The World Cup Discussion Thread (OOC, Version IV)

[Sarzonia]

A Proposal for World Cup Expansion

With the NS World Cup approaching its centenary edition and the real life World Cup set to expand its field to 48 nations beginning in 2026, multiple debates have been focused on what the NS World Cup should do when that RL World Cup expansion happens.

There has been some discussion surrounding how to format a 48-team World Cup and the effect an expanded World Cup would have on the Cup of Harmony. We advise tabling the latter issue for further discussion. Instead, we propose to address the former in the following ways:

Instead of the existing format of eight four-team groups leading to a Round of Sixteen, we propose to implement twelve groups of four teams each. Keeping with prior tradition, the top two* teams from each group shall advance to the knockout rounds.

This would include 24 teams in the knockout stages, which would then proceed as follows: The eight group winners with the highest point totals, separated by the tiebreaking procedures established by the host nations would receive a bye into the Round of Sixteen, whilst the four remaining group winners would face the runners-up in the Round of Twenty-Four, or The Second Round. Winners of those matches would then compete in the Round of Sixteen.

This proposal would allow the traditional number of group stage matches without any teams having a bye during the group stage. It would also neatly preserve the current format as much as is practical given the increased number of qualified teams.

We consider a proposal to establish 16 groups of three teams each to be unwieldy and unsatisfactory. It would require each team to have at least one bye during the group stage and potentially would determine World Cup knockout berths based on just two matches. Also, a proposal to retain eight groups, but expand the groups to consist of six teams each would unnecessarily expand the World Cup proper with two additional group stage matches. In addition, retaining the current knockout round format could potentially exclude otherwise deserving sides in a less than palatable fashion.

Sarzonia proposes to implement this expanded World Cup format for the aforementioned centenary edition.

*In the event of a qualified nation ceasing to exist or withdrawing from the World Cup, established protocols would be implemented to maintain the integrity of the competition.

[Audioslavia]

First of all, thanks to Huay and Mertagne for running a stellar cup. Everything ran like clockwork. Huge congratulations to Brookstation for the World Cup win, and to Sarz for securing a second CoH title 20 full years after the first one (!)

48 teams makes sense for us even without the RL precedence coming in 2026. We can absolutely support an extra 16 teams. We have a great deal more active users than we ever had in the Jolt era, and the amount of 'deserving' RPers feels higher than it ever has been before.

I lean towards the following:

- We implement any switch to a 48-team World Cup starting with World Cup 100 or 101, which I think will be in the middle of next year.
- We agree on* one format to use for a 48-team World Cup.

I don't feel strongly about either of these positions.

In terms of format, like Sarz I also prefer 12x4, but I'd prefer a simpler format wherein the top two, and best third-placed teams, filter into a 32-team second round. The downside of this is that we lose only 16 of 48 teams after the first round, and all ways of deciding which third-place teams are better than the others are inherently flawed. The upside is that this format works the same as the format old 24-team World Cup (1986-1998) and the current European Championships (2016-) and feels, to my European mind, more intuitive than having a playoff phase between the group stage and the knockouts.


* I appreciate this part is massively easier said than done

[Saterun]

I have mixed feelings on this. On one hand, I'm a huge fan of the straightforward format we currently use. I really love 8x4 tournaments because of how easy they are to follow. On the other hand, if Saterun's NT continues the progress it has made this cycle, we may be in with a shout to the WC proper by #100 if there are 48 teams. I also echo Sarz and Audio's thoughts on the format. I think groups of 3 should be tossed out right now, on the basis of the many flaws it has, and I think the IAC has shown that and intermediary knockout phase between the group stage and quarters or Ro16 is very workable. I think we should maybe start with looking at the amount of matchday, scorinating, and RPing change that will happen with increased fixtures.

[Tumbra]

I agree with Audio; if we move to 48, the only remotely workable format is 12x4. I also agree that we have a lot more deserving roleplayers that should get a spot in the WC proper.

[Bears Armed]

Congratulations and commiserations to our Cup of Harmony winner and runners-up respectively.

