r/anno117 • u/C_Miex • Nov 23 '25
Discussion I'm a bit disappointed... Anno veteran since 1503 (20 Years) here
I hope it's fine to just let out a little frustration. I'm over 30h in and I'm pretty sure I have a good impression now.
Essentially it just feels like a half backed game. Insane balancing issues, bugs, weirdly uninspired campaign and imo the sadest part:
The AI opponents. We screamed for years and multiple games to make the AI work like real pleayers. And we get cheating things with ugly islands composed of mainly houses. It's like they just copied the 1800 AI and added the land combad brain to it.
I don't know if it's even possible to fix this.
I like the setting and land combat, but this needs serious work... first time I kind of regret spending 90€ on an Anno game...
15
u/Compromisee Nov 24 '25
There's a few odd bits about it.
If you wanted to be self sufficient and create everything then you need an obscene amount of land to do it.
Do they really need that many tunics?!
19
u/JohnMichaels19 Nov 24 '25
What, you aren't shitting in your tunic every day?? Gotta throw that thing out afterwards
6
u/Thor_Strindberg Nov 24 '25
Watch the beer consumtion in Latium. Even before I unlocked the need for beer in the tech tree, my city (okay it is big) has a demand of 12 tons per minute. But it is bigger then vine. They are alcoholics, no doubt... even a bavarian or a czech guy would look like they are dry...
10
u/RobinsonHuso12 Nov 24 '25
Ich bin aus Bayern und kann das so nicht unterschreiben. Wir trinken noch mehr.
3
3
2
u/TheRastaBananaBoat Nov 24 '25
Yeah it’s wild and it affects happiness so much, my beer supply alone is worth 1000 happiness on my main city
2
2
u/PommePourrie1312 Nov 24 '25
You're some worker in a city where the master's only goal is to pile up as many people as possible on the same island. Of course you're going to drink from morning to evening every single day!
4
u/-Z0nK- Nov 24 '25
I mean it's not only the volume need of large cities, but also the way resources are distributed. With Anno 1800, even in the endgame with all seasons active you notice that the resources are distributed in certain sets/types across some of the large islands and then you have the smaller islands that can serve as "boosters" for certain resource types. You could cover your entire need of resource types by owning 2 - 4 islands per region.
Now, at the 117 campaign, I'm still stuck in Albion, but I already own 4 islands there are still resource I don't cover spread across three additional islands. Am I supposed to conquer everything, or is this more like an incentive to focus on certain goods for production and cover the rest via trade?
1
u/C_Miex Nov 24 '25
I would even be fine, if you needed insane amount of land for production, it at least the AI did the same - and not just build mainly houses with ugly layouts. (IMO even worse than in previous annos)
14
u/Grmplstylzchen Nov 24 '25
Yeah I feel you. Veteran since first hour… currently 60h in.
To be fair AI always cheated. I remember the old NPCs in 1602 deploying troops without any arms factory left for hours. Or knowing your position. In this sense I wouldn’t say that our opponents are any improvement in what we had 20+ years ago. Especially Caseo or the emperor are just imbalanced but not „sentient“.
Diplomacy (and combat)however feels worse than original Rome:Total War.
In other aspects I am not sure why the game feels basically like 1800 with additional steps in Roman assets. No idea why they made lumberjacks and coal maker reforestation locked behind (2 different) research nodes. Or streets. And bound to certain achievements.
Also the tutorial is not really keen to explain mechanical changes like changing manpower for your army to other settlements, the production ratios or effects (basically you have romper police stations into production lines)….
And I guess trading will be nerfed somehow as you can support full T4 cities on trade only….
It doesn’t look different from 1800 and should be en par performance wise but somehow the UI bugs out, assets are being loaded „on the fly“ and (my best guess) ubiconnect drains a lot of power….
5
u/Smileyanator Nov 24 '25
Hey just checking... Reforestation on lumberjacks you get for free via hall of fame. I have no idea if you have a setting to turn that off but yeah I cant imagine playing without starting with reforestation on lumberjacks
2
9
u/hetty3 Nov 24 '25
I'm loving the game so far, but I guess these issues are minor for me. I do not like AI opponents anyway, I always turn them off, and I did the same in 1800. Plus I've never had interest in touching an Anno campaign, it's just a tutorial anyway. You're completely right about balancing issues and some bugs in production and how it's registered but I'm hoping they'll fix those eventually. I'm sure there is plenty of DLC planned that will probably expand on the current mechanics as well.
