The World Cup Discussion Thread (OOC, Version IV)

[Red Blackiland]

A bid with the spyrit of TGOD appears.

[Audioslavia]

Getting 'Di Bradini' on the back of that shirt may very well be the nerdiest thing ever done, yet somehow it's also the coolest thing Star has ever done. The next time I see a Fluminense shirt, I'm buying it and putting Branson/Ryan/Eiger/Styrn/Whomever on the back.

Also, putting on my WCC President's hat on for a second (which is vast and lavishly decorated, naturally) I'd like to make sure we're all on the same page with regards to BoF signups. Nations cannot compete in the BoF more than once, as stated here

2.2 The Baptism of Fire
The Baptism of Fire is the first event in the World Cup cycle, being a pre-World Cup tournament for newcomer nations. It is a warm-up event that has continually unearthed the best new nations in world football. And the worst. In fact, all of them, regardless of quality.

2.2.1 Entry
The conditions for entry into the BoF are:
i) A nation must not have previously participated in a WCC-sanctioned Baptism of Fire
ii) A nation must have zero KPB points at the beginning of the World Cup cycle
iii) A nation must have signed up for the World Cup in the appropriate Signup Thread and also indicated a wish to enter the Baptism of Fire.

[New West Guiana]

I'd like to make sure we're all on the same page with regards to BoF signups. Nations cannot compete in the BoF more than once, as stated here

I think that part has been quite clear for years, of course it doesn't stop many of us of creating puppets and entering them, some people though have in the past entered over a dozen over time. I believe it was Qazox who admitted to entering over 10 over the years. So far i've now only signed two up since 2012.

[Starblaydia]

Getting 'Di Bradini' on the back of that shirt may very well be the nerdiest thing ever done, yet somehow it's also the coolest thing Star has ever done.

Somehow all the cool things I do are also super nerdy.

[Bonesea]

The next time I see a Fluminense shirt, I'm buying it and putting Branson/Ryan/Eiger/Styrn/Whomever on the back.

Or Danny Byrne, for some quantum spaghetti shenanigans?

[Gadirya]

Ilyseum signs up for the World Cup and the BoF.

Puppet of Saintland.

Just realized this is gonna be the second time you and I will be in the same BoF.

Maybe this time you won't get eliminated before the knockout stages.

[Ilyseum]

Ilyseum signs up for the World Cup and the BoF.

Puppet of Saintland.

Just realized this is gonna be the second time you and I will be in the same BoF.

Maybe this time you won't get eliminated before the knockout stages.

And hopefully your new nation will actually win some matches against my new nation.

I'm surprised, tbh, that Felix never beat the FFR in a WCC match. I mean, even I wanted to see that!

[Tomikosan]

Can I be part of this organization? I wanted to join one in the next World Cup that I am planning and preparing to join.

[Saintland]

Can I be part of this organization? I wanted to join one in the next World Cup that I am planning and preparing to join.

Anybody can be part of the World Cup Committee. The only requirement is to enter 2 consecutive World Cups and post rosters in both of them. The main benefit of membership is being able to vote on hosts, but most WCC members don't vote, most of the time (even when you may think the vote is a foregone conclusion, it really isn't, as a minority of voters could potentially reject an unopposed bid that the majority liked or vice versa and the fewer people take the time to send a TG, the more likely a bizarre result becomes).

Fortunately, you can sign up for World Cup 76 right now if you haven't already (the signup thread should be on the first or second page of NS Sports).

[Starblaydia]

Can I be part of this organization? I wanted to join one in the next World Cup that I am planning and preparing to join.

Or with a useful link: To join the World Cup, just sign up in this thread. As you are a debutant nation, also sign up for the Baptism of Fire in that thread, too.

[Tomikosan]

~snip snip~

~snip snip~

Many thanks to you!

[Gadirya]

Just realized this is gonna be the second time you and I will be in the same BoF.

Maybe this time you won't get eliminated before the knockout stages.

And hopefully your new nation will actually win some matches against my new nation.

I'm surprised, tbh, that Felix never beat the FFR in a WCC match. I mean, even I wanted to see that!

Hopefully.

I guess Maggie had a thing for Rule, hence Felix never beating FFR. :/

[New West Guiana]

Just realized this is gonna be the second time you and I will be in the same BoF.

Maybe this time you won't get eliminated before the knockout stages.

And hopefully your new nation will actually win some matches against my new nation.

Eww, since this nation of yours is set like 1,000 years ago when they compete in sports do they bare it all and wear nothing?

[Valanora]

DBC signups are now open. First come, first serve.

[Nephara]

Given a couple of situations we've had where WCC/UICA rank has been transferred over to a supposed 'successor' nation and then, well, no IC connection established, I think we need to formalise a rule for when rank should and should not be transferred. Specifically, unless the nation is actually The Same Nation With A Change Of Name (like, well, my own - the nation was identical, there was just a formal name change) there should need to be very good reasons as to why one nation justifies taking on the old nation's ranking, a very strong connection. As it stands, it feels like the rule - or lack thereof - is ripe for exploitation.

