to twice the normal defenses so it isn't practical.

My idea for a "Dark Spire Sphere" faction was that it goes around defeating all the ais one by one, and then you. It is a faction marked as "must be defeated" so the AIs all being dead does not give you victory. So, that is one example. If there was an "escape the galaxy" plotline/victory, and the idea is the AI is growing at an accelerated pace such that you just couldn't defeat it, and instead have to arrange a corridor of defenses to reach some strategic location, etc etc.

[Erenussocrates]

Does the Apocalypse Warhead do the same thing as that mark 3 nuke in AI War 1? Because I want it as an option, lol

[x-4000 (Chris McElligott-Park)]

Yeah, there are workarounds, for sure. It then winds up being whack-a-mole for all the code that has certain assumptions, though. So it can be done, but the list of "oh also and" things tends to be fairly long.

But as you say, blocking the player from the AI homeworld could in theory work -- although in rare cases that could softlock a player, such as on a snake map with two AIs. So even when minimizing the "oh and also" issues, there's still some.

[Vivisector 9999]

Originally posted by x-4000 (Chris McElligott-Park):

I've had three different concepts over the years for what cosmological horrors the AI is fighting out there, and they all have strengths and weaknesses from a storytelling standpoint. But I think that the strongest storytelling is actually not to explain it at all.

Indeed. If it's not something the player can fight or interact with in any way, it's best not to bother explaining it.

It'd be like if Stellaris let the player learn everything about the "Hunters" chasing the Prethoryn Scourge (when, of course, the Hunters never show up in-game and your species has to be telepathic to get the Scourge to even BRIEFLY MENTION the Hunters). As things are, it's scarier to contemplate the Hunters after you've desperately saved the galaxy from the Scourge (or just gotten eaten alive by them), and bleakly wonder what the hell kind of beings had THEM running in terror between galaxies.

[x-4000 (Chris McElligott-Park)]

I was originally going to let you fight it in Stars Beyond Reach, and then it was going to be something you could fight deep into Heart of the Machine. So in both cases it was planned to be an antagonist that you'd directly face, and it incidentally answers a question.

But the problem with that is, even that kind of undercuts the mystery. I can do the same sort of gameplay and have a similar antagonist that isn't "the answer to that age-old question," and it's just another cool thing.

But yeah, completely agreed.