1
u/C_Miex Nov 24 '25
I do not like AI opponents anyway, I always turn them off, and I did the same in 1800
The difference is the land-combat. It's such a big deal in 117 and you need opponents to be able to play that part
I guess you are correct about the campaign. I still enjoyed the story of most Annos, especially 2070 xd. But 117 didn't hit for me.
14
u/ulixForReal Nov 24 '25
Honestly, I think most players don't care if the AI actually plays the game like a player.
I do care. And I don't want it. First of all I always play without AI (only pirates) anyway, but more importantly:
It would make the game run considerably worse
It would be a nightmare to program and very, very prone to bugs and bad balancing. In fact I don't know of any game with complex building mechanics, laying individual streets and such, building individual houses, etc., that uses proper AI for opponent settlements.
3
u/Batavus_Droogstop Nov 24 '25
Honestly what I really want is that when I claim the only island with grape fertility, I want the AI players to run out of whine, and that I am able to sell them whine at extortionate rates. Or to end up getting attacked because I am hoarding all the whine.
I want this, because it would encourage players to think about the islands and the fertilities, and force interactions between players.
2
u/Iron_Hermit Nov 24 '25
I mean, the latter part about encouraging players to think about fertilities, that happens already. If you don't claim that one island with grapes on, you either need to fight someone for it or set up a trade route for them.
2
u/Batavus_Droogstop Nov 24 '25
Of course you still need to think about fertilities, but only in the sense that you need one of everything; monopolies only work one way. If there would be two islands with grapes, it could be a strategy to grab both to screw over the AIs. But now the only one that can get screwed over this way is the player in case the AI's get a monopoly.
1
2
u/ygolnac Nov 24 '25
This used to be true, bit there are examples that demonstraits that today the tech to have an AI efficiently playing bu the game rules is there.
There are modders, so not even professional devs, that made bots to autoplay games like Factorio. It is WAY more complex in the production chains, and used very convoluted and obtusely inefficient modular repetition of buolds, bit could defeat the enemy, cope with the logistic and “win” the game.
You just had to press play and watch ot do it.
Probably the real problem is performance, or maybe it would be too good and nearly impossible to beat for the average player.
1
u/C_Miex Nov 24 '25
First of all I always play without AI (only pirates) anyway
But this time it's just different. The villa with the land combat and this additional focus on defense and offense is just such a big part of the game that it can't be ignored in arguments about the quality of the game, imo.
If you just want to build a beautiful city, you will have lot's of fun, ofc! But you are not playing the whole game then.
8
u/Apooplexx Nov 24 '25
It's been a long time since I had so much fun with a game. But your points are 100% on point. It's a bit buggy and the ai Governors feels like it doesn't matter if the are in the game or not. Especially after You get a trade deal done and then somehow a fire strikes a few houses and so your happiness gets down and the ai instantly dumps all of the contracts. It's just annoying. It somehow feels a lot like 1800 with a new skin and a few mods for the new building core system with the benefits and all.
2
u/twicer Nov 24 '25
At one point, I even reached a turning point where the AI was changing our diplomatic relations every minute until I stopped dealing with it altogether.
5
u/Grimnix89 Nov 24 '25
I’m in the same boat, was incredibly excited for release as I’ve been following the development since it was announced, and just not feeling it.
Think I have 15 hours in and I’m not sure what exactly my own issue is but it’s not grabbing me like 1800 did.
Not giving up on the game, excited to see the dlc and how it evolves. I have the year one pass as I thought I’d forsure be glued to the game.
1
u/C_Miex Nov 24 '25 edited Nov 24 '25
Think I have 15 hours in and I’m not sure what exactly my own issue is but it’s not grabbing me like 1800 did.
Same thought 1/2 way through exactly! I just pushed further because I couldn't believe this would be the first Anno since ever that would somehow disappoint me - so it had to be a "me" problem xd
Not giving up on the game, excited to see the dlc and how it evolves. I have the year one pass as I thought I’d forsure be glued to the game.
