Baptism of Fire 43 Host Bid (Qazox) UPDATED!!!

[Qazox]

Qazox has been one of the most active sporting nations in NS and have been so for over 100 IC years (over 6 years in RL) and would like to host their first Baptism of Fire. Qazox has previously attempted to co-host the 55th World Cup (w/ ASMV); and has previously attempted to host both the 38th and 41st Baptisms of Fire.

Past Hosting Duties: Qazox has hosted World Baseball Classics 1, 4, 5, 10 and 13; World Cup of Hockey 7 and 14; World Bowls IV & IX; Baptism of Iron III and 8, NSCAA II and 2 conferences within NSCAA III and 13 editions of The OXEN Cup, a independent football tourney.

SCORINATION SYSTEM: Qazox will utilize the latest editon of Xkoranate to scorinate the event. The user behind this nation has used xkoranate to host both the 14th World Cup of Hockey and the 8th Baptism of Iron, along with a couple of other events within this past calendar year and has become very familiar with the scorinator to be used.
UPDATE: Xkoranate 0.3.2 will be used to scorinate this event. I will use the NSFS style modifers for this event, with a range of +3 to -3 instead of the previously announced +2/-2 range.

Why choose Qazox as a host?: The user behind Qazox, as mentioned earlier, has ample experience in both participating and hosting varied international sporting events, including 2 editons of the Baptism of Iron, a tourney for newcomers for the World Bowl, which is very similar in scope to the Baptism of Fire.

Group Format:
Based upon the last Baptism of Fire, which had 64 nations participate, if that many sign-up for BoF43, there will be 8 groups of 8 teams, with each team randomly selected into one of the 8 groups. Of course, based upon the final number of sign-ups, the total number of groups and number of teams within each group might have to be changed; with all efforts to have an equal number of groups and match-days for all nations involved a priority. In the event of a undivisible number of sign-ups (ie: 37, 41, 43, 47...) additional matches within the "odd" group may need to be played to ensure every team has played the same number of games.

Example: 41 teams sign up for BoF43. There would be 5 groups of 7 teams and 1 group of 6 teams. The group with 6 teams would have one additional match against one other team from within that group to get all 41 teams 6 games played.

Playoff format:
Once againg depending on the final number of sign-ups, the knockout stages of the 43rd BoF will have at mininum 16 teams advance with provisions for up to 32 teams to advance. The top two teams from each group, at a mininum, would advance into the knockout rounds.
If the need for more than 16 teams to advance occurs, the number of teams involved within the knock-out rounds would increase by 4 (20, 24, 28, 32) until a satisfactory number would be reached.

Example 1: 48 teams sign up for BoF43. There would be 8 groups of 6. The top 2 advancing would be enough to get to the mininum of 16 needed for the knockout.
Example 2: 45 teams sign up for BoF43. There would be 9 groups of 5. Taking the top 2 teams would have 18 in the knockouts. In this scenario, the 2 best 3rd placed teams would advance as well to make 20 teams in the knockouts.

UPDATED: list of Tiebreakers to be utilized involving any number of teams:

Points
H2H record
H2H GD (involving 3 or more teams ONLY)
Overall GD
Overall GF

I will answer any questions you may have about this bid as best I can. I thank you for your consideration.

[Chetkosk]

Example 2: 45 teams sign up for BoF43. There would be 9 groups of 5. Taking the top 2 teams would have 18 in the knockouts. In this scenario, the 2 best 3rd placed teams would advance as well to make 20 teams in the knockouts.

20 teams in the knock-outs becomes 10, and then 5, and then what?
I would assume, given how long NS sports has been running for, that there is a precedent for an odd number of teams left in knock-outs, I just want to know what it is.

[Commerce Heights]

SCORINATION SYSTEM: Qazox will utilize the latest editon of Xkoranate to scorinate the event. The user behind this nation has used xkoranate to host both the 14th World Cup of Hockey and the 8th Baptism of Iron, along with a couple of other events within this past calendar year and has become very familiar with the scorinator to be used.