[Northern Sunrise Islands]

Getting 'Di Bradini' on the back of that shirt may very well be the nerdiest thing ever done, yet somehow it's also the coolest thing Star has ever done. The next time I see a Fluminense shirt, I'm buying it and putting Branson/Ryan/Eiger/Styrn/Whomever on the back.

...Well, that can be arranged, y'know.

[Ilyseum]

Given a couple of situations we've had where WCC/UICA rank has been transferred over to a supposed 'successor' nation and then, well, no IC connection established, I think we need to formalise a rule for when rank should and should not be transferred. Specifically, unless the nation is actually The Same Nation With A Change Of Name (like, well, my own - the nation was identical, there was just a formal name change) there should need to be very good reasons as to why one nation justifies taking on the old nation's ranking, a very strong connection. As it stands, it feels like the rule - or lack thereof - is ripe for exploitation.

Why do we need a new rule when the existing arrangement has worked perfectly well in the past? I'm unaware of any such situations and I see no need to create an unnecessary hassle for people who want to change the IC name of their nation that might discourage people from RPing and if somebody does frivolously transfer their ranks over to new nations that have little or no connection to their old nations, is that really a big deal when, due to the decreasing frequency of World Cups and the custom of very low RP bonuses for the World Cup, it now takes about a year and a half for most new nations to have a realistic shot of qualifying? Maybe, people wouldn't want to exploit loopholes if it didn't take so long to build a ranking high enough to actually be competitive. Besides, isn't the ability to enter the BoF (and possibly win a BoF title) a pretty good incentive for those who want to switch to RPing with a new nation to start out without any rank rather than inheriting their old rank?

[San Jose Guayabal]

Given a couple of situations we've had where WCC/UICA rank has been transferred over to a supposed 'successor' nation and then, well, no IC connection established, I think we need to formalise a rule for when rank should and should not be transferred. Specifically, unless the nation is actually The Same Nation With A Change Of Name (like, well, my own - the nation was identical, there was just a formal name change) there should need to be very good reasons as to why one nation justifies taking on the old nation's ranking, a very strong connection. As it stands, it feels like the rule - or lack thereof - is ripe for exploitation.

Seconding Nephara's motion, definitively, formalisation is needed in regards of this topic.

[Farfadillis]

Given a couple of situations we've had where WCC/UICA rank has been transferred over to a supposed 'successor' nation and then, well, no IC connection established, I think we need to formalise a rule for when rank should and should not be transferred. Specifically, unless the nation is actually The Same Nation With A Change Of Name (like, well, my own - the nation was identical, there was just a formal name change) there should need to be very good reasons as to why one nation justifies taking on the old nation's ranking, a very strong connection. As it stands, it feels like the rule - or lack thereof - is ripe for exploitation.

Why do we need a new rule when the existing arrangement has worked perfectly well in the past? I'm unaware of any such situations and I see no need to create an unnecessary hassle for people who want to change the IC name of their nation that might discourage people from RPing and if somebody does frivolously transfer their ranks over to new nations that have little or no connection to their old nations, is that really a big deal when, due to the decreasing frequency of World Cups and the custom of very low RP bonuses for the World Cup, it now takes about a year and a half for most new nations to have a realistic shot of qualifying? Maybe, people wouldn't want to exploit loopholes if it didn't take so long to build a ranking high enough to actually be competitive. Besides, isn't the ability to enter the BoF (and possibly win a BoF title) a pretty good incentive for those who want to switch to RPing with a new nation to start out without any rank rather than inheriting their old rank?

Contrary to what you may be thinking at the moment, Nephara's proposal is not aimed at you; West Saintland would be an appropriate successor of Saintland as far as ranking goes and also as far as most of us are concerned (I imagine).

The case where the unwritten rule has not worked out as intended is the Armeia -> Anglatia case.

[Ilyseum]

Why do we need a new rule when the existing arrangement has worked perfectly well in the past? I'm unaware of any such situations and I see no need to create an unnecessary hassle for people who want to change the IC name of their nation that might discourage people from RPing and if somebody does frivolously transfer their ranks over to new nations that have little or no connection to their old nations, is that really a big deal when, due to the decreasing frequency of World Cups and the custom of very low RP bonuses for the World Cup, it now takes about a year and a half for most new nations to have a realistic shot of qualifying? Maybe, people wouldn't want to exploit loopholes if it didn't take so long to build a ranking high enough to actually be competitive. Besides, isn't the ability to enter the BoF (and possibly win a BoF title) a pretty good incentive for those who want to switch to RPing with a new nation to start out without any rank rather than inheriting their old rank?

Contrary to what you may be thinking at the moment, Nephara's proposal is not aimed at you; West Saintland would be an appropriate successor of Saintland as far as ranking goes and also as far as most of us are concerned (I imagine).

The case where the unwritten rule has not worked out as intended is the Armeia -> Anglatia case.

