NationStates Jolt Archive

Welcome to the official bid thread of MiLE for World Cup 31.

Here are the basic details.
Number of teams: To be decided. Preferably one that is a multiple of 12.
Qualifying format: 12 groups (provisionally) of X, top two qualify, 3rd placed teams playoff.
Scorinator: We'll be using NSFS 2.0.1, with styles of -10 to +10 (halved, therefore choosing 5.5 will be entered into the scorinator as 2.25). We'll be using KPB points for rankings.
RP bonus: This is still very tentative, but it will likely be both quantity- and quality- based. As quality is very subjective, we tentatively will ask three randomly-selected people to judge RPs for quality, and applying the bonus as needed. One matchday's RPs will count for two matchdays.

Stadia will come at a later date as more in-depth details are still being worked out. For now, questions are welcome.

As quality is very subjective, we tentatively will ask three randomly-selected people to judge RPs for quality, and applying the bonus as needed.

Due to the high number of RPs in a world cup surely this is an impractical idea as choosing the random people means that they might not be avalible, and each of the three would have to read through all the RPs meaning it would be very time consuming. Rather than that, why not have more vague definition of quality means that it is unlikely an RP will be in a grey area;

0 - A few words just saying the score plus scorers, or a few words saying we are eliminated

1- A fairly well constructed RP, makes sense has more than just the score/scorers

2- A well constructed RP, makes sense, more than a short summary of the match, goes into details

3- An RP of such breaktaking magnatude that you fell down and wept after reading such beauty

Interesting idea about random people judging but that's going be very subjective. My current RP style
* Does not mention goal scorers - I just mention the score and ramble a lot afterwards as well as lots of bad humour
* My RPs are more social these days and less technical. I have lots of competitions and commerical product plugging too.
* Actually my RPs are the social/commercical side of soccer on an RP

How this sort of RP will be dealt with very differently by different people.

-10 to +10 (halved, therefore choosing 5.5 will be entered into the scorinator as 2.25).


So.... In other words - you'll be using the same exact +5 -> -5 capabilities that NSFS is designed for, you just decided for the hell of it to say its double that to make it look different?


RP bonus: This is still very tentative, but it will likely be both quantity- and quality- based. As quality is very subjective, we tentatively will ask three randomly-selected people to judge RPs for quality, and applying the bonus as needed. One RP lasts two matchdays.


Who? We have hosts for a reason. They run the tournament, judge the RP, and most of all - they have the same brain in their heads from matchday to matchday that will interpret the RP the same way. So even if its an assanine way of interpreting the RP its fairly consistent throughout the cup. Additionally, the hosts are not going to be influenced because the hosts are not competing in World Cup Qualifying. Meanwhile, how might three at large users be even *slightly* altered in their perception when they just happen to come accross the RP of the team they are facing the next day? Or in fact any team in the entire World Cup Qualifying, as with the current format - they would potentially have to overcome that team to qualify through the finals via a playoff?

It's not a horrible idea, although it does give off the slight impression of looking to offload some of the responsibility of being a host - but I really don't see how it makes the process of judging the RP more fair at the time being...


Additionally, One RP lasts TWO Matchdays?

I'm not too fond of this idea. So lets say, the top RPer in the cup RPs 3 times in 2 days.

By the end of the cup - they still only have credit for 3 RPs in their score. That's retarded. We should be encouraging RP, not making even it easier for Non-RPers to win matches over the top RPers in the cup

I agree that it might be a problem and too subjective, but that idea is still very tentative. Perhaps we can refine it such that it wouldn't be too problematic. This bid is still in the early stages; rest assured there will be finalised, solid details soon. The RP bonus will take the longest to discuss (for obvious reasons), but we'll work out a way. If all else fails; what's been done often works - if an agreement can't be reached, good old quantity will have to do. Hopefully, however, we can make quality count too.

It's not a horrible idea, although it does give off the slight impression of looking to offload some of the responsibility of being a host - but I really don't see how it makes the process of judging the RP more fair at the time being...

The idea was to let how the cup is run be more interactive. Granted, there may be better ways of doing it. As I've said, this is all still very tentative.

