The standard word order of Esperanto adjectives is pretty much the same as English:

Opinion, Dimension, Age, Shape, Colour, Origin, Material, NOUN
Stranga granda nova cirkla franca linga aŭto (I know that is probably a very random mental image, but it's to demonstrate an idea)

We do this because we have a tendency to follow a most 'noticeable' to less 'noticeable' tendency in describing things. But what happens when we play with word order? do people reverse this order, would we say:

Aŭto ligna franca cirkla nova granda stranga
OR
Aŭto Stranga granda nova cirkla franca linga

Evildela:The standard word order of Esperanto adjectives is pretty much the same as English:

Opinion, Dimension, Age, Shape, Colour, Origin, Material, NOUN
Stranga granda nova cirkla franca linga aŭto (I know that is probably a very random mental image, but it's to demonstrate an idea)

We do this because we have a tendency to follow a most 'noticeable' to less 'noticeable' tendency in describing things. But what happens when we play with word order? do people reverse this order, would we say:

Aŭto ligna franca cirkla nova granda stranga
OR
Aŭto Stranga granda nova cirkla franca linga

The question is interesting, and not only concerning Esperanto. First I wonder to what extent the order you are giving is actually followed. Is it merely a prescription given to guide pupils, or are there empirical evidence that people speak so? Under which conditions?
I think "Opinion, Dimension, Age, Shape, Colour, Origin, Material, NOUN" is a natural way of arranging adjectives, when they are just two or three of them - and normally there are no more adjectives than so. When they are more, I think the nown itself lines up to be one of the most "noticeable" words. That is because it is hard for us to imagine an object which is both strange and big and new and round, if we are not given a clue what it is actually all about.

If, as in French, the information that it is about a car is given quite early in the phrase, I suppose there will be changes, and other changes than just a reversal of the prominence order. Perhaps some adjectives are seen to be more closely linked to the noun than others, and therefore seeking a position close to it. Accidental properties tend to be placed after the noun while permanent ones can be in front of it. But that is only what I think.

I don't know about any particular rules for adjective order in Esperanto. And most likely an investigation of tha actual situation in Esperanto texts would only reflect the arrangement in the mothertongues of the writers. Without rules we are left with both freedom and resposibility. Perhaps adjective order is no problem, neither when it comes to producing nor to understanding Esperanto.

The dominant pattern in Esperanto is adjective first, noun second.

When there are several adjectives each adjective tends to qualify what follows. So an X-a Y-a Z-o is an X-a (Y-a Z-o).

Sometimes the order makes little difference. A juna bela virino doesn't seem to be markedly different to a bela juna virino.

Sometimes a particular order will seem strange because it seems strange to be interested in a narrower range of a certain class of objects.

So a French cheap hotel is odd compared to a cheap French hotel.

It is more likely that you are interested in cheap accommodation in a hotel in France, than that of all the cheap hotels in the world you want a French one.

You might want to get a copy of "Naturaj Vortordoj en Esperanto" by Wim Jansen (ISBN 978-93-9017-103-9) from UEA. It is a study of texts.