1 vs 1 Tournament

There really is no way to reconcile level and ability of commanders until after you've been in a battle or two...

Indeed.. For example:

Black flag: players with pop 50k+
Blue flag: Players with pop 30K--50K
Purple flag: Players 10k-30k
Grey flag: Players with population between 5k 10k
Brown flag: Players with pop between 2k -- 5k
White flag: Players with pop between 0 -- 2k

Then maybe a random flag event with a herald anouncement on what coordinates the flags are dropped.

Yes, for the lucky people the flag might be dropped right next to their city. The hard thing is to keep the spot occupied for 24hrs before others arrive. Maybe even let the occupying army to be reinforced by a maximum of 5 alliance members (in the same flag class).

Every flag class have a bigger and bigger price ofcourse. Else it wouldn't even be slightly worth it to send your percious army.

Nortasha, hold the flag would be no good to new players who would not have an army large enough to withstand the attacks. Unless something is worked out thats fair for all levels of player then it wont work and people will go back to moaning about how this only works for either

waylander69 wrote: A simple challenge system, you post a set of rules example 2000 troops mixed reward 10000 gold if you can defeat them, it cost you 10000 gold to take the challenge, the person setting the test can limit the number to a max of 100 below and above the number of troops they use. 500 horse reward 5000 gold and so on, that way its up to a player to make the reward and test worthwhile for someone to take it but it also allows lower level players to join in unlike a hold the flag for 24hrs which would need a larger army.

I feel for the tournament to work the best, it has to start simple. All of this gambling talk, would make things more complicated and too much of a hassle. There should only be a fixed buy-in to enter the tournament. After each tournament we can improvise and add more things to it to make it better. I always believe in starting with the foundation first (figure out if the tournament will be about destroying a city or take down walls fastest in a week or occupy two squares the longest to advance in the tournament). There will be two different types of players involved, a care bear and a non care bear we have to cater to. I feel the walls idea (non care bear) and the two squares idea (care bear) would satisfy both parties. I have finally come to an understanding that losing a city is too much for 99% of the population. I want to start a poll after we get enough ideas.

There should be consequences for cheating in any of these tournaments. I feel losing a city or being forced to pay back double of what you stole or being banned from future tournaments should be some options the community should consider for such cheaters. Let me know what other or if you support these consequences of cheating in tournament. The consequence I feel has to be so bad, that a member would be terrified to cheat.

At this point, as a community I feel we should look at two ideas, the wall idea Crank suggested and Grunks expansion of HM's idea for two squares. Destroying or conquering a city can still be discussed. However, we need a poll that would last for one week or so to figure out which foundation of an idea the community would support the most. I say take the top 2 ideas and work from there. Once we figure out two concrete ideas, we can work on details from there.

Lionz

Destroy as many of Faction X's cities as possible before Y date.

Each side is allowed to foil the sieges of the other side, but not directly with military attacks.  Diplo/magic is fine.