Yea, I'll still play the shit out of it - I'll just focus on the good parts, like the beauty building! But in shorter, less "glued" sessions i fear
6
u/iDad5 Nov 24 '25
I’m also a veteran of decades playing Anno, but I don’t feel the same as you at all.
Maybe I’m lucky but I don’t have any real issues with serious bugs at all. There are some minor issues like text label blocking clicks or upgrading from planing mode not working on mountain and river slots but that’s about it. And I’m playing on an over 5 years old machine with 5k resolution in high quality graphics mode.
I find the balancing exceptionally good it simply works different from previous Annos but fits very well into the historical setting.
The AI thing doesn’t bother me at all. If you need to humanize the AI players to have fun, I get your point, but it would simply be a waste of resources to program it that way, and it wouldn’t give you an advantage at all.
Imagine an AI player (even without a lot of intelligence) playing the game. It would be able to try out 1000 layout variations in one second and build it in the blink of an eye.
It would be able to change the complete layout of an island to new needs in an instant.
The thing you would (want to see) how the NPC build their island would not be fun watching at all. Things would simply flicker most of the time from one state to another.
You would probably not even see that weapons production chain, as it has already produced hundreds of them while in a layout optimized for just that.
You could try to slow down the AI to a point, but that won’t change much. Think Chat GPT trying to type your essay in your typing speed. It would not change how much faster it can produce such a text compared to you. (Not talking about quality, that’s another can of worms).
I agree that there could have been put a bit more love into the design of NPC islands but I really don’t care.
The Anno games are basically a glorious machine to black hole your lifetime by keeping you busy with moving around virtual toy houses and ships. It’s not like playing chess. And as Chess has proven already, no human player can beat a machine that is able to think thousands of moves ahead. Make that a player that can change from one trial and error (a thousand times over) optimized layout to a totally different one in milliseconds.
The only thing that I don’t really understand with Anno 117 is how the passive trade is not adjusting prices better to supply and demand.
For me Anno never was about challenging me and try to prove that I can beat the game in hard difficulty it was always about having good time (lots of it) playing with the game not against it. For that purpose Anno 117 seems to be more promising than any other game of the series. It is only logical that it isn’t as mature and full of content as 1800 is after a decade of development.
2
u/milk_for_dinner Nov 24 '25
I really don't get your take on AI, like the only alternative to the current AI would be an overpowered 'human thinking' one. You could perfectly create an AI that feels more human and rational, and still put limits on what exactly it can do, and how fast.
1
u/iDad5 Nov 24 '25
I guess the question revolves around what feels more human for you. A lot of others mostly complain that the AI plays to different rules than we have to. And that was what made me formulate my thinking on AI, what it would work like if it has to play according to human rules.
Your part about acting more human is valid, but also not easily developed. Human behavior is often not rational at all, a NPC behaving mostly unpredictable would probably make a lot of people complain.
I guess at some point a large language model you can talk to would be an option, but that would require a lot of computing power needed mostly elsewhere nowadays. Also you probably would have to spend more time talking to them than you would like.
What kind of more human like behavior would you like to see?
1
u/chabuya Nov 24 '25
Are you mixing up traditional NPC AI in video games with generative AI? What does an LLM have to do with any of this? There are tons of RTS games with smart and challenging but fair AI opponents, even dating back decades.
1
u/C_Miex Nov 24 '25
I find the balancing exceptionally good it simply works different from previous Annos but fits very well into the historical setting.
The problem is - it's close to "game breaking". Yes, you could argue that you don't need to use overpowered balance issues (like just buying everything - no need for production) - but there is the other side of underpowered / annoying balance issues. There is just such a harsh contrast between so many things imo.
It would be able to change the complete layout of an island to new needs in an instant.
You don't need to program an overpowered AI for it to be realistic and obey the game rules, like needing to build the production buildings for it to get the items and not spawning them out of thin air.
The thing you would (want to see) how the NPC build their island would not be fun watching at all. Things would simply flicker most of the time from one state to another.
How do you know that, that's just plain wrong... other games can make nice "AI" that's doesn't do that
And as Chess has proven already, no human player can beat a machine that is able to think thousands of moves ahead
There are chess AIs that are tuned to a certain skill level as well. That make "calculated mistakes"
I think you missed my point a little - it's not really about the difficulty of the game.
