I purchased Revolution etc., late last year, but being the holidays, we acquired a whole bunch of games, most much simpler, so it langished on the shelf until this weekend when we decided to give it a spin.
We had three players available (and foolishly began at nearly 11:00 at night) who played the Catholics, the Nobility and the Reformers, as suggested in the rules. We played only turns 0-2 (or possibly 0-3 -- my recollection is hazy) before having to wrap it up due to time, but we were expecting it to be a "learning game" anyway, and were not upset to not be able to complete it.
I have to say that I enjoyed what I saw of the game a fair bit. I've read the reviews on this site and can see where people are coming from. That said, I did not find it to be quite as static as suggested. Perhaps the latter turns would have led to that degree, as we had reached some fair degree of stability in the north (Reformer controlled). What I did find was that the Catholics seemed to be the default winner in a three-game scenario. I don't know if that changes later in the game, but it seemed that the Nobility more or less went about their own thing, almost playing an independent game, the Catholics just sat back and raked in the success, and it was up to the Reformers to *both* secure their own position and single-handedly defeat the Catholics. Having to expend Reformer resources to both reform universities and tear down bishoprics felt like a tall order.
We didn't find the game rules too confusing except for the infamous overflow problem. It seemed, in discussion after the game, that we would have felt it fairly natural to treat overflow as only possible in situations where neutral pieces had run dry and there was thus space available. The interpretation, where overflow can occur in cases the province limit is not reached by player units only and thus the province essentially goes "over limit" and the player fights it out with the neutrals next turn does seem to encourage a more dynamic gameplay by allowing for smoother inter-province movement, but it feels counter-intuitive that people would leave an overcrowded province to escape into another province made just as overcrowded by their presence. Perhaps I'm missing some subtle point there.
On the cities-counting-toward-province control matter, we played that units in cities did not at any point in the game count toward province control. This seemed to be straightforward to us, although it did make the task of the reformers seem even more spread out.
I'm looking forward to playing it again when we can make it through the complete game to see how the final round holds up.
I've heard in several comments in the rules clarifications thread that sieges were rare. They seemed quite frequent in our game. I'm not sure if we're doing something wrong or if we just liked the appeal of the siege idea.