[TWI-ONLY] [OOC] : IFAF Western Isles Cup 2018

[Menna Shuli]

Who is running Argus?

[Athara Magarat]

Who is running Argus?

From what I heard, Argus is being divided (since there are too few nations in Argus).

Weinam and Covonant are already in MSFC (despite being on Argus in map). Torom is joining Gael confederation.

[Menna Shuli]

I suppose it would make most sense for me to join CEFA then.

[Corindia]

I suppose it would make most sense for me to join CEFA then.

Another challenger joins the BIG EAST

[Dormill and Stiura]

I suppose it would make most sense for me to join CEFA then.

I actually thought that’d be the most logical Confederation to put you in as I was working on a version of the map of the Confederations.

[Verdon]

Tagerino

Let me know how I can help out/advertize/use SoRP powers to your advantages.

[Verdon]

A couple of things:

1. I'm not too keen on the idea of NPCs being allowed to enter the tournament. Yes, it's more realistic, but this could easily rob someone the chance to compete further in the tournament - or even at all, considering qualifiers - and subsequently give an extra chance to someone who already has one. If NPCs are needed to fill out the number of nations in the qualifiers, okay - but I'd really rather see them as low stat teams with very little chance of qualifying.

2. A note on realism - this one's not necessary, but it's something to think about: There's already a whole lot of 7,8,9 teams in the qualifier threads.
Remember, unless soccer/football is a top sport in your nation, you're not going to be producing a top-tier national football team. I know that this is going to be true for many of you since it is the world's most popular sport, but remember - If there's not as much interest in a sport in your nation, you're less likely to have resources invested in youth systems, high quality training facilities, good domestic leagues, and venues for invested fans (revenue from tickets and merchandise drives all sports). For example, there's a reason why South Asia is so dominant in Cricket, Canada and the Nordic Countries in Ice Hockey, Japan and the U.S./Caribbean in Baseball - these are areas where those sports have the most prominence. I know everyone wants to do well and go far in the tournament, participating as much as they can, but don't be afraid to spec your team lower - A bad defeat can be a much more interesting story to write about than a low scoring victory.

[Corindia]

2. A note on realism - this one's not necessary, but it's something to think about: There's already a whole lot of 7,8,9 teams in the qualifier threads.

I've gone lower than that in the past two years in any number of TWI sports tournaments and my team's have just ended up unceremoniously losing. Maybe if there was some system that randomly, or partially randomly, determined how good teams were or boosted teams based on activity in TWI sports that could be a way to get a better mix. As is, particularly after seeing the MFSC thread, I'm reluctant to do anything at all to handicap my team when it will most likely keep it from ever being in contention.

[Dormill and Stiura]

2. A note on realism - this one's not necessary, but it's something to think about: There's already a whole lot of 7,8,9 teams in the qualifier threads.

I've gone lower than that in the past two years in any number of TWI sports tournaments and my team's have just ended up unceremoniously losing. Maybe if there was some system that randomly, or partially randomly, determined how good teams were or boosted teams based on activity in TWI sports that could be a way to get a better mix. As is, particularly after seeing the MFSC thread, I'm reluctant to do anything at all to handicap my team when it will most likely keep it from ever being in contention.

The current simulator does allow for random adjustments of stats following each season (even with an option to have that randomness average around the original numbers), but there is no system I know of other than using RP modifiers with xkornate to grant boosts to teams where the player actively RPs with them.

[Menna Shuli]

A couple of things:

1. I'm not too keen on the idea of NPCs being allowed to enter the tournament. Yes, it's more realistic, but this could easily rob someone the chance to compete further in the tournament - or even at all, considering qualifiers - and subsequently give an extra chance to someone who already has one. If NPCs are needed to fill out the number of nations in the qualifiers, okay - but I'd really rather see them as low stat teams with very little chance of qualifying.