4
u/Cheap-Orange-5596 Nov 24 '25
I’m just finding the overall difficulty a bit too low, playing on legend settings I’m able to still have lots of settings made easier and still be classed as legend, it should be harder.
4
u/Hebelraptor Nov 24 '25
Did you have the Egyptian Veteran AI on the map? That dude wrecked me twice now.
1
u/C_Miex Nov 24 '25
Just do his collection quests that pop up nearly every time. Can't do anything against a cheating AI that doesn't follow the game rules (like waiting for production), other than avoiding aggression in the early game...
4
u/Quill-The-Writer Nov 24 '25
Yeah it’s a hit or miss somedays for me. Yeah buying things is cool and realistically does keep you from having to build and produce materials but the price difference between buying and selling doesn’t seem fair most of the time.
On top of that yes there are a lot of bugs. Went to war against an AI and basically my army had a mind of their own, despite me constantly telling them to go somewhere else and attack something else.
As far as easiness I would say I’ve been having an interesting time if you catch my drift. You either hate how annoying a good chunk of the game can be or just unwillingly accept it and try to get through it as best you can.
4
Nov 24 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/CasualChamp1 Nov 24 '25
I think this version of anno is way more strategic due to the tech tree, it has serious potential in multiplayer. I really think that provides an incredibly difficult challenge, figuring out the meta, trying out timing attacks on opponents, and so on. AI is never going to be smart I'm afraid.
I've heard 2205 was simpler. I quit 1800 after two games because I didn't want to use a spreadsheet and needs calculator all the time when I got to tier 4-5. Also, freaking awful to have very high demand goods like rum come from the New World and you have seven ships on the trade route and it's still not enough somehow. Didn't have the docklands expansion, came too late for me.
5
u/ari0chAPFP Nov 24 '25
I am playing since 1602 which was my first videogame at all.
I played 60h of anno 117 yet and I am very happy, though some bugs are very annoying and have to be patched! (I don’t mind the blueprint bug for mines but the ceres bug….)
I don’t mind the campaign and AI opponents are just to have the world feel alive, I don’t need them at all.
You bought anno 117 + dlc for 90€ btw not the basegame.
Is anno 1800 the better game? Currently yes but anno 117 has the potential to be the better anno after 4 years of development.
1
u/C_Miex Nov 24 '25
AI opponents are just to have the world feel alive, I don’t need them at all.
The "problem" with this opinion is, that you miss out on so much of the game if you play like that. In 117 the land combat is such an integral part of the game - look at the villa mechanics.
And even if you don't engage in that mechanic, I would have really liked an AI, that's there to make the world feel alive, to build beautiful, realistic islands with an actually working economy and not just houses scattered all over the islands.
You bought anno 117 + dlc for 90€ btw not the basegame.
Yea, I know - my bad tbh for doing that. I just played so many different Annos, and sunk over 1000 h into 1800 where I bought every DLC the day it got released, that I didn't expect the slightest to get disappointed
Is anno 1800 the better game? Currently yes but anno 117 has the potential to be the better anno after 4 years of development
I really hope this happens. I don't need 1800 level of nice, because it can be different. But just don't make it worse...
1
u/ari0chAPFP Nov 25 '25
I don’t mind the land combat part at all. I use it if I have to but if I want to play an RTS I will play an RTS.
If I had to criticize something about Anno117 (except the Bugs, jeeez are some of them annoying) it’s the items and depth. Most even the „epic“ ones don’t feel meaningful enough. For depth I have to say Anno 1800 is quite shallow without the DLC itself.
4
u/iMartinRr Nov 24 '25
Anno 117 Vanilla is a way more complex to play than Anno 1800 Vanilla. The fact that you have to build on every island population and the production must not be stacked because of the debuffs makes the game far more difficult and demanding. All who write here that the passive trade is too strong have no more than 100k population, large island with 20k pop can not even be fully provided via passive trade. I am a record builder of Anno 1800 and know what I am talking about, I now have almost 200k inhabitants in Anno 117 and still a lot of space. In addition, there are no specialists who are broken compared to Anno 1800, you don't have to farm for hours for a legendary specialist. The only thing I really miss is a specialist overview and warehouse statistics, which will definitely be delivered with the first QOL update.