Additionally, One RP lasts TWO Matchdays?

I'm not too fond of this idea. So lets say, the top RPer in the cup RPs 3 times in 2 days.

By the end of the cup - they still only have credit for 3 RPs in their score. That's retarded. We should be encouraging RP, not making even it easier for Non-RPers to win matches over the top RPers in the cup

That was poorly phrased. The idea here is similar to what Schia and Qutar are doing - every matchday's RPs count for two matchdays. The offending phrase has been edited.

<LE> Vil: just to answer your question here: That was poorly phrased. The idea here is similar to what Schia and Qutar are doing - every matchday's RPs count for two matchdays.
<Vilita> LE: What Scia and Qutar are doing isn't very good, and making RPs count for even fewer matchdays than schica and qutar are doing it, is just a step in the wrong direction
<Qutar> <Vilita> LE: What Scia and Qutar are doing isn't very good <---- Explain yourself!
<LE> why, pray tell?


Why? Lets assume you go through with this whole "RPs count for 2 Matchdays" thing.

Lets say we've got Az-Cz and Hockey Canada, who has now left NS.

Lets say Az-Cz, as previously suggested, has contributed double the RP of any other competitor through the qualifying. They've made 40+ Rps for 12 matchdays; while the inactive Hockey Canada contributes zero. Now lets say, just before the final matchday of qualification, a storm knocks Az's internet out and they can't log on for two days. Meanwhile, HC logs into the forums for the first time in 3 months after sending mini-HC to daycare for the first time, and logs on to realize shes in a playoff vs. Az-Cz to make the World Cup finals and decides to post a shantily written RP in attempt to qualify at the last gasp.

That's about that. How the hell is it a good idea to delete a teams contribution from 2 days prior? Allowing HC to make one post, qualify for the finals and never return, and leave Az-Cz, who was only offline for 2 days, to wonder what could have been - yearning to RP but stuck watching a dead nation in their place in the finals.


Bottom line is, If you're going to do something relative the the recency of an RP, you can't just delete the previous contribution. You can certainly (heres my suggestion section) Increase the importance of the more recent RPs, but all that this new-found idea of only counting RPs from the previous two or three days does is make it easier and easier for a team who never RPs to qualify.

People are taking the time out to post the RPs, and I think the hosts should take the time out to count them. All of them. If you want to weight the more recent RPs higher than the RPs from earlier in the cup or the pre cup thread, by all means weight them, but don't ignore them completely.

The most feasible idea I can see from this count RPs from the previous x-matchdays idea, without counting all previous RPs, is to count ALL RPs in the first half of qualifying, then in the second half of qualifying begin ignoring RPs posted prior to each matching matchday in the first half, such as:

assume 14 matchdays here
MD1 & MD8 you play the same team
MD2 & MD9.... and on

So from MD1-MD7, all of your RPs count towards the score. For MD8, only your RPs since you last played that team (MD1+) count. RPs from pre-MD1 would be ignored as you've already played that team after those RPs were written. Then on MD9, RPs since MD2 would be ignored, as only the RPs since the last time you played this team would be considered.


The idea of counting RPs from x-amount of matchdays isn't *horrible* but decreasing the amount of days from an already sketchy 3 down to just 2 days is ludacris without additional considerations.

I agree that it might be a problem and too subjective, but that idea is still very tentative. Perhaps we can refine it such that it wouldn't be too problematic. This bid is still in the early stages; rest assured there will be finalised, solid details soon. The RP bonus will take the longest to discuss (for obvious reasons), but we'll work out a way. If all else fails; what's been done often works - if an agreement can't be reached, good old quantity will have to do. Hopefully, however, we can make quality count too.

And the other issue with the proposed system is the different time zones of the selected people - some people might not be able to do their duty in time as they log on in a different time zone to the hosts (yourselves).

If I was doing judging, I really like the weird off-beat RPs for some reason - like ones by Wentland.

Why? Lets assume you go through with this whole "RPs count for 2 Matchdays" thing.

Lets say we've got Az-Cz and Hockey Canada, who has now left NS.