So you know it has two formulæ for association football. Which one do you intend to use?

A style modifer range of +2 to -2 will be utilized with any whole number within those ranges accepted.

Why +2 to −2?

[Qazox]

Example 2: 45 teams sign up for BoF43. There would be 9 groups of 5. Taking the top 2 teams would have 18 in the knockouts. In this scenario, the 2 best 3rd placed teams would advance as well to make 20 teams in the knockouts.

20 teams in the knock-outs becomes 10, and then 5, and then what?
I would assume, given how long NS sports has been running for, that there is a precedent for an odd number of teams left in knock-outs, I just want to know what it is.

In that scenario, 8 teams, the two 3rd placed teams and six 2nd placed teams would face off in a play-in round to eliminate 4 teams which would join the nine group winners and the three best 2nd placed teams in the Round of 16.

SCORINATION SYSTEM: Qazox will utilize the latest editon of Xkoranate to scorinate the event. The user behind this nation has used xkoranate to host both the 14th World Cup of Hockey and the 8th Baptism of Iron, along with a couple of other events within this past calendar year and has become very familiar with the scorinator to be used.

So you know it has two formulæ for association football. Which one do you intend to use?

A style modifer range of +2 to -2 will be utilized with any whole number within those ranges accepted.

Why +2 to −2?

1: The NSFS formula will be used, but with xkoranate-style modifers.

2: The range of +2 to -2 gives the teams a chance at more scoring without it being too unreasonble with a range of let's say +5 to -5. The range of scores in the current edition of the World Cup (ie: 9-2, 7-1, 6-2 etc.) seems to me a bit far-fetched as ICly these teams are just starting out and a range of +2 to -2 gives more reasonable scores for these teams.
Since the BoF is really about RPing, having two teams play in a 2-1/3-2 game I think would create more RPing oppertunities between the 2 teams involved than a 9-0 game between the same two teams. While a range of +2 to -2 might also create more of a cluster of teams with similar records, the RPing potential of having more teams involved in a "playoff chase" would create for a more interesting BoF tourney overall.
Having a lesser range (+1 to -1) would also provide a similar cluster of teams, but would create too many teams with identical records of and with the exact same GD/GF, etc and would/could lead to potential tiebreaker problems.

[Commerce Heights]

1: The NSFS formula will be used, but with xkoranate-style modifers.

2: The range of +2 to -2 gives the teams a chance at more scoring without it being too unreasonble with a range of let's say +5 to -5. The range of scores in the current edition of the World Cup (ie: 9-2, 7-1, 6-2 etc.) seems to me a bit far-fetched as ICly these teams are just starting out and a range of +2 to -2 gives more reasonable scores for these teams.

(emphasis added)
What on Earth does the range of scores in the current World Cup, using NSFS3, have to do with your use of xkoranate style modifiers?

Since the BoF is really about RPing, having two teams play in a 2-1/3-2 game I think would create more RPing oppertunities between the 2 teams involved than a 9-0 game between the same two teams. While a range of +2 to -2 might also create more of a cluster of teams with similar records, the RPing potential of having more teams involved in a "playoff chase" would create for a more interesting BoF tourney overall.
Having a lesser range (+1 to -1) would also provide a similar cluster of teams, but would create too many teams with identical records of and with the exact same GD/GF, etc and would/could lead to potential tiebreaker problems.

None of this applies, since xkoranate style modifiers never increase the margin of victory; if a team has a one-goal win before style modifiers are applied, they’ll still have a one-goal win at the end. (In fact, since negative style modifiers can decrease the margin of victory, a greater range of style modifiers would create more close games.)

You didn’t actually test the scorinator to reach this conclusion, did you?

[Qazox]

1: The NSFS formula will be used, but with xkoranate-style modifers.

