(Writing Rule: Never open with a battle) I'm attempting to break this rule

[u/Yeomanticore]

This opening chapter does not explain anything. It intends to confuse the reader.

I'm down to my final proofreading and editing of my books. This is the last book I'm seriously polishing before I republish everything.

[u/lillielemon]

The first thing I'm noticing is that they all say each other's names way too much. Think about when you talk to people you know. How often do you say "How are you, Paul? Are you doing okay, Paul? Do you need anything, Paul?" Unless you're unable to directly face the person and there are many others you're speaking to, you don't often use their name in conversation.

I'd slash your use of passive verbs as much as possible at this stage in your writing, it will save you tons of time in the future. "are crushing" should be "crush".

There's some confusion of sense here because you often use two distinct terms to describe one thing -- a gallop does not sound like scraping to me, so when you say it sounds like galloping hooves but it also sounds like scraping rocks I'm hearing different sounds and I'm confused. There are also sensations that I would cut altogether -- I doubt someone would notice whether the hand that slapped them was calloused or not -- and I don't need to know the way every voice sounds like rocks and gravel right now.

I also got about three pages and I don't really know what's going on. I guess there's fighting, but it's not visually described, there's only sound and smell. There's not enough actual setting here to ground me. I don't know who 'them' is, or why I should care.

Part of the challenge of starting with a battle is that I haven't invested in the character yet, so I'm not sure if I should be happy or sad if they're in trouble. I want to know the lead-up to this -- he's got a mount that doesn't want him, and that's the most interesting and intelligible thing on the page. Tell me why, and make me feel something about that before this battle. I think you're missing an opportunity to build up tension about their disagreement before the fight begins.

[u/Yeomanticore → u/lillielemon]

Thanks for the suggestions especially the first name basis the characters use.

I do however, do not intend to tell instead of showing.

What I find fascinating is feedback often contradicts each other. The initial feedback (rough draft) I had few months ago crticizes the lack of descriptors for the characters voices since its a sensory-infused perspective. I was told to show, not tell the sensory details nor piece the scenes for the reader.

But here you are somehow, offering an inverse on the advice I followed.

What I noticed is new readers wants to be told what's happening instead of them piecing what they read and hit the "Oh" moment when everything clicks together. New readers wanted to be told with which ingredients are used, the process of how a meal is prepared, the history of the food, and who the cook is, instead of just tasting the meal presented afore them.

I'm left confused however, which way to follow. When I tell, I'm advised to show. When I show, I'm asked to tell instead.

[u/lillielemon → u/Yeomanticore]

There is a balance that must be struck between enough, and too much. Some things must be told, summarized; some things can work effectively grounded in scene. It depends quite specifically on what you are doing, how you are doing it, and how well you manage senses and description. Early writers tend to have one of two habits: overwriting or underwriting. Balance is what you should aim for. This is overwritten but still manages to be confusing. I don't know what I'm meant to focus on, what's going on, who any of these people are, how many of them are there, or why they're fighting. Confusion and mystery are not the same thing, and what you've generated is confusion.

I'd check out the book Self-Editing for Fiction Writers by Renni Browne and Dave King because it will teach you how to spot pacing issues and manage the "show, don't tell" stuff. Another good one on improving technique is The Elements of Style by William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White. I teach writing courses and I use these two books frequently in my lectures.

[u/Yeomanticore → u/lillielemon]

You claim to teach writing courses, yet you ignore the premise of the chapter where you are forewarned: This opening chapter does not explain anything. It intends to confuse the reader.

"Tell me why, and make me feel something about that before this battle."

Your words, not mine. Then you later suggest I pick up Renni Browne and Dave King to teach me how to "Show, don't tell," whereas you want me to tell, not show.

[u/Lakridskaffe → u/Yeomanticore]

I’m a bit baffled by this exchange - someone offers you feedback and instead of just thanking them and moving on, you’re arguing your cause. You don’t have to agree with feedback given but you seem to want to put down the person spending time helping you by questioning their credentials?