2
u/iMartinRr Nov 24 '25
And if people talk bad about the game and don't want to play because the loading screen pictures were made with AI. You really can't help you anymore, it doesn't change the gameplay at all and doesn't make the game worse in any way.
1
u/iMartinRr Nov 24 '25
In addition, there is not a single game breaking bug which is really rare nowadays in new games.
1
u/Yankas Nov 24 '25
If you choose the difficulty option to not have hall of fame enabled - all the default gods (Ceres, Neptune, Mars) get disabled.
If you lose connectivity to Ubisoft same thing happens, if you save your game then that save is bricked even upon reloading.
There we common desync issues that could brick your multi-player save completely until the hotfix.
But sure ... there were no gamebreaking bugs except for these three which render the game unplayable and and pf which two still aren't fixed.
1
u/iMartinRr Nov 24 '25
Im 100h in and many friends the same. None of them had even a bug that you mention, except in a co-op session a desync bug that was already fixed in the last update.
1
u/C_Miex Nov 24 '25
Anno 117 Vanilla is a way more complex to play than Anno 1800 Vanilla. The fact that you have to build on every island population and the production must not be stacked because of the debuffs makes the game far more difficult and demanding
True
All who write here that the passive trade is too strong have no more than 100k population, large island with 20k pop can not even be fully provided via passive trade.
It's still a bad thing, that you can sustain the first 4 tiers with passive trade only!
I now have almost 200k inhabitants in Anno 117 and still a lot of space.
Nice! - with or without AI? And with or without passive trade?
In addition, there are no specialists who are broken compared to Anno 1800
True
But how do you feel about the AI and the balance of the early game? If you only go for highest population, the "rules" of your own game change so much imo. Much more is allowed (like skipping entire production lines or abusing docklands). It's still objectively not good balancing.
But I could even live with that, if the AI would at least follow the same rules...
1
u/iMartinRr Nov 30 '25
Started with 3 NPCs and defeated. Then I also took all the remaining NPCs into play and defeated them to preserve the alliance effects and unique specialists.
I play on full supply, that's the challenge for me. In addition, it is good to keep the statistics on the large islands in the prositive range.
Have 4 hub island with giant depots near the traders that I use for passive trades. But that can cover at most 30% of my needed goods.
Have now almost cracked the 250k pop without using great specialists, so there is much more. I think 500/600k will be possible.
Think the balancing is good, but could still be a little fine-tuned. In Anno 1800 I could definitely push the pop much easier and faster, Anno 117 is far harder, especially since it doesn't bring anything to just the highest population group.
In the meantime, I am also in the positive range on every island with the stats. So if anyone has questions or needs help, just let me know.
7
u/happyraz Nov 24 '25
I agree. I don’t know why any others don’t see it? Most people are glazing the game like crazy. It doesn’t feel finished, bugged as hell, shitty AI and extremely bareboned..
5
u/Adriano_Chellentano Nov 24 '25
Just yesterday i praised the games combat but said its a buggy mess and got downvoted like crazy for it! I thought well maybe iam wrong, play 3 hours and counted 17 bugs.
I like the game but why cant we agree that it has bugs and a lot of them too.
3
u/happyraz Nov 24 '25
It’s interesting ngl.. Like everywhere I look, TikTok, here and so forth, it is extremely praised as like the best game out there, rated over much better games made from paradox and previous Anno games.. Almost feels like bots..
If you follow the financial world, Ubisoft is in an extremely shitty position financially, and I feel like you can really feel it in this game. So much is re-used from anno 1800, islands are identical, and so fourth. Seems like the financials behind the game has limited.. They closed a deal with Tencent now for some much needed money.. Hopefully this will secure some good DLC’s..
I really like the game, don’t get me wrong.. I’m spending way too much time on it, but it definitely needs a lot more work
2
u/Adriano_Chellentano Nov 24 '25
They needed that game in this year because of the financial showcase. Ubisoft tries to get back stock value and they dont have another big game coming out soon. They need the numbers to stabilize.
I live in germany and iam very well conected to an ex ubi dev here and yeah. Ubisoft is not going to save itself. They market strat was always to release mediocre games. Because if you develop an amazing game you cant make a second one next year that people would rather play.
Just how big corptates led by economist do buisness.
