Thanks for organising the tournament flusty, was fun and had some really tense games. Since I guess one of the main purposes of the tournament was to test and decide on some new rule-set ideas, gonna just post my thoughts on some of them.
I thought using the Division C style scheduling with set dates chosen by both teams; late, early and flexible times and so forth was a huge improvement: it makes the scheduling very open and would hopefully eliminate a lot of the issues with it. I'd personally hope though that the match every three days thing wouldn't be something that would be carried over into the main ENL tournament, since we were having a little difficulty getting people together for matches, and we're a clan with people who can generally play most days; I think a lot of clans would struggle with it, and I'd say a week is a better deadline.
I personally on the whole liked the idea of choosing maps from three pre-generated ones, however I do think it raises some issues with match preparation and team selection. Normally we'll try to prepare teams before matches with their classes, any equipment drops and such. It becomes fairly difficult to do this, make sure everyone plays, make sure we have the right class balance, make sure everyone's able to play, make sure for instance that someone who leaves part-way through will get to play the first half and so on if you don't know beforehand which maps are being played. Possibly the map selection could be tied into the scheduling process, so Team 1 selects two match days, the first map and then Team 2 selects their day and time, as well as selecting the second map. I think this would retain the advantages of the choice-based system, whilst also allowing teams to prepare for their matches.
I don't really like this rule: "At every sideswap and between each tiebreaker, the map should be resetted immediately by either team and will go live straight away, with know acknowledgement required by either team. Teams will be expected to make any substitutions at that time and are not entitled to any break." Firstly it seems to conflict with this one: "Teams are permitted to make as many changes as they like after each 3 round leg, after each 2 round tiebreaker and before sudden death." Since it'll always be fairly difficult to manage swapping out players if you're immediately changing the map and going live, especially with things like some players needing to download the map. Secondly, as above it kinda interferes with match preparation by teams. It basically forces you to use the same team (or only 1 or 2 differences) for both halves of a map, rather than adapting to different factions or the enemy's strategies. I guess the fact that as far as I know this rule wasn't ever really used in any of the matches I played (generally both teams agreed to a not live on restart) goes to show its unpopularity as well.
The fewer rounds combined with the fact that map wins, not round wins count combine to make every round count far more than normally. This has the advantages of making every round feel pretty tense and forcing teams to actually consider what they're doing, rather than not caring on rounds they know they can afford to lose. It does also however slightly reduce the amount you can adapt your tactics to the enemies', with only two rounds, you could easily find yourself only really having time to do a major change in tactics on the third round, when it's probably too late. It can also mean that one tiny mistake by either side can have far more impact; one team-kill could make an otherwise better team lose a map to an otherwise worse team, although I don't know if that's an advantage or a disadvantage. Overall I like the system, but I know some other people in AE didn't.
A minor point is that I'd quite like the ability to have more than one team representative, just for convenience's sake.