Lets say Az-Cz, as previously suggested, has contributed double the RP of any other competitor through the qualifying. They've made 40+ Rps for 12 matchdays; while the inactive Hockey Canada contributes zero. Now lets say, just before the final matchday of qualification, a storm knocks Az's internet out and they can't log on for two days. Meanwhile, HC logs into the forums for the first time in 3 months after sending mini-HC to daycare for the first time, and logs on to realize shes in a playoff vs. Az-Cz to make the World Cup finals and decides to post a shantily written RP in attempt to qualify at the last gasp.

That's about that. How the hell is it a good idea to delete a teams contribution from 2 days prior? Allowing HC to make one post, qualify for the finals and never return, and leave Az-Cz, who was only offline for 2 days, to wonder what could have been - yearning to RP but stuck watching a dead nation in their place in the finals.

Your missing the point here. The whole point is that one RP counts for two days is going to HELP Az (well actually not in this instance but whatever) because if he is off for a few days or something his RPs from the time before that STILL count. Therefore you should still RP everyday because it will count more but if you can't be on for a couple of days because of something it's not going to shoot your RP bonus to hell.


Bottom line is, If you're going to do something relative the the recency of an RP, you can't just delete the previous contribution.

We never said that we would delete it. We just said that the ones for two would count as the one that they RPed yesterday. But that doesn't mean that the RP that happened 4 days ago just goes away, it just takes a decrease like 99% of all other WCs with a RP bonus.

You can certainly (heres my suggestion section) Increase the importance of the more recent RPs, but all that this new-found idea of only counting RPs from the previous two or three days does is make it easier and easier for a team who never RPs to qualify.

People are taking the time out to post the RPs, and I think the hosts should take the time out to count them. All of them. If you want to weight the more recent RPs higher than the RPs from earlier in the cup or the pre cup thread, by all means weight them, but don't ignore them completely.

Well then you agree with us.

The most feasible idea I can see from this count RPs from the previous x-matchdays idea, without counting all previous RPs, is to count ALL RPs in the first half of qualifying, then in the second half of qualifying begin ignoring RPs posted prior to each matching matchday in the first half, such as:

assume 14 matchdays here
MD1 & MD8 you play the same team
MD2 & MD9.... and on

So from MD1-MD7, all of your RPs count towards the score. For MD8, only your RPs since you last played that team (MD1+) count. RPs from pre-MD1 would be ignored as you've already played that team after those RPs were written. Then on MD9, RPs since MD2 would be ignored, as only the RPs since the last time you played this team would be considered.

Your whole solvency thing isn't feasible as it means that we would need to count every single RP again for every matchday. Or barring that every single RP will almost always count meaning that if you do crap paragraphs every day you'll be getting a bigger RP bonus than a well thought out RP every other day, which is impossible.

The idea of counting RPs from x-amount of matchdays isn't *horrible* but decreasing the amount of days from an already sketchy 3 down to just 2 days is ludacris without additional considerations.

And we are putting the additional considerations in, we're counting RPs from before the additional two days so all will be well. You even agreed with it so stop kvetching and start making your scorinator work better.

We never said that we would delete it. We just said that the ones for two would count as the one that they RPed yesterday. But that doesn't mean that the RP that happened 4 days ago just goes away, it just takes a decrease like 99% of all other WCs with a RP bonus.


Then you should have stated that. And it worries me that Liverpool England already addressed this in a different fashion, although he realized the post he made that brought on the barrage of questions was not representative in wording and has since altered it, so really the issue has been dealt with and the original post is less relavent.. Are you two working together at all on this bid, or are you just going to show up on MD1 and run two seperate cups? Additionally Jeruselem has brought up the issue of time difference, which I think is a very fair point to expand beyond RP counters and on to the hosts who are on opposite sides of the world.



Your whole solvency thing isn't feasible as it means that we would need to count every single RP again for every matchday.


No it doesnt... And it doesn't say much for your ability to troubleshoot any problems that may occur during the course of the cup if you do not see how its possible to easily do something as proposed.

Or barring that every single RP will almost always count

That's kind of the idea... If you RP, you should get credit for it. Not allow people who don't RP at all to get back into the game with one single RP on the final matchday of the cup.