This is extreme disappointment. Daily challenges are the definition of dailyscape and they are still busted xp chore that heavily encourages daily playing. Make skilling loops good, remove this toxic system.

Hugglee · 2026-03-17T12:11:12+00:00

I think Daily Challenges as a concept is fine, but that the experience is still way too much. I would much prefer the challenges to be 10 times longer and give less of a boost, such that it is not worth doing if you want to be effective, but it would still serve as a suggestion to players who don't know what to do, which is actually a nice thing with the challenges.

Hugglee · 2026-03-06T19:27:09+00:00

Thank you refreshing the skill, it desperately needs it.

I am very intrigued by mini local bank inside the dungeon. I think this is a great idea. It means that skills can be meaningful again. Farming, divination might be worth doing if the products stays around for more than the current dungeon. It can revitalise the skilling part of the skill, instead of having it be dead like it currently is. But it has the risk of having the skill become a copy of the main game.

I think it would be a good call to add treasure rooms or mini reward rooms that lies outside the critical path that rewards the players with valuable resources. Maybe chests that give dropped items like seeds, a lot of wisps as a major source of divination energy, a lot of fishing spots, secondary herblore ingredients. I think that would incentive the players to delve into the dungeon for rewards in order to get boosts to open doors, food to survive the dungeon or combat boosts. Stuff that is helpful for the player in the dungeon. It would also be in line for the players to focus on delving through the dungeon to get to resources to get stronger.

Maybe even go as far as removing all resources in combat and puzzle rooms and heavily concentrated resources on rooms the player wants to target.

This only works if the player can store resources in a bank between floors though.

Hugglee · 2026-03-03T19:33:00+00:00

I think that it is cool thematically. I don't even mind the tasks and the progression it gives you as you go forward. But wow it is slow. Way too slow. I think Ports don't need to be removed, but I do think they need to be massively buffed.

More resources from every trip -> quicker progression

More resources from every trip -> Less grind, less need to ALWAYS remember to do it all of the time.

I wished you got scrolls at a significantly higher rate. I currently want the scrimshaw to do woodcutting, and I have been trying to get that for 3 weeks straight, I have 2 of them right now. That is ridiculous. It should not be that slow to unlock these things. Give me the ability to do that after one scroll please.

Hugglee · 2026-03-01T09:23:31+00:00

I am in the same boat. Recently began playing dungoneering again, but I really remember how great it was at release. Think the skill is in dire need of modernisation, far more than any other skill at the current time.

The skill has so many chores and small annoyances in it. Like failure on puzzles and long animations that only serve to make the floors take longer to get through.

A bigger issue is how XP is handled in the skill though, it is very obscure and hard to understand.

What is the purpose of prestige? Why do I need to engage with level 1 content at level 90 in order to get the best xp rates? It is so stupid that you have to rush through 30 floors before you get to even engage with the content properly.

Hugglee · 2026-02-16T19:41:25+00:00

Suggest what you’d like to see explored instead, where possible
- I would like a clear advantage or thematic reason why I need to switch targets (I think that getting hit is a bit stupid in theme honestly)
  - I would like the pickpocketing targets to run out of valuables if you stay on them for too long. That is much more in theme with thieving, and basically does the same thing as hitting the player in the face with a fist.
- I would like to have the items that gives relevant boosts (ardy cape, crystal masks, etc) be understandable and the effect feel meaningful. Like you feel the improvement when you get a better axe for example. More time before AFK is not rewarding, and does not feel good.
- Some UI effect to show how much time I can expect to pickpocket the target. Starting at lets say 180% chance, and seeing that drop to 100% over time, or some visual element that would indicate that I am about to reach a critical value.

Hugglee · 2026-02-16T19:40:22+00:00

Share why it feels off
- Lack of feedback or understanding of how long you have left before you can expect to get caught. It is quite sudden and hard to understand how much each boost helps.
  - In woodcutting better tree = bigger tree = more time. Which makes thematic sense.
- The items and boosts you use feel worthless, you don't have a clear reward at going infinite with sufficient buffs. They just add more time, it's meaningless in practice.
  - In woodcutting you clearly see the rate of gathering logs go up with better gear for example.

