Limit TW Sandbagging

Why not make TW matchups according to TOTAL guild gp? This would reward guilds who get maximum participation from their members. Instead, these active gp matchups encourage guilds to limit participation so they can fight way below their pay grade.

Replies

  • So if I’m on vacation or at a wedding or attending a family funeral and can’t participate in TW, the rest of my guild suffer?

    Sounds fair!

    The flaw is with the matchmaking, not either guild. A guild who allows members to not take part should not be punished, just the same as a guild who gets everyone to take part shouldn’t be punished.
  • Finch1221 wrote: »
    So if I’m on vacation or at a wedding or attending a family funeral and can’t participate in TW, the rest of my guild suffer?

    Sounds fair!

    The flaw is with the matchmaking, not either guild. A guild who allows members to not take part should not be punished, just the same as a guild who gets everyone to take part shouldn’t be punished.

    The problem is guilds actively encouraging people not to join to get an easier match up, not allowing people not to take part and yea if you cannot join it is fair that your guild should suffer in what way is it not fair? Whats not fair is guilds who get everyone to participate just to be matched against a guild way ahead of where they are.

    Yes you can blame the matchmaking but it would be very hard to match simliar GP as well as similar members joined it would be much easier to work off of total GP and would stop these horrible mismatches.

    Finally don't forget the less people who have joined the less you can put in defense so there is already measures in place for guilds when someone cannot join which at the moment further encourages guilds to make members not participate because then these lesser guilds don't have any advantage through strength or numbers.

    Problem with what you're saying is then guilds can just manipulate their rosters. They can even kick guild members who agree to it and just inv them back after the TW. I get what you';re saying but there's already a 25 player minimum in place for the TW. It's like GA. People suggest "fixes" yet someone will always find a way to manipulate it to their advantage.
  • Finch1221 wrote: »
    So if I’m on vacation or at a wedding or attending a family funeral and can’t participate in TW, the rest of my guild suffer?

    Sounds fair!

    The flaw is with the matchmaking, not either guild. A guild who allows members to not take part should not be punished, just the same as a guild who gets everyone to take part shouldn’t be punished.

    The problem is guilds actively encouraging people not to join to get an easier match up, not allowing people not to take part and yea if you cannot join it is fair that your guild should suffer in what way is it not fair? Whats not fair is guilds who get everyone to participate just to be matched against a guild way ahead of where they are.

    Yes you can blame the matchmaking but it would be very hard to match simliar GP as well as similar members joined it would be much easier to work off of total GP and would stop these horrible mismatches.

    Finally don't forget the less people who have joined the less you can put in defense so there is already measures in place for guilds when someone cannot join which at the moment further encourages guilds to make members not participate because then these lesser guilds don't have any advantage through strength or numbers.
    My guild (212M GP) have made TW optional because a handful of guild members were signing up and not participating, for perfectly good reasons usually.

    We’ve had some easy matchups, sure, but most have been with guilds of a similar size to ours who also don’t go in 50/50.

    You asked in what way is it not fair that the rest of the guild suffer if total GP is calculated? I’m surprised I have to explain this to someone, but if we have 6 members who for family / work / whatever reasons are not able to participate in TW, why on Earth would it be fair for the remaining 44 to have to fill in for those 6? The devs have clearly designed a mode where people can choose whether or not they participate. It is not acceptable to add a punishment when people choose to sit a TW out.

    The solution to this issue lies in the matchmaking. The algorithm should be matching guilds with similar active GP AND number of players signed up. I really don’t think it would be that hard.
  • Another argument that cannot be won because both sides have perfectly valid arguments.
    Maybe they should do something similar to GAC where it looks at the guilds top toons, i dont know but it's also not as easy a fix as you believe it should be.
  • References to team sports are completely meaningless. This isn’t one.

    Yes, a team who enter with fewer players have to fill fewer defence slots, but the opposing guild, if 50/50, will still be able to set all their key defence teams. So the 44 will need to find additional counters to certain teams.

    Maybe you and your 49 guildmates eat sleep and breathe swgoh, but it is not right to have a game mode that penalises guilds where some of the members have a life.
  • Finch1221 wrote: »
    My guild is actually very laid back thank you and your mention of the team slots doesn't change my previous argument at all your own guild puts you at a disadvantage and the lesser teams means you don't have to find more counters because you face less teams.

    Also trying to attack me and my guild shows me exactly what type of person you are goodbye.
    I don’t think you follow what I’m saying.

    If my guild (212M GP) has 44/50 sign up and we face a guild (also 212M GP) where 50/50 sign up, we absolutely do need to find more counters.

    If the 50/50 guild set 50 JKR teams, 50 CLS teams, 50 NS teams and 50 Geo teams, at least 6 of our guild will need to beat more than one of those teams to clear the board. We only have 44 JKR available, for example, though the opponent still have all 50.