2: The range of +2 to -2 gives the teams a chance at more scoring without it being too unreasonble with a range of let's say +5 to -5. The range of scores in the current edition of the World Cup (ie: 9-2, 7-1, 6-2 etc.) seems to me a bit far-fetched as ICly these teams are just starting out and a range of +2 to -2 gives more reasonable scores for these teams.

(emphasis added)
What on Earth does the range of scores in the current World Cup, using NSFS3, have to do with your use of xkoranate style modifiers?

Since the BoF is really about RPing, having two teams play in a 2-1/3-2 game I think would create more RPing oppertunities between the 2 teams involved than a 9-0 game between the same two teams. While a range of +2 to -2 might also create more of a cluster of teams with similar records, the RPing potential of having more teams involved in a "playoff chase" would create for a more interesting BoF tourney overall.
Having a lesser range (+1 to -1) would also provide a similar cluster of teams, but would create too many teams with identical records of and with the exact same GD/GF, etc and would/could lead to potential tiebreaker problems.

None of this applies, since xkoranate style modifiers never increase the margin of victory; if a team has a one-goal win before style modifiers are applied, they’ll still have a one-goal win at the end. (In fact, since negative style modifiers can decrease the margin of victory, a greater range of style modifiers would create more close games.)

You didn’t actually test the scorinator to reach this conclusion, did you?

Yes.

Test Results: (8 teams, 2 group of 4, double round robin. no RP bonuses applied, 2 teams at +2, 2 at+1, 2 at -1, 2 at -2)

ACBD group (A=1, B=2, C= -2, D= -1)
MD1:
A (a) 1–0 D (d)
B (b) 0–0 C (c)
MD2:
D (d) 1–0 C (c)
A (a) 2–3 B (b)
MD3:
B (b) 0–1 D (d)
C (c) 1–0 A (a)
MD4:
D (d) 0–1 A (a)
C (c) 0–0 B (b)
MD5:
C (c) 2–1 D (d)
B (b) 5–4 A (a)
MD6:
D (d) 0–1 B (b)
A (a) 2–0 C (c)

ACBD                                P    W   D   L   GF   GA   GD  Pts 
1 B                                   6    3   2   1    9    7   +2   11
2 A                                   6    3   0   3   10    9   +1    9
3 C                                   6    2   2   2    3    4   −1    8
4 D                                   6    2   0   4    3    5   −2    6

EFGH Group (E=1, F= -2, G= -1, H=2)
MD1:
E (e) 1–0 H (h)
F (f) 1–0 G (g)
MD2:
H (h) 2–5 G (g)
E (e) 0–0 F (f)
MD3:
F (f) 0–2 H (h)
G (g) 2–3 E (e)
MD4:
H (h) 2–1 E (e)
G (g) 0–0 F (f)
MD5:
G (g) 2–0 H (h)
F (f) 0–2 E (e)
MD 6:
H (h) 1–0 F (f)
E (e) 0–2 G (g)

EFGH                                P    W   D   L   GF   GA   GD  Pts 
1 G                                   6    3   1   2   11    6   +5   10
2 E                                   6    3   1   2    7    6   +1   10
3 H                                   6    3   0   3    7    9   −2    9
4 F                                   6    1   2   3    1    5   −4    5

Assuming the top 2 teams from each group were going to advance, every team had a chance going into the final MD. I know this is not a perfect example by any means (just 8 teams, no RP bonuses applied, etc.). But maybe I'm not getting what your question is, but I think the format I've stated will have a positiv effect of more RPing during the BoF.

[Commerce Heights]

Assuming the top 2 teams from each group were going to advance, every team had a chance going into the final MD. I know this is not a perfect example by any means (just 8 teams, no RP bonuses applied, etc.). But maybe I'm not getting what your question is, but I think the format I've stated will have a positiv effect of more RPing during the BoF.

You’re missing the point.