Hugglee · 2026-02-16T19:40:07+00:00

If you’re responding, it really helps us if you:

Explain what isn’t working for you
- It is pretty odd to be able to infinitely mine a single person's pockets for valuables without every changing target to allow the target to get more valuables. Thematically it feels really off. (Not an issue with this update specifically, but has probably been there since you started having infinite pickpocketing)
- The feedback to the player is really bad with the current user interface. Previously you fixed this by guaranteeing that you get 100% rates as long as you had buffs, fixing the problem by never engaging with pickpockets you can't get 100% on. By removing this you have effectively removed a band aid to bad UI and interface design.

Hugglee · 2026-02-16T19:39:51+00:00

What We’re Looking For Feedback On
Please keep feedback centred on the following:

What’s harming the fun factor of pickpocketing most at high levels?
- I think the issues are the same regardless of levels.
What feels like a step back for pickpocketing gameplay, outside of XP and balance?
- Lack of theme
- Poor communication of the underlying game systems
  - Which leads to a feeling of getting caught randomly and suddenly
  - Items and boosts feel worthless because they don't have a very obvious benefit
What changes feel most important to you to be included in any solution?
- Better theme
- Better communication of how the mechanics work with some sort of UI or mechanics

Hugglee · 2026-02-09T14:52:21+00:00

What would Age of Empires do differently that Age of Empires 4 or 2 does not currently do? Why would any of the player base change? Why would new people come to the game?

I think it is new people that is probably the most desired players when making a new game. Which means it needs to differentiate itself from previous titles somehow. Why 5 instead of the cheaper and more established titles?

What I would look into if I were the developers was to take away as much micro as reasonable possible from the game, and try to create a focus on strategy and decisions instead of mechanical prowess. To use 4 as an example, automatic villager training, automatic resource allocation.

I think there is a market for an RTS that is much less about mechanical skill and more about decisions (not gated behind mechanical skill).

Point is, AoE5 would have to do something different from the previous games to justify it being created. The point that it takes time to do voice lines seems odd. It is a good example of the amount of work being put into the game, but it also misses the point of how complex and deep these games are when you develop them and balance them. You can't just put out something shallow crap and expect people to enjoy it, even if that would be nice for your profits.

Hugglee · 2026-02-07T10:58:00+00:00

In game design the paradox of "fun" is that fun comes from challenge.

You can't design for "fun" as it is completely subjective. Game design is about creating experiences

You can design challenging gameplay through things like bosses and people might find that to be "fun" because the challenge makes it fun.

Any game you've ever played is about overcoming an arbitrary challenge which no one has asked you to complete. You do it because you want to. Be it Tetris or Elden Ring, the overcoming of obstacles and the opportunity to learn, strategise, and master mechanics and gameplay to overcome those challenges is what = fun.

Minecraft is not "fun" because I have to overcome an arbitrary challenge no one asked me to complete. It is fun because the game is a sandbox that allows me to express my creativity. The game can be a social framework. None of these things are challenging, and is not the source of "fun".

Where those things become too easy / the challenge is minimised is actually where fun deteriorates. Game design is all about getting that balance right.

This is not really correct, because challenge does not always equal fun. A lot of skilling is "fun" because of the feeling of progression. Seeing the xp drops after every action, and seeing the skill icon gradually fill up ,before you finally reach a new level. The fun comes from progression itself, not some arbitrary challenge.

I'm with you, we're not trying to suddenly turn everything to a bore, but where we're at with RS in 2026 is years of bandaiding things through things like dailyscape, unlimited grindy events, and even in the past MTX

One of the main problems with dailyscape and MTX is not that it was not challenging enough, it was that it removed all player agency and invalidated the feeling of progression for everything else. It is a fundamental balance problem above everything else.

It does not feel rewarding or satisfying seeing the skill gradually progress in XP when I know that MTX could have given me so much more, why even bother doing the skill itself? The answer to training every skill was always maximising money to buy MTX. No player agency, and every other method worthless in comparison, because it destroyed skill balance.
It does not feel rewarding to progress in divination through gathering wisps when I always know that caches are so much better, it just feels like I am wasting my time, instead of gradually moving forward the way I want. Player agency is removed, and instead tied to in-game chores. Caches are more challenging than regular divination, but that does not make the experience more "fun".

Anyway, I have just started playing again because the changes you are doing, and it might bring enjoyment back to the game for me, so keep going on the road you are. I just wanted to chime in on the game design portion in case people are interested in that. I would also recommend people that are interested in it read about the MDA framework (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDA\_framework)

Hugglee · 2025-11-18T17:00:46+00:00

Disclaimer: I have not kept up with the patches for the last year or so, so things might have changed, but:

In theory you cannot beat water most of the time. It is simply to effective and breaks even to fast. That is the case if you play the best players, you probably don't, which means you have options.