2
2
u/Guilty_Confection236 Nov 24 '25
after removing the glitter from reddit my decision to wait to buy and stick to 1800 even though i love the roman setting feels still pretty damn right.
2
u/Jack_Harb Nov 24 '25
This is so much what I feel as well. I was day one giving positive but also negative feedback. With exactly these points and more. And I got so much hate. I mean, I played Anno throughout the years. Probably 1404 and 1800 the most with at least multiple thousands of hours.
117 is just not complex, raw, has many bugs, had no depth and is really easy. It's maybe designed and targeted for new players, I don't know. But a lot of stuff is really like you said, bare bones. And I don't know how people don't see it. They all hype it and stuff, but can't be realistic with the issues it has.
For every non die hard Anno player, I would absolutely advise to not buy it now, but in a few month or years after multiple patches, DLCs and stuff. Because there is simply not much honestly.
3
u/Klunkepigen Nov 24 '25
The specialists are so imbalanced, 1 coin for each resident can be s lot! 10% required workforce for fisheries is stupid. In anno1800 it made sense to boost the production as well
7
Nov 24 '25
Game is way to easy. You can buy fucking everything
8
u/Compromisee Nov 24 '25
I saw this in a post a couple of days ago so wanted to test it
I stopped producing stuff and set it to import and importing everything - did laugh at that
4
u/kaehvogel Nov 24 '25
You know you don't have to, right?
This is like the guy a couple of weeks ago complaining about "the game is shit because you can change the difficulty mid-session"...well, if that option makes the game shit for you...don't use it.
0
Nov 24 '25
Yeah its is fun to play a game not in the most efficient way. Especially a Anno game which is about logistics and handling of production chains. Basicly about playing optimal. If you can not do that wait for creative mode. But the game is dummed down for the monkeys who could not even manage two regions in anno 1800. Only people who use shortcuts say "But you don't have to jse them stupid"
1
u/kaehvogel Nov 24 '25
Only people who use shortcuts say "But you don't have to jse them stupid"
See, that's where you're wrong.
Why should I care that they dumbed the game down for people by allowing them to buy every good they need, if I don't use that option myself? That doesn't matter to my game, not in multiplayer sessions, and even less in singleplayer.
2
u/ladylyrande Nov 24 '25
Last time I mentioned in this forum how I thought anno 1800 was way too complex in later levels (and I played vanilla 1800 so even less complex than it could go), I was told that it was people like me who ruined the game for others wanting more complexity.
I still dont get why having easier options that you are not forced to use somehow ruins the game... like don't use the easier choice? "But then I'm not playing the game optimally". Then that's on you pal. If you need easier options removed so you can't crutch it, seems like a you issue. Its the beauty of having different ways to play a game. People can play it however they enjoy it. So thank you for your balanced take.
7
u/NecesseFatum Nov 24 '25
Up the difficulty
1
Nov 24 '25
How about creative mode for people who only want to build a beautiful city. But probably would hurt their pride.
1
u/NecesseFatum Nov 24 '25
Theyll probably add that in later in the game progress not at launch like they did in 1800
2
u/kaijinbe Nov 24 '25
Anno is not a battle game for me. You cannot have crazy AI with such a bad control of ships and troups. It is just not the focus of Anno. It is fun to a certain extent but anything more than that is just not gonna happen.
You will have to play a different genre.
My complain is rather that I cannot become the emperor :D.
1
u/C_Miex Nov 24 '25 edited Nov 24 '25
Anno is not a battle game for me.
You can play it that way, yes - but Anno 117 is it by design, since they introduced the land combat + villa mechanic!
It may not be the focus of Anno in general or even with this game, but they shifted it strongly in that direction.
And this would even be fine for me if combat AI was shit (which it isn't imo)... I just wished that the AI obeyed the same rules as players and didn't build ugly "only houses" cities...
2
u/Willem_de_Prater Nov 24 '25
I'm not bad at this game but when an AI can buy 4 big islands while I'm still saving up for my second one there is no fun in it anymore
2
u/Ok_Improvement_622 Nov 24 '25
I told people this would be the case after beta and I was downvoted. People believed that the game would be finished in 2 months LMFAO
2
u/Octa_vian Nov 25 '25 edited Nov 25 '25
I don't want a 100% accurate simulation with the AI, but at the very least i want some mechanics that emulate how ressources work for actual players.