The margin of victory in every single one of those matches would have been exactly the same, if not smaller if the team had style modifiers above +2 or below −2.

Have you ever actually tried using the normal range of style modifiers?

[Commerce Heights]

Though Qazox has decided to respond to my last post in a telegram rather than in this thread, an act which I find somewhat cowardly, the details of Qazox’s bid and their rationales are a matter of interest to every potential voter and participant and I feel it would be irresponsible of me to respond anywhere but here.

Yes I have simulated results up to a range of up to +5 to -5. I understand the Margin of Victory would be the same not smaller regardless of the range. I just feel that a +2 to -2 range works best for me.

I still have no idea what point you are thinking of that you are expecting me to get.

I’m expecting you to get that this statement…

Since the BoF is really about RPing, having two teams play in a 2-1/3-2 game I think would create more RPing oppertunities between the 2 teams involved than a 9-0 game between the same two teams. While a range of +2 to -2 might also create more of a cluster of teams with similar records, the RPing potential of having more teams involved in a "playoff chase" would create for a more interesting BoF tourney overall.
Having a lesser range (+1 to -1) would also provide a similar cluster of teams, but would create too many teams with identical records of and with the exact same GD/GF, etc and would/could lead to potential tiebreaker problems.

…is a complete fabrication, without any basis in fact; that it serves to confuse people who don’t understand how the scorinator works, and might believe that you do; that it gives people who do understand how the scorinator works, and who may already distrust you greatly, a reason to distrust you all the more; and that you should either defend it publicly, or retract it publicly.

[Qazox]

Though Qazox has decided to respond to my last post in a telegram rather than in this thread, an act which I find somewhat cowardly, the details of Qazox’s bid and their rationales are a matter of interest to every potential voter and participant and I feel it would be irresponsible of me to respond anywhere but here.

Yes I have simulated results up to a range of up to +5 to -5. I understand the Margin of Victory would be the same not smaller regardless of the range. I just feel that a +2 to -2 range works best for me.

I still have no idea what point you are thinking of that you are expecting me to get.

I’m expecting you to get that this statement…

Since the BoF is really about RPing, having two teams play in a 2-1/3-2 game I think would create more RPing oppertunities between the 2 teams involved than a 9-0 game between the same two teams. While a range of +2 to -2 might also create more of a cluster of teams with similar records, the RPing potential of having more teams involved in a "playoff chase" would create for a more interesting BoF tourney overall.
Having a lesser range (+1 to -1) would also provide a similar cluster of teams, but would create too many teams with identical records of and with the exact same GD/GF, etc and would/could lead to potential tiebreaker problems.

…is a complete fabrication, without any basis in fact; that it serves to confuse people who don’t understand how the scorinator works, and might believe that you do; that it gives people who do understand how the scorinator works, and who may already distrust you greatly, a reason to distrust you all the more; and that you should either defend it publicly, or retract it publicly

.

Sorry you felt it was cowardly to TG you about it, but I really had no idea what point you were trying to get across and didn't want 20 posts of us going back and forth with me still not understanding just what point you were trying to make.

Now that I see the point you were trying to make, I don't see how having a range of +2/-2 instead of +5/-5 or any other range would make a difference in the overall results, not including RP bonuses, other than potentially increasing the overall number of goals scored. I know in the scorinator that the higher the style modifer number the more attacks a team gets whch equal the possibility of potentially scoring more goals, while having a lower style modifer number leads to the possibilty of potentially scoring less goals. I get that.

What I don't get is why having a range of +2/-2 is appearently a big deal to you.

As for the 2nd part you quoted, I never said it was a fact nor I ever claim it was based in fact. It was an opinion. In my opinion, closer games should equal better/more RPing. I never said that it was true or said that it was a fact. Just my opinion. I did post a simulation and just based off that simulation, all 8 teams had a chance entering MD8. It's my opinion that in a case like that during a real event, that the teams invloved would likely RP more/RP better to have a slightly better chance of winning those games than if the final games of that hypothetical event were meaningless (having the final two spots locked in). Just my opinion.

