It seems less swingy but may slow down game play. One thing my wife is finding (and liking) with the Frostgrave combat rules is the speed of combat compared to GW’s MESBG rules. There is a certain elegance to opposed die rolls even if it feels swingy.
I'm long out of the loop, but wasn't there a smaller-scale (in terms of models on the table) variant of the Middle Earth rules at one point? Something with figure counts closer to the XGrave games, which would speed things up a bit just by virtue of having less rolling. Maybe I'm just remembering some old Whie Dwarf scenarios or something, I haven't played since before the Hobbit sets came out.
Splitting the activation of the primary but not secondary player sounds innovative to me. It seems the monsters will get the initiative a lot more than in Joe’s previous games.
I think I've seen that style of split suggested as house rules for Frostgrave, etc in the past, mostly as a balancing factor for winning initiative repeatedly. This variant seems a bit different though.
The way the monsters slot in is closer to the solo rules (where it's usually leader & his immediate pals, then all the NPCs, then the rest of the player stuff) than we've seen previously, so yeah, they should be harder to play around/ignore. Makes sense for a game that's more about monster hunting and solving mysteries with clues than loot collection. The NPC/monster AI sounds like it's been improved as well, which is good. Even Stargrave still has some flaws in its programs, like not allowing for jammed weapons or taking cover after an NPC has shot.
Tentatively pretty excited to see this. Wonder if we'll see fan ports to other settings - Dracula's America/Deadlands for the American West, Weird WW1/WW2/Viet Nam ala the Pinnacle Savage Worlds settings, maybe a Cold War era black ops game set in a supernatural Europe or something. Maybe too soon for real moderns.