I think it would be fun if different maps could have different gambit rules based on the map, with those rules (playtested by R&D, of course) printed right on it.

Silly question here... have we considered simply applying the chess-clock to this game? It seems that a lot of the current problems related to highly defensive play styles go away if you introduce the clock in such a fashion. Has anyone ever tried it?

But I've long thought that Engineer's idea (borrowed from DDM 1.0 I think) of having multiple formats you must play with the same squad over the course of a tourney does really interesting things to the metagame.

The cost of chess clocks is the first issue. Not worth discussing after that.

I just don't think Chess clocks would change how the SWM game is played.
They would not expedite or encourage, "battle" the sacrificing or exchanging pieces.
I imagine games would still go to time and players would still win on points.

My concern is that adding chess clocks would only encourage the "clock" mentality.
Chess has a finite set of moves and the board is small (compared to a SWM map.)
I "get" how they work in chess, but how would chess clocks work in SWM?

What time control mechanism would be used for SWM tournament play?
Would the clock run 1hr. and warning/ DQ be given if a player went over a certain time?
Would a turn or phase be forfeit immediately at a certain amount of time?
Would players be given equal amounts of time (30 mins)?
If one player reached time (30 min) would the game suddently end?

I'm anxious to try out the King of the Hill format. It sounds like it could be fun.

So let's say it's Player 1's turn and he attacks Player 2's character who has Evade. Player 2 pauses, picks up his d20, changes his mind and decides to use his 'lucky' d20 (which he has to fish out of his little box o' dice) and, finally, rolls for Evade. He rolls a 9 but, lucky for him, his character has Force Points so now he thinks about whether or not he should spend a FP to re-roll that failed Evade or not... after a few seconds he decides to take the damage and hang on to the Force Points and tells Player 1 as much. So Player 1 makes his Twin... do you see where this is going? Player 2 is running down the clock on Player 1's side of the table. Unless Player 1 is expected to hit the button as soon as he rolls his attack and player 2 is expected to run his own time down for each decision (which can get pretty ridiculous when you have characters with Double + Twin + Extra Attack on the opposing side of the table). In the interest of being fair, though, that would be the only way you could do it. And that seems like an area that's just ripe for all sorts of abuse.

Say each player gets 30 minutes of play time. Player 1 has spent 20 of his minutes and Player 2 just spent all 30 of his. Player 1 should, in fairness, be able to use up his remaining 10 minutes of play time without any interaction from Player 2.

So let's say it's Player 1's turn and he attacks Player 2's character who has Evade. Player 2 pauses, picks up his d20, changes his mind and decides to use his 'lucky' d20 (which he has to fish out of his little box o' dice) and, finally, rolls for Evade.

But there are significant pitfalls to maps that allow too much specialization in competetive DCI play, and the kinds of things you suggest would tend to offer that. The ability to build to your map to gain a large (rather than modest) advantage. We learned at Gencon 2007 that certain maps favored or discouraged certain types of squads. The end result was that you could predict a huge proportion of game results simply by looking at who won the setup roll(s).