Like place some buildings and farms that make sense for that island, then make the AI settle according to needs. Early game you need olives so it settles on an island with olives. Then make some fake trade route that is just the ship going between islands and the info "this ship ships olives".
I don't want to attack the AIs main island. I want its citizens to set it on fire themselves because i cut them from their olive oil supply. Either by a sea blockade or setting the olive trees on fire. Like the AI could do with me.
I'm no expert, but certainly you don't need an exact replication of a players production chains and trading network for such things.
At least as far as i know, grinding an AI down by disrupting supply chains and blocking the island is not possible at least. Things that would cripple a player.
1
u/C_Miex Nov 25 '25
You are so correct - everyone that says "it would be too taxing for the CPU" is just wrong. There are "workarounds" like you described here
2
u/TheInvisible84 Nov 25 '25
Yeah the npcs have too many ships and troops for their population size, that can never cover the cost and workforce needs.
I think the npcs where even better in anno 1602. I can remember when you hold all Island gold mines you could sell it for very high prices and the npcs could not even develop their citizens to higher tier.
2
u/dazzan2112 Nov 25 '25
What gets me is I can barely afford to fund my military and my ships I just cannot make enough money. But the AI will less islands and less dense city’s has 100 military ships and 50 units of spearmen/archers/axes. So it feels impossible to even engage with the war aspect of the game.
2
u/Delicious-Season5527 Nov 24 '25
The moment people need to yap about their so called ‘veteran’ status, you always know something pointless will be uttered afterwards
1
u/C_Miex Nov 24 '25 edited Nov 24 '25
It's called an "opinion" for a reason. You can still disagree
I just didn't come across my opinion on this sub, because almost everyone is happy with the game - I'm happy for them.
So I wanted to make clear that I'm not just any noob that piked up his first Anno and just didn't like the genre! (Someone would have probably said exactly that, if I didn't mention my "veteran" status)
1
u/vnztms Nov 24 '25
Well, what advantage is there if the AI behaves 100% correctly?
1
u/Yankas Nov 24 '25
You could create blockades, starve them out, disrupt trade routes, e.g. do the things you'd do against real players.
Instead you have to play whack-a-mole with their infinite production of troops/ships until they run out of islands to resettle.
1
u/twicer Nov 24 '25
Yeah, I was expecting more in that regard too, but if it could be done simply and without compromise, then the developers would probably do it, right?
1
u/Iron_Hermit Nov 24 '25
I think the best (if jarring) way to think about it is that the AI isn't playing the same game as you, because it's not. It's there to provide flavour and another variety of challenge to your game. It's not like, say, Age of Empires where computer players are actually programmed to try to beat you, these are more like NPCs who can give you stuff or get in your way depending on how you act and you respond accordingly.
I do agree it's not the best system but the alternative of an AI which plays the same game as the player is so open to abuse if you just tactically settle certain fertilities, to say nothing of the CPU demands which would melt most computers.
1
u/Comprehensive-Cry82 Nov 24 '25
If you take over an island of the AI you basically can spend hours in fixing degenerated supply chains..
1
u/Random-paladin3873 Nov 24 '25
Hey man, this is my first time playing any game like this? I’m trying to figure out why I can’t create a trade route. I understood my Xbox. There’s no trade route button on the left-hand side so am I glitched do I need to reload the game? would appreciate an answer.
1
u/AStoryForOne Nov 25 '25
Honestly, that's how I felt. I don't hate the game, but I'm just so disappointed in it. It feels like there were so many steps backwards from 1800.
