Just got it, a few requests

[colb]

...Are people using tables? I'd rather have better automators. LFOs/looped random to quantiser is king of arpeggios. Modulate your LFO with another LFO and you have a really complex sequence very quickly. Requires sync to line and stepped random would be super useful too. 

LFOs to quantiser is not the king of arpeggios. The problem is that the LFO changes amplitude smoothly, but the spaces between notes in a scale or chord do not - sometimes there is a semitone, sometimes a full tone, sometimes a third etc. So you get an 'arp' with odd timing, or repetitions of some notes. Using tables avoids this issue.
I wondered if I would find a use for tables, but as soon as I got around to playing with them for a while, I realised that they will be very useful. (I would still happily swap them for better groove control - that's a fundamental issue for me, so far it's the only one)

I think it's going to take a while to really get to know some of the more esoteric features of Nerdseq before really understanding how best to use them.
Personally, I'm not too worried about random value generation or LFO style automators, I'd rather do that stuff in the analog realm. The probability FX on the other hand are very useful.

Totally with you on the page up suggestion - that's caught me out a few times. Similar is that in menus (haven't checked in the edit panes) up and down you can hold for key repeat, but page up or down you need to keep hitting the button - annoying for the sample loading screen.

Easier access to undo would also be very nice.

Also agree about the auto gates - I always put an explicit gate in the trigger column, and would rather not have things happen in the background that I haven't explicitly set.