Having one of the teams do commentary may seem a bit biased, but in reality anyone who's interested enough in this tournament to be willing to put that kind of time into it, will be biased in some way even if they aren't a participant.
No objections from me.
As far as the logistics of it, I would suggest that the commentators would download the replay of each game, convert it into a video and then add their commentary, creating a video of the match with their commentary of the game added to the sound of the video. I can do this fairly easily.
Can you provide a simple walk through on what to use, etc for this process?
I'd also like to weigh in on crashes/dc/invalid game states. I think the best way to handle it is, if someone crashes or dc's somehow unintentionally, i.e. power outage, internet disconnect, some sort of routing issue between the players, anything really. Or crashes and drops out of the game, the players involved in that match should see if they can come to a consensus on whether one of two things happens: 1. no clear winner was apparent and they do the same match again with the same demigods and teams, or 2: it is agreed that one team was winning and give the win to that team. If they can't agree on a winner or that the game should be redone, then the replay of the game should be reviewed by someone or more than one person and they should weigh in on it. I'm sure we can figure out what should be done in these cases if the players in that match don't agree. As for invalid game states, I’m fairly certain that the last game file stores data up until the demigod process is terminated, whether that is because they pressed exit, pressed exit on an invalid error, or ended the process. I tested this by starting a game and then ending the dg process after 2 min and then checking the replay file, it showed the 2 min and then me leaving after and it just ends without a result. If and invalid error happens, the players in the game should try and resolve it the same way as if there was a dc, if they CANT come to a consensus, they can submit the replay, and whatever other data they can come up with to support their arguments, and we should review this information and try to come up with a verdict, whether to redo the game or to declare a winner. If the same team causes or is suspected to have caused more than one invalid game state and this seems to be working to their advantage somehow, they should be disqualified after a thorough review of the facts. I know this is a lot of work to do in the case of anything buggy or crashy or dcy or invalid happening, but this is DEMIGOD. If we don't have rules about this that take into account the fact that this stuff happens OFTEN in this game, it is likely that teams will get unfairly treated if such unfortunate things happen.
I appreciate the thought out response and I am on board with this line of thinking as well. I'll summarize your statements and put them in rule format. If anyone disagrees with the ideas aborn mentions, please reply here and explain any deficiencies in his logic and/or provide a better solution. We'd need a group of people willing to review games as needed. I'm certainly willing to handle that, but it will probably be better to have more than one person making a decision.
then teams can decide for themselves
frankly, I didn't have an good ideas for the 3rd round, so I wrote it that way. Keep in mind that the team on dark has a little bit of an advatage because of the heath and gold flags. I'd think if it came down to one team picking light or dark and then the other team getting to pick their team in response to whatever the other team selected (eg the team that chose sides HAS TO pick their characters first and cannot change), that might be enough, but maybe not. I'd even go so far as to say flip a coin..
And last - ptarth said he's willing to release version 1.02 of uberfix (click for details). I'm interested in that, but we'd certainly need to do some bug testing prior to the tourney to ensure there are not stability concerns.