2. A note on realism - this one's not necessary, but it's something to think about: There's already a whole lot of 7,8,9 teams in the qualifier threads.
Remember, unless soccer/football is a top sport in your nation, you're not going to be producing a top-tier national football team. I know that this is going to be true for many of you since it is the world's most popular sport, but remember - If there's not as much interest in a sport in your nation, you're less likely to have resources invested in youth systems, high quality training facilities, good domestic leagues, and venues for invested fans (revenue from tickets and merchandise drives all sports). For example, there's a reason why South Asia is so dominant in Cricket, Canada and the Nordic Countries in Ice Hockey, Japan and the U.S./Caribbean in Baseball - these are areas where those sports have the most prominence. I know everyone wants to do well and go far in the tournament, participating as much as they can, but don't be afraid to spec your team lower - A bad defeat can be a much more interesting story to write about than a low scoring victory.

A 7 is barely above average. If teams are competing at this level, an aggregate of 7 would be considered the bare minimum for qualification: even the worst teams to have qualified for FIFA would be a 6 or a 7.

[Corindia]

A couple of things:

1. I'm not too keen on the idea of NPCs being allowed to enter the tournament. Yes, it's more realistic, but this could easily rob someone the chance to compete further in the tournament - or even at all, considering qualifiers - and subsequently give an extra chance to someone who already has one. If NPCs are needed to fill out the number of nations in the qualifiers, okay - but I'd really rather see them as low stat teams with very little chance of qualifying.

2. A note on realism - this one's not necessary, but it's something to think about: There's already a whole lot of 7,8,9 teams in the qualifier threads.
Remember, unless soccer/football is a top sport in your nation, you're not going to be producing a top-tier national football team. I know that this is going to be true for many of you since it is the world's most popular sport, but remember - If there's not as much interest in a sport in your nation, you're less likely to have resources invested in youth systems, high quality training facilities, good domestic leagues, and venues for invested fans (revenue from tickets and merchandise drives all sports). For example, there's a reason why South Asia is so dominant in Cricket, Canada and the Nordic Countries in Ice Hockey, Japan and the U.S./Caribbean in Baseball - these are areas where those sports have the most prominence. I know everyone wants to do well and go far in the tournament, participating as much as they can, but don't be afraid to spec your team lower - A bad defeat can be a much more interesting story to write about than a low scoring victory.

A 7 is barely above average. If teams are competing at this level, an aggregate of 7 would be considered the bare minimum for qualification: even the worst teams to have qualified for FIFA would be a 6 or a 7.

Is the 1-9 ranking all teams in the world or all qualified teams though? It's probably more helpful if it just ranks the qualified teams so that there are more than four levels of skill. Not that I think acknowledging that will be able to fix the enormous drift towards higher numbers.

[Menna Shuli]

Is the 1-9 ranking all teams in the world or all qualified teams though? It's probably more helpful if it just ranks the qualified teams so that there are more than four levels of skill. Not that I think acknowledging that will be able to fix the enormous drift towards higher numbers.

If the 1 - 9 only ranks qualified teams, I might alter my rankings. I assumed it was for every professional team.

[Corindia]

Is the 1-9 ranking all teams in the world or all qualified teams though? It's probably more helpful if it just ranks the qualified teams so that there are more than four levels of skill. Not that I think acknowledging that will be able to fix the enormous drift towards higher numbers.

If the 1 - 9 only ranks qualified teams, I might alter my rankings. I assumed it was for every professional team.

I mean, given the gamut of scores I think it more accurately reflects a ranking for all professional teams because there's such a cluster at the top. Now, whether that was intended, who knows. Probably not.

[Dormill and Stiura]

A 7 is barely above average. If teams are competing at this level, an aggregate of 7 would be considered the bare minimum for qualification: even the worst teams to have qualified for FIFA would be a 6 or a 7.

Is the 1-9 ranking all teams in the world or all qualified teams though? It's probably more helpful if it just ranks the qualified teams so that there are more than four levels of skill. Not that I think acknowledging that will be able to fix the enormous drift towards higher numbers.