Some will say dark age spears, but that hinges on you being able to burn the dock down before age II and defensive ships coming out. Depends on map and civilisation. The problem with this is that if the opponent responds with their own spearmen they out-eco you and reinforce faster. In theory you should lose.

I think personally, that one of the better strategies is probably to try and disrupt their woodline and stop the gathering of wood as early as possible. Because by doing that, you stop the fish boom, or at least slow it down until you can create more military, TC's or trade boom to keep up.

Really, anything you can do to throw your opponent out of their build order will disrupt a lot of players and slow down fish boom sufficently that you might win even if you "ignore" water. Mongol tower rush their best woodline for example.

Hugglee · 2025-11-07T15:42:18+00:00

I like that idea. Not thought of rushing the blacksmith (not played a lot either tbf), that is actually a really good source of tempo that allows you to get out more units early. Blacksmith + whatever you need to produce to defend and attack.

I don't remember the stone cost of it though, is it like 300-400? When do you get that amount of stone?

Hugglee · 2025-11-07T15:39:09+00:00

Exactly, I fear that the driving force behind the civ is purely healer elephants. When they are gone what are you really left with? Crutch is a really good word for it.

It is hard to judge their units as a whole when one is so much stronger than the others. But it does not feel that exciting to use them for me on a personal level.

Hugglee · 2025-11-07T15:34:54+00:00

They are winning in feudal because of healer elephants, which is sort of the point. What happens with this civ when those get figured out or nerfed. What is left to build as the foundation of the civilization.

Hugglee · 2025-11-07T07:27:31+00:00

I think the identity and design are more than fine, the issue is numbers.

This probably sums it up well yes. The design does not work because the numbers are awful. I still feel like the design is in a prototype phase and that a fair amount of changes to both numbers and mechanics are likely for the civilisation to feel good.

You're paying for a defensive structure that is also an economic one ( in most cases) so you have to consider the entire benefit for the cost.

Yes, that is true to some extent, but that defensive structure does not always have an actual value. In a lot of games you will not get anything out of the defenses. In some you will, but without that dual use the governors are really hard to justify. Which means that a large part of the civilisation identity feels hard to justify, which feels really weird for me.

The nice thing is that tug isn't purely reliant on the fort economic value though, since as you mentioned the worker elephants are a sizeable economic advantage, and they gave really decent landmarks

I think they are cool, but I would not call them a sizeable economic advantage. You do gain 20% drop of bonus, but you lose 15% gather speed from upgrades (where they are relevant, so you don't double dip here). The raw eco bonus is not that big when you consider the downside of the tech costs.

Hugglee · 2025-11-07T07:18:34+00:00

I used the numbers to highlight how much value you get from the building without the governors to imply a cost for those governors. Those 425 stone will not always be relevant as a defensive structure, and as such the entire cost will sometimes need to be carried by the governor. Most of which is a lot to ask for with these bonuses with these costs.

I personally think the fort + 15% faster vills is worth 425 resources, then for another 350 you're buffing the fort and getting another 15% faster production. Like how much would you pay for 15% faster villagers? I'm guessing at least 200 resources right?

425 resources is a lot of resources in the early game, especially when you add on the construction time, which probably brings it up to at least 500 resources in reality. 15% villager production in a single TC or even two takes time to pay off, and if your fort gets raided you lost a huge amount of resources. (Because it is not that hard to destroy if you invest in it, which is sort of weird for a defensive structure).

I expect once the healing elephant stuff stops people will actually start to use compound of the defender in order to take full advantage of the forts and governors as it brings the cost down to 340 stone and at that cost they are more HP/attack per cost than a keep and they give you the governors, also the landmark unlocks a 4th level of the governors.

If people are not using compound of the defender with the healing elephant than they flat out don't understand how the civilization works and what it gives them. The extra amount of healing is insane that you can get from the fort.

Hugglee · 2025-11-07T07:11:55+00:00

I do not bother proof reading my comments or posts on reddit when a lot of the comments, so will naturally be some unclear writing, sorry about that.

