Is Sandbagging now the ultimate power in the universe?

It seems so...

Anyway, why not make guilds with high recent win counts fight other guilds with high recent win counts? Then sandbaggers would have to go toe to toe with other sandbaggers. Kind of like a sandbagger Thunderdome.

Replies

  • TVF
    17351 posts Member
    Nope.
    TVF's guild is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • A TW grand arena? Do it!
  • TVF wrote: »
    Nope.

    Name one thing unfair about guilds who win in their GP group having to fight other guilds who win in the same group.
  • Waqui
    6037 posts Member
    TVF wrote: »
    Nope.

    Name one thing unfair about guilds who win in their GP group having to fight other guilds who win in the same group.

    Weaker guilds would have an easier path to ranking higher than stronger guilds, which would render the ranking worthless.
  • TVF wrote: »
    Nope.

    Name one thing unfair about guilds who win in their GP group having to fight other guilds who win in the same group.

    Since there is no global TW rating which gives better rewards for guilds which are higher in the ladder, such matchmaking would be unfair for stronger guilds - they essentially will be punished by receiving stronger opponent (and lesser win change) just for being good.
  • TVF
    17351 posts Member
    TVF wrote: »
    Nope.

    Name one thing unfair about guilds who win in their GP group having to fight other guilds who win in the same group.

    This topic has been beaten to death, resurrected, and beaten to death again, over and over again. So nope.
    TVF's guild is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Kyno
    21947 posts Moderator
    TVF wrote: »
    Nope.

    Name one thing unfair about guilds who win in their GP group having to fight other guilds who win in the same group.

    Any use of "history" in TW, leads to issues, this is especially true when a guild is TW casual and doesnt always have the same people signing up.

    How does it work if a guild has 45 sign up and win, then a different group of 45 sign up, but have a different win record? How would you propose the count is saved? An average of all players involved? (What if they bring in 1 new player who had a great history, or one new player with no history) or Just a guild record? ( what if players leave, is that guild stuck fighting harder opponents?)

    All of those have their own issues that can lead to a guild being punished for having a history, that is not fair.

    Matchmaking should be fair, and probably should get some tweaks, the problem is a history doesnt do that.
  • Kyno wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    Nope.

    Name one thing unfair about guilds who win in their GP group having to fight other guilds who win in the same group.

    Any use of "history" in TW, leads to issues, this is especially true when a guild is TW casual and doesnt always have the same people signing up.

    How does it work if a guild has 45 sign up and win, then a different group of 45 sign up, but have a different win record? How would you propose the count is saved? An average of all players involved? (What if they bring in 1 new player who had a great history, or one new player with no history) or Just a guild record? ( what if players leave, is that guild stuck fighting harder opponents?)

    All of those have their own issues that can lead to a guild being punished for having a history, that is not fair.

    Matchmaking should be fair, and probably should get some tweaks, the problem is a history doesnt do that.

    I think it's even simpler than that. Matching up "winning" guilds takes away some of the advantages that TW focused guilds work hard to obtain. Instead of getting a random sample of casual, PvE, and PvP focused guilds they would slowly start facing more and more PvP/TW focused guilds. What's the point in working to get better if matchmaking is trying to set odds for most matches at 50/50? This type of matchmaking works better in GA where it's a lot easier to shift strategy and tactics based on opponent analysis. We'd need a lot more officer tools to replicate that kind of planning in TW.

  • Kyno wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    Nope.

    Name one thing unfair about guilds who win in their GP group having to fight other guilds who win in the same group.

    Any use of "history" in TW, leads to issues, this is especially true when a guild is TW casual and doesnt always have the same people signing up.

    How does it work if a guild has 45 sign up and win, then a different group of 45 sign up, but have a different win record? How would you propose the count is saved? An average of all players involved? (What if they bring in 1 new player who had a great history, or one new player with no history) or Just a guild record? ( what if players leave, is that guild stuck fighting harder opponents?)

    All of those have their own issues that can lead to a guild being punished for having a history, that is not fair.

    Matchmaking should be fair, and probably should get some tweaks, the problem is a history doesnt do that.

    Sorry, but there is little to no logic in your counter argument.

    First of all, I said "recent" history should factor in. Recent history would capture a generally current status of the guild. This would have the exact opposite effect on a casual guild that you used as a case for a victim of the use of history. A casual guild who doesn't always have the same people showing up will have a very average win/loss record from recent history. They would be moved towards the average history segment of their GP grouping.

    Secondly, the use of 45 members joining a guild in between TW is an extreme edge case, which may not be technically impossible, but is highly unlikely and counterproductive to the players if done on purpose since players have lockout periods on raids and lose reward opportunities from previous guild raids if they leave suddenly to join a TW guild on purpose to game the recent history system.

    Thirdly, you mention individual player history when I am quite clearly talking about guild history. There should be no relationship between individual history and collective guild history.

    Finally, my idea of TW is that every war should have closely matched guilds to create an exciting and engaging experience for all players. Sandbagging is not a skill technique is the game. It is a form of laziness. Why would TW purposefully reward a guild that is only interested in beating on weaker opponents?

  • How exactly do you sandbag a TW?
  • You don't. It is just an excuse some people use to explain why they don't win 100% of the time.
  • Anariodin wrote: »
    How exactly do you sandbag a TW?
    BlackBart wrote: »
    You don't. It is just an excuse some people use to explain why they don't win 100% of the time.

