I have been thinking about a tournament for a long time so I'd like to give my thoughts although it sounds like I might be a little late (story of my life).
1. Games would be 2 vs. 2. This provides a combination of teamwork while maintaining a lot of 1 vs. 1 action. In other words, provides the broadest spectrum of multiplayer experience.
2. At the time of "sign-up" each player would have to give an honest appraisal of his skill on a numeric scale. Teams would then be matched up by the tournament organizer(s) with a view to equalizing the teams. In other words, the best players would be paired with the worst and average would be paired with average. I believe this would be in the best spirit of the APC because (a) the best players would have the challenge of something close to a 2-on-1, (b) the least experienced players would have the opportunity to mentor with one of the best and (c) the average players would have an opportunity to meet and play with someone at their own skill level.
3. All games would be played at default popular settings eg. Huge Med, no reveal, 150 pop, no cheats (of course), default everything. Any or all of these settings could be modified my unanimous consent of
all players.
4. Special rules would have to be developed for dropping. This would be more complicated than difficult.
5. Opposing teams would have a reasonable time to set up the time and place of their games with a time limit at each level of 7, 10 or 14 days. By not trying to get the tournament all into one night virtually everybody should be able to play.
My thoughts and, of course, I'd be happy to help (in any event).
------------------
VagrantKnight