Quite polished, I did not encounter any bugs. First time playing a turn-based city-builder and I won on the first try in the default difficulty, playing mostly by instinct, so maybe kind of easy actually but, at the same time, there was a week where I almost didn't make it, because I chose before the last reward (with extra attack) and failed a quest.
I didn't use iron at all (seems like cavalry is enough to win) and only used the shop a few times (skipped buying on most weeks, and some options seemed not really worth the money, though maybe I misunderstood the effects). At some point if the first weeks, my peasants were much stronger than my warriors and archers, which was nice. Didn't need that much storage capacity (something in the 300s, I think). In the last weeks, it felt a bit disappointing when a reward was of the kind that is mostly useful in the long-term (so kind of useless on the last week). Also, the numbers become so big that it's a bit difficult to get a feel for them: on some weeks, it felt like I just happened to win due to mostly following a reasonable strategy, but I couldn't tell at the start of a week if it'd actually be doable or not.
Another thing I noticed is that due to how the resources are chained from a dependency point of view, there's mostly only one way of progressing in the long term: there's some choice of specializing in peasants or warriors in the first weeks or depending on quests, and maybe almost skipping some units (didn't make many spearmen, for example), but overall you have to mostly follow a predictable progression. But maybe that's always the case with turn-based city-builders, dunno (as I said, it's the first one I try).
Also, btw, I did not expect a "roguelike" city-builder, but I know the tag is used nowadays for every game that has some procgen, even if it doesn't play like the original rogue at all :-)
Anyway, I had some fun discovering the turn-based city-builder strategy genre!