I ll open this topic to start some brainstorming. What elements would you guys like to see in here?

3v3, no walls, civs decided for each round like last tourney and maybe "winner takes all" (the prize)

I think the "winner gets all" would be a bad rule (no offence Judaz) because there would certainly be a lot of Rmers who wouldn't sign-up in the tournament.

You guys proved in last tourney that even the best Rmers (like Daut, Alive, Cyclops, IwantMarylin etc...) couldn't beat a team with motivated michi specialists so they know they would probably not win the next tournament, which would mean with your rule no money at all for them.

If you allow the team who finish at second rank, or even third and fourth ones, to have a prize too there would be more teams i guess.

I understand your position Judaz, as the winner of last ML (and probably willing to win the next one^^) but as a player and watcher i'd prefer to see more teams in the next tournament

The 3v3 idea is good in my opinion even if this would be harder to schedule.

ps: i dunno if i explained well my point of view but i just woke up and i had to struggle with english this morning 11

hehe nice comments mate idk what would happen with no walls rule i mean it's two sided, benefits michiers can rush RMers otherwise i belive RMers can raid much better in long games so im not sure michiers can win this time, any surprise possible with no walls and also we can watch nice comebacks of RMers, "winner takes all" was just to make it more competitive im fine with current portions though.Im just trying to create a diversity if i wanted to just win it i wouldnt mind staying with walls as we (me+enes) are already pretty suitable with them.

3v3 no walls sounds good to me.
3v3 i may have a better chance to get in my first michi tg tournament 30.
no walls could keep the tournament attractive for the rm´s if the money price couldnt get that high like this time 11.

3v3
NO walls
dif civ each round
max team player 3!!!(i know its harder to schedule....but....)
14!

I'm afraid a totally NO wall rule would result in very short games :/

But on the other hand too many walls make the game boring imo. How about a rule which doesn't allow to wall the middle tree-line but allows to wall in between back forests (to make the trade route safe)?

Why not change the game such that walls cost twice as much, build five times slower and have halve the hp.

Koen wrote:Why not change the game such that walls cost twice as much, build five times slower and have halve the hp.

yea that would be cool but i dont like ironies at all, why no go for constructive comments instead?

or no upgrad. walls....