    This. Most guilds that are "accused of sandbagging" are actually usually in one of three situations:
    1) A guild that has had 50, but due to people quitting/moving to more casual guilds, etc.) end up with less than 50 at the start of TW.
    2) A guild that has 50, but a few of them have real life commitments/conflicts during that TW, so rather than be "dead weight" (i.e. defense only), some of those members just don't join the TW as it's better for the guild to have everyone active on offense as well.
    3) A guild that has 50 but some people simply forgot to join (yes, it's happened. Even in high end guilds).

    And what TVF said about this topic being beaten to do death.

    Think about it for a second - if you were in a guild and they asked you (or told you) to sit out for a TW (and not get ANY rewards), so they could all have a chance at one extra zeta, how long would you stay in that guild? How long would that guild stay together? Yeah - that's why sandbagging isn't a real thing.
    In game name: Lucas Gregory - - - -"Whale blah grump poooop." - Ouchie

    In game guild: TNR Uprising
    I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
    *This space left intentionally blank*
  • Kyno wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    Nope.

    Name one thing unfair about guilds who win in their GP group having to fight other guilds who win in the same group.

    Any use of "history" in TW, leads to issues, this is especially true when a guild is TW casual and doesnt always have the same people signing up.

    How does it work if a guild has 45 sign up and win, then a different group of 45 sign up, but have a different win record? How would you propose the count is saved? An average of all players involved? (What if they bring in 1 new player who had a great history, or one new player with no history) or Just a guild record? ( what if players leave, is that guild stuck fighting harder opponents?)

    All of those have their own issues that can lead to a guild being punished for having a history, that is not fair.

    Matchmaking should be fair, and probably should get some tweaks, the problem is a history doesnt do that.

    Sorry, but there is little to no logic in your counter argument.

    .................

    A casual guild who doesn't always have the same people showing up will have a very average win/loss record from recent history. They would be moved towards the average history segment of their GP grouping.
    ...................

    Hello there from low-GP casual guild which doesn't force players to participate in TW (although encourages them in the guild chat by saying "Hey people, please join TW!" :)) . Your own logic is based on false assumptions. Our win/loss is something like 35/1 for now, and that single loss was because joined people become lazy and forgot to fill all def spots available (we still were better in combat). So please don't do any claims about how different type of guilds can perform without having some real info.
  • Hortus wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    Nope.

    Name one thing unfair about guilds who win in their GP group having to fight other guilds who win in the same group.

    Any use of "history" in TW, leads to issues, this is especially true when a guild is TW casual and doesnt always have the same people signing up.

    How does it work if a guild has 45 sign up and win, then a different group of 45 sign up, but have a different win record? How would you propose the count is saved? An average of all players involved? (What if they bring in 1 new player who had a great history, or one new player with no history) or Just a guild record? ( what if players leave, is that guild stuck fighting harder opponents?)

    All of those have their own issues that can lead to a guild being punished for having a history, that is not fair.

    Matchmaking should be fair, and probably should get some tweaks, the problem is a history doesnt do that.

    Sorry, but there is little to no logic in your counter argument.

    .................

    A casual guild who doesn't always have the same people showing up will have a very average win/loss record from recent history. They would be moved towards the average history segment of their GP grouping.
    ...................

    Hello there from low-GP casual guild which doesn't force players to participate in TW (although encourages them in the guild chat by saying "Hey people, please join TW!" :)) . Your own logic is based on false assumptions. Our win/loss is something like 35/1 for now, and that single loss was because joined people become lazy and forgot to fill all def spots available (we still were better in combat). So please don't do any claims about how different type of guilds can perform without having some real info.

    But he's been doing that the entire thread!! :D
    In game name: Lucas Gregory - - - -"Whale blah grump poooop." - Ouchie

    In game guild: TNR Uprising
    I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
    *This space left intentionally blank*
  • Nikoms565 wrote: »
    Hortus wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    Nope.

    Name one thing unfair about guilds who win in their GP group having to fight other guilds who win in the same group.

    Any use of "history" in TW, leads to issues, this is especially true when a guild is TW casual and doesnt always have the same people signing up.

    How does it work if a guild has 45 sign up and win, then a different group of 45 sign up, but have a different win record? How would you propose the count is saved? An average of all players involved? (What if they bring in 1 new player who had a great history, or one new player with no history) or Just a guild record? ( what if players leave, is that guild stuck fighting harder opponents?)

    All of those have their own issues that can lead to a guild being punished for having a history, that is not fair.

    Matchmaking should be fair, and probably should get some tweaks, the problem is a history doesnt do that.

    Sorry, but there is little to no logic in your counter argument.

    .................

    A casual guild who doesn't always have the same people showing up will have a very average win/loss record from recent history. They would be moved towards the average history segment of their GP grouping.
    ...................

    Hello there from low-GP casual guild which doesn't force players to participate in TW (although encourages them in the guild chat by saying "Hey people, please join TW!" :)) . Your own logic is based on false assumptions. Our win/loss is something like 35/1 for now, and that single loss was because joined people become lazy and forgot to fill all def spots available (we still were better in combat). So please don't do any claims about how different type of guilds can perform without having some real info.

    But he's been doing that the entire thread!! :D

    My thread. I'll do what I please. Thank you!
Sign In or Register to comment.