, as JD has asked us, I can only say that I´m quite impressed:a) Rules very good written. Clear and unambiguos sentences, but still gentle for a non-native english speaker, unlike other game rules.
b) I think the structure of the chapters is fine: starting with general rules which apply moreless during the whole bound, and then describing each phase with more detail. Anyway, I missed the rules for terrain set until I read the fouth appendix. Well, this may make this aspect of the game seem less important, IMO. I would consider if these rules should be described at the beginning in order to make the rules go through the same steps than a normal game.
c) I have not been able to see any diagrams. A line of text describing it is all I can see. Were they ready? Should they had been printed with the rest of the text?
d) I like tips. They give conclusions that help you to check if you understood the rule correctly.
e) Now, about the quality of the rules, I DO like them. I think they allow a very good ´simulation´of each troop and its behaviour on the battlefield. The three different combat phases solved perfectly the differences between tough shock troops and steady troops.
f) The BG concept is very accurate. I guess battles will look just like those blue and red squares that you can find in, for expample, any Osprey Great Battles book.
g) Rules for generals are just great! You have to work a lot with them! This gives players a chance to show their best, indeed.
Well, next week I´ll write my thoughts about my first games, in Jaen.
I tried to make a technical evaluation. Rude enough?