I never said or thought that it was and I fail to see anything wrong with Armeia's name change to Anglatia. Still strongly opposed to a pointless and unnecessary proposal.

[Nephara]

Why do we need a new rule when the existing arrangement has worked perfectly well in the past?

90-something% of nation successions are entirely legitimate, no grey area, and won't be affected in the slightest.

I'm unaware of any such situations and I see no need to create an unnecessary hassle for people who want to change the IC name of their nation that might discourage people from RPing and if somebody does frivolously transfer their ranks over to new nations that have little or no connection to their old nations, is that really a big deal when, due to the decreasing frequency of World Cups and the custom of very low RP bonuses for the World Cup, it now takes about a year and a half for most new nations to have a realistic shot of qualifying?

wow this is all one sentence It's not too hard to think of times where excuses that a connection would be established are made and ultimately failed to materialise. Yes, when it happens, it's a big deal. IC doesn't get to be thrown out the window when someone wants to pick and choose what 'a fresh start' means. Successors are successors, new nations are new nations.

Maybe, people wouldn't want to exploit loopholes if it didn't take so long to build a ranking high enough to actually be competitive.

Time, patience and diligence are rewarded.

Besides, isn't the ability to enter the BoF (and possibly win a BoF title) a pretty good incentive for those who want to switch to RPing with a new nation to start out without any rank rather than inheriting their old rank?

One would think so, yes.

I never said or thought that it was and I fail to see anything wrong with Armeia's name change to Anglatia. Still strongly opposed to a pointless and unnecessary proposal.

It's not a name change. Nothing links the two nations together apart from maybe one or two ex-pats.

(EDIT: In hindsight, this hasn't happened in UICA that I can think of. My initial post was based on an assumption. Still, there's been a few instances in WCC terms, so my point stands.)

[Ilyseum]

Why do we need a new rule when the existing arrangement has worked perfectly well in the past?

90-something% of nation successions are entirely legitimate, no grey area, and won't be affected in the slightest.

I'm unaware of any such situations and I see no need to create an unnecessary hassle for people who want to change the IC name of their nation that might discourage people from RPing and if somebody does frivolously transfer their ranks over to new nations that have little or no connection to their old nations, is that really a big deal when, due to the decreasing frequency of World Cups and the custom of very low RP bonuses for the World Cup, it now takes about a year and a half for most new nations to have a realistic shot of qualifying?

wow this is all one sentence It's not too hard to think of times where excuses that a connection would be established are made and ultimately failed to materialise. Yes, when it happens, it's a big deal. IC doesn't get to be thrown out the window when someone wants to pick and choose what 'a fresh start' means. Successors are successors, new nations are new nations.

Maybe, people wouldn't want to exploit loopholes if it didn't take so long to build a ranking high enough to actually be competitive.

Time, patience and diligence are rewarded.

Besides, isn't the ability to enter the BoF (and possibly win a BoF title) a pretty good incentive for those who want to switch to RPing with a new nation to start out without any rank rather than inheriting their old rank?

One would think so, yes.

I never said or thought that it was and I fail to see anything wrong with Armeia's name change to Anglatia. Still strongly opposed to a pointless and unnecessary proposal.

It's not a name change. Nothing links the two nations together apart from maybe one or two ex-pats.

What I'm puzzled by is why this issue is coming up now when I had thought it was settled months ago. Did Anglatia do something to piss off #nssport today or something?

[Northern Sunrise Islands]

90-something% of nation successions are entirely legitimate, no grey area, and won't be affected in the slightest.

wow this is all one sentence It's not too hard to think of times where excuses that a connection would be established are made and ultimately failed to materialise. Yes, when it happens, it's a big deal. IC doesn't get to be thrown out the window when someone wants to pick and choose what 'a fresh start' means. Successors are successors, new nations are new nations.


Time, patience and diligence are rewarded.


One would think so, yes.


It's not a name change. Nothing links the two nations together apart from maybe one or two ex-pats.

What I'm puzzled by is why this issue is coming up now when I had thought it was settled months ago. Did Anglatia do something to piss off #nssport today or something?

DBC. Go check it. Gracias.

[Nephara]

That decision is in the past now - Anglatia took Armeia's rank in the WCC, not in UICA or IIRC in Esportiva, a couple of cycles have happened since - but when it was 'settled', the entire problem was the fuzziness of the unwritten rule, the subjective nature of what people consider a 'succession' - the same nation with an IC name change? Sure. What about pretty much transplanting a national team into a new nation for IC reasons, like Falatulu? Most people, myself included, would agree that that's justified too. So where exactly do we draw the line? What would be wrong with having a line?

[Farfadillis]

What I'm puzzled by is why this issue is coming up now when I had thought it was settled months ago. Did Anglatia do something to piss off #nssport today or something?

My God yes. Anglatia has done what no NS Sporter should ever dare do: invoke the wrath of the *gasp* NS Sports Old Guard. We will not stop until we have his head.