Moderator: Tournament Directors


yes those are good ideasmc05025 wrote:I understood the system.
Only one final? I would like the final not to be only one game. For example it can be again the best of 3 (the one who win 3 times take the tournament). Only an idea of course...
In addition I think you should not put the players randomly in brackets. It will be pity for example to put Kiron and xiangwang (if he join) at the same group... the final will not be so strong. You can put the strongest players not in the same bracket and the others randomly or put all the players by ranking (at the first game they play the numbers 1,9,17,25,33,41,49,57 etc))
If you do not like my ideas please ignore them

you get a medal.xiangwang wrote:what's the prize?

yea i thought of this problem to. if it is a stalement i will think of something. i asked kiron on what he wants and he said waterloo.mc05025 wrote:The map will be only Waterloo?![]()
In my opinion there will be a problem with the stalemates...(because it is flat rate at a map without object)
There will be about 60 games with these settings. Some of them might be a stalemate and all the players will have to wait for months.
In addition at the final game all the players will be very good. I am sure that there will be one or more stalemates at the final, something very common at games with only good players at a map without object.
So you can might chose more maps with an object like third crusade and not only Waterloo.
Thanks for reading my suggestions![]()
I would like to know Kiron 's opinion too...



when a bunch of people that are really good play each other they all want to win so they all get huge stacks and there not worth going after so you just stack up.shieldgenerator7 wrote:I'm in.
But I have a question: how in the world do you stalemate at risk?