A few thoughts and observations:

1. The engagement rate for this CoH was excellent. Of the 32 participants, 31 posted their roster before MD1

Oops! My apologies about being the exception to that, and being one of the 5 who didn't RP at least once. The depression that I've been suffering from on-&-off for several decades by now flared up again and so I just stopped caring much about anything. It's a bit better now, but once a planned move of home has been completed -- and I'm therefore within a different medical practice's catchment area -- I'll see about going back onto medication to help me cope with it.

[Milchama]

A Proposal for World Cup Expansion

With the NS World Cup approaching its centenary edition and the real life World Cup set to expand its field to 48 nations beginning in 2026, multiple debates have been focused on what the NS World Cup should do when that RL World Cup expansion happens.

There has been some discussion surrounding how to format a 48-team World Cup and the effect an expanded World Cup would have on the Cup of Harmony. We advise tabling the latter issue for further discussion. Instead, we propose to address the former in the following ways:

Instead of the existing format of eight four-team groups leading to a Round of Sixteen, we propose to implement twelve groups of four teams each. Keeping with prior tradition, the top two* teams from each group shall advance to the knockout rounds.

This would include 24 teams in the knockout stages, which would then proceed as follows: The eight group winners with the highest point totals, separated by the tiebreaking procedures established by the host nations would receive a bye into the Round of Sixteen, whilst the four remaining group winners would face the runners-up in the Round of Twenty-Four, or The Second Round. Winners of those matches would then compete in the Round of Sixteen.

This proposal would allow the traditional number of group stage matches without any teams having a bye during the group stage. It would also neatly preserve the current format as much as is practical given the increased number of qualified teams.

We consider a proposal to establish 16 groups of three teams each to be unwieldy and unsatisfactory. It would require each team to have at least one bye during the group stage and potentially would determine World Cup knockout berths based on just two matches. Also, a proposal to retain eight groups, but expand the groups to consist of six teams each would unnecessarily expand the World Cup proper with two additional group stage matches. In addition, retaining the current knockout round format could potentially exclude otherwise deserving sides in a less than palatable fashion.

Sarzonia proposes to implement this expanded World Cup format for the aforementioned centenary edition.

*In the event of a qualified nation ceasing to exist or withdrawing from the World Cup, established protocols would be implemented to maintain the integrity of the competition.

Seconding except that this should be implemented at the next available World Cup. If we think it's the better move, why wait?

Edited to add: I will continue my stand of not voting for any bid that does not involve expanding the World Cup

[Sarzonia]

ICly, Sarzonia recognises that the wheels of bureaucracy churn very slowly.

OOCly, I don't know how practical it would be to implement in, say World Cup 97 or 98. Expanding to 48 nations still involves discussion and working out logistics before we run out a 48-team World Cup.

Number one, we haven't officially decided what format the group stage will look like. I favour 12 x 4, and I outlined why the other formats discussed (16 x 3 and 8 x 6). would be problematic. Number two, we're already pondering what we want the first knockout stage to look like, whether it's a RO24 or a RO32. We'd need to come to an agreement there before we vote.

More to the point, we've figured out qualifying stage formats that work for a 32-team World Cup (15 groups, top two qualify automatically and 20 groups, winners qualify automatically, runners up have to win a playoff), but how do we sort 46 teams? Remembering that hosts get an automatic berth into the proper, we have to figure out a workable format.

All that said, there's also the matter of getting a formal third to get discussion rolling in earnest before Ko-oren can even think about putting this up to a vote.

World Cup 99 might be a feasible starting point, but 98 is pushing it, and 97 would be nigh on impossible. Purely from an aesthetic standpoint, 100 would be a great jumping off point for expansion because it's such a notable number.

[Bears Armed]

Purely from an aesthetic standpoint, 100 would be a great jumping off point for expansion because it's such a notable number.

It isn't so notable for nations that use base-8 rather than base-10...