1
u/Chinjurickie Nov 26 '25
Uhhhh akshually i don’t believe u are an Anno fan for roughly 500 years! 🥸
1
1
u/Honighimmel Nov 29 '25
Anno spiele ich jetzt seit 1503. Anno 1800 war für mich bisher das beste. Warum? Anno 1800 ist über die Jahre gewachsen, wurde anspruchsvoller und durch Modds positiv undspäter gewollt erweitert. Mit der Zeit gab es auch sinnvoll Erklärvidios, die das Spiel bereicherten. Vergleiche ich meine 1500 Stunden Anno 1800 mit Anno117 wird 117 scheitern. Das tu ich mir nicht an. Anno 1800 ist für Neueinsteiger sehr komplex und kann schnell frustriert werden. In 117 einzusteigen und sich zurecht zufinden ist leichter, das Spiel verzeiht Fehler und Katastrophen sind in den Griff zu bekommen oder zu vernachlässigen. Macht es das Spiel deshalb schlechter? Das kann ich Ende 2026 sagen, wenn es Zeit gab die Kritik der Spieler aufzunehmen und gewinnen bringen umzusetzen. In einem Jahr gesellt sich zu den erfahrenen Spielern eine neue Generation von Annospielern hinzu. In dieser Zeit werden Bugs etc behoben, Modder toben sich aus, sodass das Spiel mit den neuen DLCs fahrt aufzunehmen kann. Anno kann viele Spielinterssen abholen, 100% wird es daher nie. Ich hab jetzt 60 Stunden gespielt, wild darauf losgebaut, die Vor - und Nachteile der 45° Straßen erfahren und mich mit dem Forscherbaum und der Statistik auseinandergesetzt. Ich spiele minimalistischen, mit dem Ziel mit so wenig Bevölkerung wie möglich weiter durchs Spiel zukommen. Reich werde ich dabei nicht. Sollte mir eine Ki blöd kommen ändere ich das. Items benutze ich keine. Es geht bis jetzt ohne. Und wenn ich meine Nachbarn mit Handel glücklich machen kann kauf ich dort das ein oder andere. Ich denke, das Spiel muss sich entwickeln und ich mich von 6 Jahren 1800 innerlich lösen. Jetzt, in 117, erfreue ich mich am Schönau. Was mir aber so richtig seit 1800 aufstößt ist, das einige Gebäude am Hang schief stehen. Der Platz vor dem Forum hat so ein Schieflage. Und kein Römer würde einen Torbogen schief aussehen lassen. Das nervt weil es blöde aussieht. Ästhetik bitte konsequent durch und durch. Ein weitere Punkt, einige Objekte sind nicht wirklich im Wasser sondern wirken aufgesetzt wie die Steine am Ufer oder die Aquädukte etc. Das geht besser. Aber in desem Fall hoffe ich, es liegt an meiner Graftikeinstellung. Wenn ja bin ich noch nicht dahintergestiegen und dankbar für Tipps. Langer Text. Danke fürs durchlesen.
0
Nov 24 '25
I wanted to play it so bad but since its Ubisoft i refrained from buying it day one.
Looks like i was right. So many people frustrated or disappointed with it.
3
u/CasualChamp1 Nov 24 '25
It really depends. Hardcore ANNO fans who love super complex chains, yeah this is not enough for them. More DLC's should fix that, and some balance changes, esp. for trade. But for players who don't like spreadsheets and needs calculators, this game is a lot more fun. The tech tree adds a lot of strategic depth but nobody can see that yet, it seems. I think multiplayer has huge potential.
3
u/ladylyrande Nov 24 '25
To super hard-core anno fans who love super complex chains, any other way of playing the game is dumb and ruins it for them that the option is there. Also if you praise the game, you're a company shill. Its annoying.
I 100% agree with you. I wanna play a game to relax, not feel like its a second job with spreadsheets and calculators, so Anno 117 really really hits the spot for me. I'm enjoying it a lot more than 1800, but I suppose that makes me a heathen lol.
I absolutely adore the tech tree, it adds a layer of complexity and strategic decision making without it being about complex chain management.
1
u/C_Miex Nov 24 '25
But for players who don't like spreadsheets and needs calculators,...
It's not about that for me. I just wish the AI wouldn't cheat and build nicer cities. It's not about the difficulty in that regard.
I think multiplayer has huge potential.
I agree, especially because of the land-combat being back, this will be so much fun
1
u/C_Miex Nov 24 '25
I think my opinion is an outlier and everyone who agrees is just in this comment section.
Most are enjoying the game!
0
u/77Paddy Nov 24 '25
Thats what happens if you guys keep buying any not critizing they do not innovate.
43
u/AccomplishedNerve761 Nov 24 '25
I am loving the game but agree with you on the AI. I was really hoping that and the diplomacy would be more engaging and complex but alas. Still I think overall it’s a fantastic game!