[Commerce Heights]

Now that I see the point you were trying to make, I don't see how having a range of +2/-2 instead of +5/-5 or any other range would make a difference in the overall results, not including RP bonuses, other than potentially increasing the overall number of goals scored.

They wouldn’t (though I don’t see why you brought up RP bonuses).

I know in the scorinator that the higher the style modifer number the more attacks a team gets whch equal the possibility of potentially scoring more goals, while having a lower style modifer number leads to the possibilty of potentially scoring less goals. I get that.

(emphasis added)
Neither xkoranate nor NSFS3 style modifiers change the number of attacks; changing the number of attacks is precisely why NSFS2 style modifiers were problematic. NSFS3 style modifiers apply a multiplier to the number of goals scored, while xkoranate style modifiers add or subtract from the number of goals scored. (Both then make an adjustment, if needed, to prevent a win from being turned into a draw by negative style modifiers.) This difference (multiplicative vs. additive) is precisely why your statement about “the range of scores in the current edition of the World Cup”, given as justification for your choice of style modifier range, is a non sequitur.

As for the 2nd part you quoted, I never said it was a fact nor I ever claim it was based in fact. It was an opinion.

“A range of +2 to -2 might also create more of a cluster of teams with similar records” is a statement of fact—it can be proven or disproven using logic and evidence. It is false. It is completely and utterly impossible, given the other parameters of your bid, that a range of +2 to −2 would “create more of a cluster of teams with similar records,” and to say that it might is ignorant at best, and deceptive at worst.

In my opinion, closer games should equal better/more RPing. I never said that it was true or said that it was a fact. Just my opinion. I did post a simulation and just based off that simulation, all 8 teams had a chance entering MD8. It's my opinion that in a case like that during a real event, that the teams invloved would likely RP more/RP better to have a slightly better chance of winning those games than if the final games of that hypothetical event were meaningless (having the final two spots locked in). Just my opinion.

What’s this got to do with the price of crossing the street in Cafundéu?

What I don't get is why having a range of +2/-2 is appearently a big deal to you.

It isn’t. The fact that you have attempted to justify that decision by making statements which are demonstrably false is a big deal—not just to me—because it “serves to confuse people who don’t understand how the scorinator works, and might believe that you do…[and] gives people who do understand how the scorinator works, and who may already distrust you greatly, a reason to distrust you all the more”.

[Legalese]

I think CH's comments say it all about the way this bid has been presented, but I would like to ask you one more question, Qazox:

The Baptism of Fire has long been considered a tournament that is not only a training ground for the new nations, but also one for the hosts. By that token, the BoF is frequently - like most WCC events - hosted by a pair of users, preferably one experienced and one un-experienced (though this is certainly not a requirement). Why would it make sense to break with this practice, which has proven successful, in favor of a single-user bid by you?

[Qazox]

I think CH's comments say it all about the way this bid has been presented, but I would like to ask you one more question, Qazox:

The Baptism of Fire has long been considered a tournament that is not only a training ground for the new nations, but also one for the hosts. By that token, the BoF is frequently - like most WCC events - hosted by a pair of users, preferably one experienced and one un-experienced (though this is certainly not a requirement). Why would it make sense to break with this practice, which has proven successful, in favor of a single-user bid by you?

Usually one of the first events a new hosts attempts to host is a Baptism of Fire. Firstly, I'm not a new host by any means seeing as I've hosted 13 events covering 3 different sports; and 2 of those 13 events, the Baptism of Iron, is similar in scope to the BoF itself. Since I do have prior experience hosting, I do not feel the need to be 'sheparded' by a more experienced host in this event.

Secondly, With my past, it's hard to find another person willing to co-host with me.