[Legalese]

I mean, all it takes for 48 is for someone to put in a winning bid at this point -- just nobody's been ready to make the jump just yet (for many of the reasons stated here, I suspect). That said, we already know what the RL format for 2026 will be, and while it wouldn't be impossible for it to change, once you've gotten to the point of posting schedules, it's pretty fair to say there's unlikely to be a major change from 4 x 12, with a 32-team knockout format. Obviously, we've always made small adjustments to account for NS/RL differences, but if anyone was going to go for it, starting with a form of that in pretty much any cycle forward would make sense, especially given that there will either be an updated rankings system starting with 98, or there won't -- which means discussions on what will have to change in KPB to accomodate differently-sized finals anyways.

[Tumbra]

Personally I feel that we should focus on one big change at a time; we should focus on KPB reform first before tackling a change to 12x4.

[Commonwealth of Baker Park]

Personally I feel that we should focus on one big change at a time; we should focus on KPB reform first before tackling a change to 12x4.

As much as I would love to make a jump to a 48 team WC sooner rather than later, I agree with Tumbra that the ranking reform should be first.

I don't agree that 12x4 is the "logical" format as I think 8x6 is far better. We could even take an interim step with a 40 team WCF if the will isn't there for 48 in the next couple of cycles.

Also, appreciation and full credit to our hosts. Thanks for well administered events.

[Sarzonia]

I laid out my objections to 8x6, namely that it 1) extends the group stage by two matches and 2) opens up questions as to the "right" knockout stage format. Going from a five-match group stage to a Ro16 means two thirds of the World Cup qualifying teams are eliminated. A Ro32 potentially cheapens advancement.

Why do you prefer 8x6 to 12x4?

[Tumbra]

Agree with Sarz re: more cutoffs and KO formats, not necessarily whether a round of 32 is good or not. 8x6 also favours higher-ranked teams; remember the snowglobe analogy I brought up earlier in the cycle.

[Ko-oren]

I don't see the need to codify a 40 or 48 team World Cup, let alone a format. A constitutional amendment 2 years ago opened the door to World Cups larger than 32, allowing anyone to come up with a bid, which can then be accepted or rejected in the ensuing vote. If anyone wants to bid for World Cup 97 with a 40 or 48 team format, go right ahead. If anyone wants to bid for a 32-team World Cup but not with a standard 8-groups-of-4 format, go ahead as well - that was always an option.

[Ko-oren]

Apologies for the double post, but with cycle 96 over and a new presidential term starting, I'd like to welcome Chromatika to the VP position. As said before, I'm looking to hold that ranking vote this term (looking at the most recent post in the Proposal thread, I'm looking at a vote during the 97 cycle and the new ranking taking effect, if voted in, for the 98 cycle). I'd also like to trial something proposed 2-3 pages ago, namely the WC, BoF, and amendments happening in a single voting round before the cycle, and the CoH vote happening mid-cycle and handled by the VP - more on that later.

[Commonwealth of Baker Park]

I laid out my objections to 8x6, namely that it 1) extends the group stage by two matches and 2) opens up questions as to the "right" knockout stage format. Going from a five-match group stage to a Ro16 means two thirds of the World Cup qualifying teams are eliminated. A Ro32 potentially cheapens advancement.

Why do you prefer 8x6 to 12x4?

--The format of eight group winners vs the winners of 2/3 place playoffs in a R16 versus 24 teams--what even would that entail?
--Are some group winners better than others? Seeding 24 nations for a second round is not a solution.
--MD/cutoff increase is better from an RP standpoint, and I disagree about 8x6 favoring higher ranks if carryover RP bonus is handled the way it's been generally presented in bids for some time (average of X number of highest RP grades).
--I'm so over 3 match group stages for World Championship events. At 32 teams it seems like the "right" number for orderly square root based reduction. Any other combination, not so much.
--I'd love to see some type of "test run" in another sport to convince me that it's not the best way. (I'm always open to being proved wrong with good data).

Congratulations to Chrom on assuming the Vice Presidency.

[Mertagne]

I made a promise to share some of the tools that we used for automating World Cup 96 with the community at the conclusion of the tournament.

To that end, I have recreated from scratch a version that is similar to the sheet we used (hopefully it's a lot better, but it's still untested), with the aim that prospective hosts would be able to use it for their own sports tournaments. Primarily, it serves as a sheet to collate RP bonus, and aid in the formatting of roster links.

You can find the sheet here. You will need to make a copy of the sheet before you can use it.