Although I’m not a die-hard X-Men fan (yet), I have read Sienkiewicz’s entire run on "New Mutants" and I LOVED it in every way possible! Right now, I’m reading the whole Claremont’s run on "Uncanny X-Men" from the very beginning, and I've read Captain Britain too (because of Alan Moore and Jamie Delano, two of my favorite writers).

So, my plan is to read Claremont’s "New Mutants" run too and, given most of the reeeeally underwhelming comments I’ve seen, I think I’ll skip Louise Simonson’s run and Liefeld's above all (btw, speaking of other mutant spin-off series, I'm not sure yet whether to read "X-Factor" and "Excalibur" as well), although fans do seem to recommend Wells’ run (as a Spider-Man fan, you get why I don’t feel like reading it, at least in the near future) and especially Ayala’s recent one.

Now, these are my questions about Ayala’s run:

1) Is it necessary to read the entire Krakoan Era in order to understand this run or not?

2) Can it be read without having read the previous runs by Hickman, Brisson or any other previous writer (except Claremont, obviously)?

3) Related to my 2nd question, does it have a clear beginning and end? In short, is it a totally STANDALONE run?

Many thanks in advance for reading this, I’ll take a look at all your replies!

Also, if you want to recommend any other really good "New Mutants" runs, or give me your spoiler-free thoughts on Simonson’s run, or tell me whether or not I should read Simonson’s "X-Factor" run and "Excalibur" alongside Claremont's "Uncanny X-Men" (I mean, I don’t even know if they’re any good on their own, or if I can actually read through the whole Claremont's UXM run without having to read any of the spin-off series apart from his "New Mutants"), GO AHEAD, I’d be delighted to hear them ;)

About Vita Ayala's "New Mutants" run and Claremont's other spin-off series