I don't understand the distinction, the 1-9 rankings are global for all teams, whichever team advances far enough in the qualifiers to be qualified for the Isles Cup are qualified, regardless if that team has skills lower than 7 or higher.

For example, a Confederation can consist of teams with lower-than-average skill, the qualifiers can still be fair, and you can have a greater diversity in skill levels going into the cup. However, how these teams will be organized to have a fun and fair tournament where each team that enters has a reasonable chance of winning is something I would need to work on.

[Corindia]

Is the 1-9 ranking all teams in the world or all qualified teams though? It's probably more helpful if it just ranks the qualified teams so that there are more than four levels of skill. Not that I think acknowledging that will be able to fix the enormous drift towards higher numbers.

I don't understand the distinction, the 1-9 rankings are global for all teams, whichever team advances far enough in the qualifiers to be qualified for the Isles Cup are qualified, regardless if that team has skills lower than 7 or higher.

Is a 1 equivalent to the worst team present or the worst professional team reasonably imaginable (TWI probably would have teams like this, but I doubt anyone has bothered to put them to text)?

[Dormill and Stiura]

I don't understand the distinction, the 1-9 rankings are global for all teams, whichever team advances far enough in the qualifiers to be qualified for the Isles Cup are qualified, regardless if that team has skills lower than 7 or higher.

Is a 1 equivalent to the worst team present or the worst professional team reasonably imaginable (TWI probably would have teams like this, but I doubt anyone has bothered to put them to text)?

1 being the worst possible.

[Menna Shuli]

From a Doylist perspective, people set their stats high because everyone wants a reasonable chance to reach the finals. Sure, a loss can be more interesting to write about. Sure, someone with low stats can theoretically reach endgame. But really, everyone wants a snowball's chance in hell to win. So the stats creep into the upper third. I think that's fair. I mean, I just dropped my scores down to the 5/6 range and I already know how this is going to go.

From a Watsonian perspective, really, if you are competing at this level, wouldn't your team be in the upper third? You'd take your country's best-of-the-best, right? Local leagues might have a lower average score, or lower scores across the board, but at an international level, that number climbs. It's the difference between, say the quality of play in MLS and in the USA team.

[Verdon]

I've gone lower than that in the past two years in any number of TWI sports tournaments and my team's have just ended up unceremoniously losing. Maybe if there was some system that randomly, or partially randomly, determined how good teams were or boosted teams based on activity in TWI sports that could be a way to get a better mix. As is, particularly after seeing the MFSC thread, I'm reluctant to do anything at all to handicap my team when it will most likely keep it from ever being in contention.

This is a great point and I want to look in to finding a way for this to be implemented in the algorithm.
A 9 should barely average more wins against an 8, and on occasion, a 5 should be able to beat a 9.

One of the lowest ranked competitors in this word cup is Russia, at a FIFA rank of 70/211. I realize that those in the tournament are pretty much going to be exclusively 5+ scores - but then that kinda makes the 1-4 scores pointless.

[Polar Svalbard]

I think Verdon makes a salient point. It shouldn't feel completely hopeless to compete against teams like Nors or others who have large stats. It should not feel as though it's a foreign conclusion who's going to win.

[Menna Shuli]

I think Verdon makes a salient point. It shouldn't feel completely hopeless to compete against teams like Nors or others who have large stats. It should not feel as though it's a foreign conclusion who's going to win.

*foregone conclusion

That's my point. I have no reasonable chance of actually making it past the first round, and my stats are still, technically, "above average" with an aggregate 5.5. It's like, why even participate at that point? There's no drama in it.

[Dormill and Stiura]

I think Verdon makes a salient point. It shouldn't feel completely hopeless to compete against teams like Nors or others who have large stats. It should not feel as though it's a foreign conclusion who's going to win.

*foregone conclusion

That's my point. I have no reasonable chance of actually making it past the first round, and my stats are still, technically, "above average" with an aggregate 5.5. It's like, why even participate at that point? There's no drama in it.