Thirdly, since my BoF (BoF 14) there have been 11 single-hosted BoF's, so it's not unprecedented in anyway. In fact QoD hosted a BoF singly not too long ago and there was no problems that I am aware of regarding their hosting singly.

Regarding the last comments by Commerce Heights: I was unaware that in the latest editions of NSFS and xkoranate style modifers had been changed from what I had understood how they determined the results. I retract my previous statements as they were based in erronious assumptions that I had about the scorinator.

[Virabia]

Secondly, With my past, it's hard to find another person willing to co-host with me.

Would you also not say that given your past you are not fit to host a WCC tournament especially one designed for a lot of newer players?

[Qazox]

Would you also not say that given your past you are not fit to host a WCC tournament especially one designed for a lot of newer players?

No. Despite my past, I have been voted in to host the 14th World Cup of Hockey and 8th Baptism of Iron just this year. Both of those tournaments went off without any problems or complaints. At least I've not seen any in either related Discussion thread, unless it has been discussed behind the scenes, on IRC or via TG's so I wouldn't know. I know how to use the scorinator and just hosted an event that featured newer players (8th Baptism of Iron). So I believe that I am fit to host the 43rd BoF.

[Cosumar]

Would you also not say that given your past you are not fit to host a WCC tournament especially one designed for a lot of newer players?

While many people on this forum dislike Qazox and he has made his share of mistakes in the past, I do not think there is any question that he is experienced enough and capable of hosting this smoothly.

There are some things I dislike about the bid however, most of which have already been pointed out by CH and Legalese.

[Qazox]

Bid
Up
More
Promenently.

[Legalese]

Fine, I'll ask you another question to keep this towards the top

Now that you've seen some additional bids, why should the voters pick yours over theirs? That is, why would, in your opinion, the BoF be better off having you host this edition?

[Qazox]

Fine, I'll ask you another question to keep this towards the top

Now that you've seen some additional bids, why should the voters pick yours over theirs? That is, why would, in your opinion, the BoF be better off having you host this edition?

One- I'm availible to scorinate this event within a reasonable time after the completion of the Cup of Harmony. We wouldn't have to wait until mid-July to have this event.

Two- No unusual formats for the BoF.

Three- No attempting to get new RPing nations to diversify their RP styles just to get bonus points. The BoF is all about RPing, no matter the style in which it is presented.

Four- I have more hosting experience than the other bidders. Including my own non-mainstream NSSports events, I have hosted 30+ events including: Football/Soccer, American Football, Hockey, Basketball, Baseball, Cycling, and X-games-like events. Of those 30 events, 4 of which I've hosted/co-hosted this calander year (WCoH 14, BoI 8, NSCAA III and Winter X-Games 1), none of those 4 events had any complaints about the scheduling, the promptness of scores/RP cutoffs or other problems. I've learned my lessons from World Bowl 9.

Five- I've been an active member of the NSSports community for over 5 years.

Six- I'm working on regaining the respect and trust of the other NSSports nations, and successfully hosting one of the bigger events on NSSports would help me to continue doing so.

[Qazox]

Based upon the current number of BoF signups (and the soft-cap placed) of 32 teams, Qazox' group stage/playoff structure would be:

Group Stage Structure:
8 groups of 4 teams each, double round-robin (6 games for each team). Top 2 teams in each group to playoffs.

Playoff Structure:
1: A1 vs. D2
2: B1 vs. C2
3: C1 vs. B2
4: D1 vs. A2
5: E1 vs. H2
6: F1 vs. G2
7: G1 vs. F2
8: H1 vs. E2

9: Winner 1 vs. Winner 5
10: Winner 2 vs. Winner 6
11: Winner 3 vs. Winner 7
12: Winner 4 vs. Winner 8

13: Winner 9 vs. Winner 11
14: Winner 10 vs. Winner 12

Final:
Winner 13 vs. Winner 14

3rd place:
Loser 14 vs. Loser 13

[Qazox]

UPDATED the OP with new information.