I think the game played well. You certainly need to close the distance between yourself and the enemy asap. It stops both sides from playing-for-time, if that's what they want.
The d10's don't worry me too much as the extremes don't occur as often as you might think, and when they do isn't that the uncontrollable elements within a battle which we are trying to achieve. Remember commanders are controlling a corps or more and shouldn't worry about a few dice rolls that go against them for a single brigade. I still think the outcome of the battle is decided by good forward planning in these rules. And there is a real feeling that you are attempting to impose your plans upon the enemy as the battle progresses.
I'd prefer a few extreme results each game rather than being able to calculate the results of each brigade's actions.
That's perhaps more than my 2p, I think.

I enjoyed the game ... really sorry about the two 10's :)

I didn't realise it was based on Fire and Fury, which I know quite well and like.

as for the endless 2D6 debate ...

I honestly think it's a bit of a red herring. You can get the same probability of results using 2D6 and a D12 simply by altering the restults table, (ok, depending on the number of results required and the exact probabilities might not be achievable, but in principle it is possible).

If you accept this, then you have to accept that the game designers have thought about the probability of each result and factored that in to thier table design to get the desired results. Of course a clever system might allow either style to give a choice over more or less predictable results.

I suppose 2D6 gives you that feel that results are less random though.

... well that's my 2p