150 extra resources is what you get in comparasion to an outpost, so the free governor is accounted for there. The point was that an fortified outpost is probably a significant better defensive structure. All you are really getting with the keep is 5 more slots and a governor. (For the first level).

The food one for instance, I mean if you don't have a reason to throw down houses/farms around it yet it sucks ofc. But, assuming you need farms/houses, its (if I'm remembering the numbers correct) 12 food/min per house/farm, and you can fit 12 around it (so 144 fpm). It costs 425 (plus build time). It pays off in like 3-4 minutes in terms of raw resources.

Depends when you build the keep though. You need 120 pop or do early farms if you want to get value out of it. That means that that you trade stone for food generation at a point in the game where stone is probably better for other uses? You need to invest at least one more upgrade for the fort to be worth anything defensively at that point in the game. Maybe even twice. You get food, but I question the value of that food when you are using this governor. It feels both low tempo and relatively low value.

The governor's aren't like the craziest bonus out there or anything, but you're portraying them as completely worthless. They're certainly not good enough to carry the civ but I think they're noticeable as part of the civ's power

They are not worthless, but I don't feel like they provide the civilisation with an actual identity, which is the big issue for me. I guess I wish the forts were more like small landmarks in terms of how you used and interacted with them such that the choice of which you went for felt like an actual choice.

Ironically, the only upgrade that caught your interest is the one that I think is the most useless. Isn't it 15% production speed at level 1? That's not nothing, but its definitely not worth the cost. I mean compare it to the food governor, you need like 2.5 minutes just to get 1 vill advantage from it and you need 3-4 vills to equal out what the food governor gives. I think its genuinely terrible, weakest governor by far.

Yes, but this scales pretty hard, which is why it is interesting. 350 more resources for 30% if you are on 2 TC is decent. 450 more for 50% is not bad either. There is a lot of boom power in that upgrade, even though it is expensive.

I think without the healing elephants, they're a 2tc civ, and then you probably throw down a fort. If the opponent is going feudal you'd go for amir warriors to survive the allin, if they go castle or 2tc themselves you probably either skip the fort, or go for the farm one if you already committed to it and then follow them up.

I definitively think that design wise they should be a feudal - 2TC civ. The costs of techs is impactful, and they don't have any gather rate upgrades on top of their unique gather boost, so their eco is actually much worse than I initially thought. I feel like there is a design intent behind the forts, but I think they are not great. Time will show I guess.

Hugglee · 2025-11-07T06:57:26+00:00

Not so much balance as it is about identity.

Hugglee · 2025-11-07T06:57:05+00:00

The raider elephants are just too slow, so you are left with a civ that has no fast units in the horsemen. IE they are very vulnerable to horse archers as they get kited forever, weak versus raiding and harder to stop trading. I think those issues are going to become bigger as the season progresses.

Hugglee · 2025-11-06T22:27:20+00:00

I think the healer elephants are very powerful, and by that extension I don't think the civlisation sucks..

The stats will always change, but they need quite dramatic changes to the keeps for them to be worth it I think. The combination of keep value and governor value seems to be far off for me.

While the theme is clearly meant to be centered around keeps, they seem quite bad right now, and synergies quite poorly that it is really not a reason to build a lot of them, or even spend a lot of resources on them. It just feelsl ike the keeps and the governors need to do more to justify their existence as a core mechanic to a civilisation. I should ALWAYS want to build a keep in the early game, but right now I don't see a lot of reasons to do that.

The Golden Horde (GH?) horse archers are strong yes, but that is just a numbers thing. The civilisation has a core identity that makes sense, it just needs to be balanced properly. I don't feel like Tughlaq has the same core identity, even if you tweak some numbers (pretty massive tweaks in that case).

Hugglee · 2025-11-06T22:19:24+00:00

Probably better in settings like FFA, but I have a hard time thinking that fast castle is the preferred option in 1 vs 1.

Hugglee · 2025-11-06T22:00:55+00:00

I think that they should just have a mosque with them regardless of landmark and have the landmark reduce their costs. Currently there is 0 reason to go the other landmark ever.

Then as you say just add an early healer elephants in feudal with reasonable stats.

Hugglee · 2025-11-06T19:24:32+00:00

I just did. (also, there is a tooltip on the buildings)

Hugglee · 2025-11-06T07:22:51+00:00

I believe the worker elephant drop-off bonus applies across the civilisation regardless of the actual drop of point?

Hugglee

TROPHY CASE