I have been reading through the stuff so far, and I have to say it is looking really interesting in concept. I really like the single page, standard layout, and the ideas seem to be presented at about the right level.
That said, IMO it would be clearer if certain definitions and processes were abstracted to a separate 'header' section or page. Doing this would also give you a little more space to flesh out the scenario summary etc.
- The deployment process (players building the terrain and choosing sides etc). Also whether the players may choose to play using the ‘short’ edge or even ‘corners’
- Perhaps a summary of objectives and how they are used in the separate scenarios. Alternatively, there should be a small section for objectives each scenario.
- What the various Scenario levels are intended to do (Alpha, Delta, Omega etc)
Equally, the rules for Concealment and Planetary conditions should also contain sections for :-
- The definitions of Contingent, Vanguard, Garrison and Reinforcement.
- Attrition, Surprised, Fortification and Preliminary Bombardment need defining and should also be put here
While I really like the ideas and the way they are presented, I did find some of the wording in the scenarios a little confusing, and sometimes at odds with the E:A rules for example, can Eldar use normal troops to garrison as they are normally constrained to Rangers and War Walkers. I know it is really hard, but could you try to be even more specific about who does what in the main sections; Gaming area, Deployment and especially Victory conditions.
Possibly consider using a 'sub-process' approach that can be applied to each section. For example Deployment might contain:-
- Contingents (allocation and removal);
- Formation assignment (Spacecraft, Garrisons, Vanguard, reserves and Reinforcements);
- Formation deployment etc
Some scenarios contained army list constraints that probably should be presented in the 'Forces' section, and there may be other parts where things should be re-ordered.
However, all-in-all it is a really first class effort, and I can't wait to get a look at the finished document or to try some of these with people in the UK. The scenarios would also really lend themselves to 'campaign' battles - where two or more people fight a series of engagements essentially using a single army (or even various sub-sets of a single army), and the results of one battle impose certain constraints on the following battle.