    We have to set 220 teams (avg 4 ground, 1 fleet each) but the opponent also sets 220 teams (avg 3.52 ground, 0.88 fleet). Those bonus teams they’re not setting are handy on offence.

    And I’m not attacking you or your guild. I’m trying to highlight the flaw in the logic of matching guilds based on total GP. The argument that guilds who don’t have 50/50 sign up deserve to be punished is just plain wrong.
  • Waqui
    8802 posts Member
    Finch1221 wrote: »
    So if I’m on vacation or at a wedding or attending a family funeral and can’t participate in TW, the rest of my guild suffer?

    Sounds fair!

    The flaw is with the matchmaking, not either guild. A guild who allows members to not take part should not be punished, just the same as a guild who gets everyone to take part shouldn’t be punished.

    The problem is guilds actively encouraging people not to join to get an easier match up, not allowing people not to take part ...

    And other guild simply allow those, that dislike the game mode or are unavailable for the duration of the event, to not join the TW.
    ...and yea if you cannot join it is fair that your guild should suffer in what way is it not fair?

    That wouldn't be fair. In what way is it fair?
    Whats not fair is guilds who get everyone to participate just to be matched against a guild way ahead of where they are.

    Ahead of where they are? How is that even possible?

  • Dinglord
    61 posts Member
    edited August 2019
    No, it’s not “just plain wrong,” and you’re creating a straw man by saying I want to punish any guild without full participation. Total gp is a system that would be less prone to manipulation and would reward participation. Even matchups like you describe would be less skewed than ones like our current TW where a 200 mil gp guild is playing down to our 180 by manipulating the active gp system. And yes, many of the points raised by others above are actually valid. I happen to think your fairness claims are both overstated and flawed, but I’m not going to dismiss them out of hand.
    Obviously there are multiple factors to consider. The problem with your arguments isn’t that they don’t have merit, it’s that you present them with unjustified arrogance. I realize absolutism is the hallmark of the forums, but it’s boring as kitten
    Post edited by Fauztin on
  • Hard to know who you’re addressing @Dinglord , but I suspect it’s me.

    First off, “manipulating” the system is the very absolutism you claim to be bored by. As Waqui said above, many guilds make TW optional. If 44 / 50 sign up and 6 / 50 choose not to, that is not manipulative.

    Secondly, if a 200M guild has 5 members sit out and they get matched with a full 180M guild that sounds pretty similar to a 200M guild with 5 members sitting out facing a full 200M guild. I don’t see how one is much more skewed than the other.

    Finally, I am not saying the current matchmaking system is great. It has major flaws, and the matching on active GP without any reference to average active GP is the biggest one.

    I’m just pointing out the flaws in using total GP instead. It wouldn’t be better than the current system.
  • I believe that if you are in the guild, you should be in the TW. The argument that a guild is punished for people not being able to contribute is ridiculous. The guild can be “punished” in every other facet for absence. The TB doesn’t change for how many active players. It seems that there would be less occurrences of absence affecting the outcome than the current manipulatable setup. Please CG, make it easier on everyone (including yourself) and have the matchmaking purely total guild GP.
  • This total gp solution is a lovely idea but how would you deal with someone just leaving the guild 5 mins before lock-in then rejoining? That’s what I would do if I was busy and it was going to punish my guild mates. It might make a difference at lower levels where people aren’t as organised/bothered but people would get round it if they wished.
    797-722-718
  • Gabe9876543210
    263 posts Member
    edited August 2019
    If this is implemented, you would not be able to leave and rejoin to benefit your guild.

    You would leave, and then they wouldn't let you back in, because obviously you aren't good enough.

    Also, players wouldn't be asked to sit out a TW. Instead they would be cut from the guild.

    How is that a good thing? Everyone in the guild has to be maxed out. No room for any newbies or anyone sub par.
  • jackymoon wrote: »
    I believe that if you are in the guild, you should be in the TW. The argument that a guild is punished for people not being able to contribute is ridiculous. The guild can be “punished” in every other facet for absence. The TB doesn’t change for how many active players. It seems that there would be less occurrences of absence affecting the outcome than the current manipulatable setup. Please CG, make it easier on everyone (including yourself) and have the matchmaking purely total guild GP.
    Respectfully disagree.

    TB, Raids and TW require different levels of commitment.

    With TB, it is possible to login once a day for 10-15 minutes, take care of your business and your guild will be happy with your efforts.

    With a raid, I’m quite certain no guild needs all 50 members to complete. Maybe the very first time you run HSTR, but that has a 48 hour timer.

    TW doesn’t work like that. If you’re facing a well planned defence with zones full of challenging teams that need specific counters, logging in once a day for 10-15 minutes is not good enough. To be of good service to your guild you need to log in regularly to see which zones are open and which of your counters you can use effectively.

    So it is inaccurate to claim that other game modes punish guilds in the same way when people are not readily available.

    And as for claiming “it seems that there would be less occurrences of absences affecting the current manipulatable setup” - from what data did you draw that inference? Thin air?
Sign In or Register to comment.