I've emailed this to the address given, but I'll post it here for you to respond to if you like. I don't really expect/need a proper response, the questions are more to show how I am confused.
I see if I can give quick answers on the thinking.
Okay, now this list is something different. The last one was basically the pdf with magic items, this one has some new flavour to it. Some of it is remarkably similar to my own ideas, although mine is a completely different approach. One problem with this new list is that the extra units make it a bit unwieldy. Maybe combine the Elf characters into a single entry, and same for the Dwarfs. I can't really see the point of the Merchant Prince except for getting loads of "free" banners, which seems like a very odd use. I'm not sure why the Halfling units are split up either, since they are so similar it seems like a weapon option would be best (plus maybe the choice of a type of champion). The script-style font used for the headings and titles is horrible to read!
We are trying out new units to see how they work, some are works in progress and may not make final edition of the book.
You want us to combine the Elf and Dwarf Heroes? Elf magic Caster and fighter and Dwarf fighter and Engineer. I can't see that being helpful.
Merchant Prince can take Banners, extra magic items, more War Academy Abilities and Citizens Militia.
Halflings were split because different points cost for the unit champions (archers with higher BS and spearmen with extra attack). Plus Archers have option to skirmish and scout but the spearmen really shouldn't do either.
I never had anyone complain about the script font before. We'll have to look into it.
The RoR units fall into the same problems they always have - most are essentially ordinary units with a hero in them. How many different named pike units do you need? You could dump half of the RoR pretty easily and leave people to use the equivalent unit rules, maybe adding a magic item or academy skill to replace the few unique parts, and it would have next to no effect. Why are the Giants of Albion in the main rules rather than the RoR section?
The pike RoR's we are stuck with because if we drop any there will be calls for our heads, each unit has a group of supporters.
The reason the Giants were in the Main book was two fold.
1. The only army allowed to take the Giants of Albion are the Dogs of War.
2. The person handling the RoR book forgot to include them. :(
Finally, I don't like the renown points system at all. It adds an extra layer of complexity to making an army that is hard to follow and not really all that restrictive for most players anyway.
The renown points are getting slightly favourable reviews. Depending on the current round of playtesting/comments we will review it again.
To end on a positive, it's nice to see a bit more fluff in the naming of the units to add some feel to it rather than sticking with the generic titles, plus a few new ideas in the way of war machines, although it does feel a lot like a Tilean army that hires mercs rather than a merc army. I can see this fleshing out into something very good with a little more direction.
The co-developers had a lot of debate on the renaming of units, some hated the generic names and others hated the names we changed them to.
It really is a Tilean army, Tilea only hires mercenaries so it's a mercenary army. That is why one Mercenary Captain has to be upgraded to a Paymaster in the Army. The only non-mercenary unit is the Citizens Militia who are in service of the Merchant Princes, that is why you have to have a Prince to put them in the game.
There was some debating about using generic Dogs of War in other armies. Most were for it with some limitations, no missiles for Chaos or must assign a character as paymaster in that army to use them were popular ideas but nothing has been settled on changing the requirements to hire in other armies.