Greetings all,
I just wanted to chime in and say I think it is great to have "newbies" and elites playing together in a tournament like this. I consider myself to be a pretty good player that was a newbie not that long ago. I've been good enought (at times) to compete with some of the best but I also have made and continue to make my fair share of mistakes. I really think mistakes are fun. Russia placing a sub and fighter in turn 1 can be devastating but may not have to be if the UK is aggressive in coming to the aid of Moscow. Newbies bring variety and the unexpected to a game that at its worst can become formulaic and scripted.
I'm not volunteering, but perhaps the A&A playing community should work on a better ranking system? The experience level is certainly a factor in predicting the outcome of a game, but if a newbie walks in and beats a couple of great players immediately, I think he's still a newbie by that standard. I see myself ranked in the top 100 of '42 players simply because I won a couple of games in the tournament preceding the ladder league. I evenutally dropped out because I found the ongoing time commitment overwhelming for me.
A better ranking system would allow tourneys like this to better identify folks to let in etc. Obviously, a player with no games under their belt wouldn't have a track record to stand on, but one that joined a month ago and already has a couple of great wins against highly ranked players could be considered.
Best of luck.