It’s entirely possible to set up a tournament for lower skilled teams or non-qualifiers. The IFAF could also set up friendlies between any mixture of countries or skills (I’ve thought about how the CU would play into this and I suspect they would also want to do something between each other), then there’s also club tournaments like how Michigonia has handled the GFA Champions Cup.

I am entirely open to suggestions on how to handle this without needlessly buffing or nerfing everybody involved while keeping things exciting for everybody.

[Menna Shuli]

*foregone conclusion

That's my point. I have no reasonable chance of actually making it past the first round, and my stats are still, technically, "above average" with an aggregate 5.5. It's like, why even participate at that point? There's no drama in it.

It’s entirely possible to set up a tournament for lower skilled teams or non-qualifiers. The IFAF could also set up friendlies between any mixture of countries or skills (I’ve thought about how the CU would play into this and I suspect they would also want to do something between each other), then there’s also club tournaments like how Michigonia has handled the GFA Champions Cup.

I am entirely open to suggestions on how to handle this without needlessly buffing or nerfing everybody involved while keeping things exciting for everybody.

I only set my team as lower skill because I knew we needed weaker teams. I really didn't want to. Setting up tournaments for lower skill teams seems needlessly patronizing.

[Dormill and Stiura]

It’s entirely possible to set up a tournament for lower skilled teams or non-qualifiers. The IFAF could also set up friendlies between any mixture of countries or skills (I’ve thought about how the CU would play into this and I suspect they would also want to do something between each other), then there’s also club tournaments like how Michigonia has handled the GFA Champions Cup.

I am entirely open to suggestions on how to handle this without needlessly buffing or nerfing everybody involved while keeping things exciting for everybody.

I only set my team as lower skill because I knew we needed weaker teams. I really didn't want to. Setting up tournaments for lower skill teams seems needlessly patronizing.

The issue I’m seeing is that nobody wants to have their team low-skilled because everybody wants to win. At the moment I know of no good way around this issue and create a diverse range of skill without curtailing player freedom in these regards.

The only thing I can think of would be to make a pointlessly complicated calculator to determine how skilled a team is based on common factors involved in successful football teams, but that would also hinge on the hope that people choose to have lower-skilled teams. I see this as a similar reason why TWI on average has nations with populations in the upper quadrants with GDP per Capita in the same range, few people want to handicap themselves and become uncompetitive in an environment where being economically powerful, politically powerful, or militarily powerful is the best (if not only) path to being seen as a relevant and worthwhile member of an RP community. Even I suffer from that and at times wish I can bring D&S down a few notches to open up a new set of potential play styles.

[Menna Shuli]

For me its not so much that I want to win, but that I want to have the reasonable potential to, because that allows for drama in the waiting. Now, as things stand, maybe the RNG gives me an underdog victory once or twicr, but there's no drama in knowing that, statistically, the chances of even reaching the quarter finals is infintesimal. Drama in sports comes from the potential that anyone can win. It's why the Marlies don't play in the NHL and why the British leagues use consolidation.

[Dormill and Stiura]

For me its not so much that I want to win, but that I want to have the reasonable potential to, because that allows for drama in the waiting. Now, as things stand, maybe the RNG gives me an underdog victory once or twice, but there's no drama in knowing that, statistically, the chances of even reaching the quarterfinals is infinitesimal. Drama in sports comes from the potential that anyone can win. It's why the Marlies don't play in the NHL and why the British leagues use consolidation.

I did look back into my own League Simulation, and 53% of the finals (31 of 58) have consisted of at least one "average" (either or both skills below 7) team and 9 games where such a team actually won the title, 15.5%. So I wouldn't say the chance of breaking out into the quarterfinals is infinitesimally small, but it is evident that the odds are pretty far from your favor. Even then, at the very least in the TWI Cup, low-skill teams will have a pretty high chance of breaking out of the group stage due to their design.