NationStates

A Vanorian-Sarian Bid for World Cup 71

Who And Why?
That would be the Atlantian Oceania nation of Valanora and Esportiva nation of Sarian who are looking to maintain and uphold the heritage and traditions of NSSport's most long running sports competition. This bid is a call back to the ideas and traditions that have allowed the World Cup to endure and prosper. Valanora is a historical nation full of intrigue and diversity aplenty with a welcoming populace eager to assist others in any way they can. Sarian is a relatively new to the international scene but one full of promise and enthusiasm.

What are the machinations?
In accordance with the theme of the bid, we will be looking to use a traditional software in NSFS, using the most updated of versions, 3.0.1. In this edition of the software, maxpoints, the ranking of a squad, and the style modifier of a squad can be altered on any matchday, much akin to its predecessor in the NSFS 2.7, that was used to great extent through many of the pre-NS hosted forums and a few of the NS hosted forums cycles. The RP bonus is also to be allocated on a cumulative nature, though the exact number of KPBs available per matchday will not be provided.

Our format would prefer 20 groups of 8 nations each, though it may be modified to a variety of formats if the signups dictate, which could include 10 groups of X nations with double matchday scorination, except for the first and last MDs. If our preferred format of 20 groups of X nations is used, then the group winners would advance and a two legged playoff between the second placed teams would be used to determine the remaining 10 qualifiers.

Should nations be tied on points after the Group Stage, the tiebreakers will be as followed: Goal Difference, H2H result, Wins, Goals Scored, and if needed a coin flip.

Past Experience?
Valanora has a plethora of hosting experience, the user having hosted WCC events no less than eleven times, as well as other major tournaments, including the DBC,WCoH, and AOCAF, and routinely scorinating the AOCL. The user has the adequate experience and the nation the infrastructure to host such an event should they be awarded the tournament.

Sarian has hosted the Beltane Cup, WLCs 17 & 19 and Baptism of Fire 57, alongside the usual domestics.

With the outline of our bid now laid out, we are open for questions regarding it from the World Cup community.

I fucking knew it as soon as you started poking each other

In all seriousness, I like this bid. The traditional format is still the best one for me. One question - why have you chosen NSFS over SQIS? (Apart from being traditional, of course.)

I personally feel that NSFS is more balanced in regards to the 3Rs than SQIS, which IMO feels more tilted towards a Randomness favor than balance. Just a personal preference and opinion really.

I'm so happy to see a bid with the "proper" tiebreakers (GD rules! )

One question however: by double matchday scorination do you mean that 2 MD would be scorinated per day (bar the 1st and last MD as you said)? And would that only apply to a situation where we had really big groups or do you plan on using this format even with your ideal format of 20 groups of 8 nations?

By double matchday that would indeed mean that it would be 2 MDs scorinated for a day, ie 2nd and 3rd one day and 4th and 5th the next day. This would only be put in place should there be large groups and not in our ideals format of 20 groups of 8 (or below).

Interesting bid. Also glad to see someone else favours GD over H2H too!

Sarian getting introduced to WC hosting is good, considering that has such a skilled senior host like Valanora, It's a good bid overall in the tie breaker sense. Hosting two MD's per day is actually a clever idea to avoid burnout and the traditional format is good, because is a thing that we really know well, but I wonder if the plan of 20 x 8 will use the same method of two MD's per day except the first and last day?

Apart from that, seems that we will have a hard time deciding which bid to choose.

Good luck!

This bid looks good for the most part, but I really don't like the idea of two games per matchday. It makes it too rushed and forces us to RP too much in too little time. And you're basically saying, between what you've said here and what you've said on IRC, if we have more than 160 signups, which we have exceeded every tournament I've been here for, you're going with two games per matchday. If that's the case, I can't support this bid under any circumstances. It would just be too rushed. It's a shame, because the rest of the bid was better than the other two. It's a shame I can't go piecemeal and vote for everything from your bid but that.

When the IBS and WBC went with three games per matchday to reduce randomness, I found myself RPing less, even though the tournament was actually the same length, since there was too much to RP and I was overwhelmed. This is a similar but different scenario, where the tournament is shorter but is the same number of games, but it's the same principle. And unlike in those tournaments, there's no good reason to do it here. I see nothing significant to be gained. If anything, burnout is more likely since people will be more overwhelmed with what they feel the need to RP.

In fact, I am seriously considering proposing an amendment to the Constitution to ban the scorination of more than one matchday on the same calendar day. I'm that opposed to it.

