Okay, so, my original idea was a sort of idea to crown a Best and a Worst player, so that good performance can be rewarded and players who lose out early on can still make a comeback. Each round would also have special rules that affect game play (like a round of teams rules, a gunboat game, a global press game, etc.)
Best players would be chosen on grounds other than SC count, such as a strong comeback against a more powerful adversary, or maybe good tactical strategy against all odds. You know, that kinda stuff.
Worst players wouldn't be whoever can get eliminated first. It would be more of a, who made some stupid choice to get stabbed and lose their first place position. It would also go hand in hand with being a funny character in the chat, building all armies as England or something along those lines. It'd be the kind of people you wanna give a second chance to keep in the tournament.
Of course, selecting these players would be completely subjective, so a panel of judges would have to be appointed. Judges can participate in the tournament, and maybe we could include all participants as judges (just an idea). It'd be pretty easy to detect and disregard votes based on bias, so there would be little worry over that...
The best players would need to continually perform well, while the worst players would have multiple opportunities to redeem themselves after rounds of terrible mistakes.
Anyway, I'm thinking around 15 participants including 3-15 players as judges. I'm working on a draft of elimination rounds and what maps and special rules would be included. Thoughts?
)
There and Back Again
)
)