Gregoryisgodistan wrote:This bid looks good for the most part, but I really don't like the idea of two games per matchday. It makes it too rushed and forces us to RP too much in too little time. And you're basically saying, between what you've said here and what you've said on IRC, if we have more than 160 signups, which we have exceeded every tournament I've been here for, you're going with two games per matchday. If that's the case, I can't support this bid under any circumstances. It would just be too rushed. It's a shame, because the rest of the bid was better than the other two. It's a shame I can't go piecemeal and vote for everything from your bid but that.

When the IBS and WBC went with three games per matchday to reduce randomness, I found myself RPing less, even though the tournament was actually the same length, since there was too much to RP and I was overwhelmed. This is a similar but different scenario, where the tournament is shorter but is the same number of games, but it's the same principle. And unlike in those tournaments, there's no good reason to do it here. I see nothing significant to be gained. If anything, burnout is more likely since people will be more overwhelmed with what they feel the need to RP.

In fact, I am seriously considering proposing an amendment to the Constitution to ban the scorination of more than one matchday on the same calendar day. I'm that opposed to it.

Hey, don't go too extreme, calm. They are offering this for either their timing or to avoid burnout from some players, I don't see a need to do an amendment with this, you are in your right to do it obviously but sincerely, think about it.

I don't know exactly what the plan here is, but I'm not opposed to "Double Matchday" scorination depending on the circumstances

IE: I wouldn't mind "Double Matchday" scorination where the cutoff is every 48 hours instead of every 24 - this allows more time for users to get their RP's in, and reduces the workload on the hosts by about half (Which would be similar to the reduction of workload achieved by the 4-host system used successfully in WC70)

However, 2 scorinations every day over a one week real-life time period constituting the entire qualifying process is not something I would enjoy

The double Matchday would only be used if we had to have large group sizes, to save a potential 18 MD qualifying, which would decrease RPing and increase burnout, as others have pointed out.

If we have qualifying groups of an appropriate size, we will of course be doing single MD per cutoff point, the double MD is just a plan B.

The Sarian wrote:The double Matchday would only be used if we had to have large group sizes, to save a potential 18 MD qualifying, which would decrease RPing and increase burnout, as others have pointed out.

I have to say, I am strongly against this 'double matchday scorination' lark. It may be a contingency plan for the prospective co-hosts, but I feel that I cannot in good conscience vote for a bid proposing the scorination of two matchdays per calendar day under any circumstances - which is really a shame, given that this bid would otherwise be strongly in contention for my vote.

which could include 10 groups of X nations with double matchday scorination

I might be reading this wrong, but could that mean groups with up to seventeen, eighteen teams and about 34 MDs? That would be something I'm heavily against.

Why not, if the field moves to 176 or 184, go for 22 or 23 groups of 8 and opt for a double play-offs?

Valanora wrote:Our format would prefer 20 groups of 8 nations each, though it may be modified to a variety of formats if the signups dictate, which could include 10 groups of X nations with double matchday scorination, except for the first and last MDs. If our preferred format of 20 groups of X nations is used, then the group winners would advance and a two legged playoff between the second placed teams would be used to determine the remaining 10 qualifiers.

I think some more concrete options as to what would happen with numbers other than 160 would help here - 'could' is a very powerful word for (what I see as) the unwelcome prospect of double matchday scorination.

I think could is the keyword there. The likliehood is that there will only be one MD per cutoff, we are just covering ourselves for full transparency that double matchdays are on the table.

When signups open and we start getting some numbers, we'll be releasing our full plans, don't be surprised if every plan has the normal single matchday is single matchday, but equally don't be surprised if there are some double MD solutions.

The essence of this bid is a traditional World Cup with top sides automatically qualifying, second placed sides in the playoffs and sensible tiebreakers, not the small possibility of double matchdays.

As my cohost has pointed out, the likelihood of 2 MDs per scorination is a minute possibility that is being put on the table as a contingency plan should we reach signup numbers that make the qualifying process exceedingly long. Our preferred format is 20 by X, with our ideal format being 20 x 8 in lieu of 162 signups, which we think could be a possibility given the low turnout for regional competitions right now. In the event of 182, we will most likely use a 30 x 6 or 20 x 9. However if for some reason we hit 190, 200, etc... we would like to have a contingency plan and for the voting body to know about rather than be taken by surprise if it was implemented.

With bids about to be voted on and given the slowdown of signups, the likelyhood of a 162-182 World Cup looks likely and as such, we are not going to be using the 2 MDs per scorination.