Q&A: Sandbagging Response

Prev1345678
StoemKnight
60 posts Member
edited December 2019
So @CG_Cyanides you don't understand how 40 players with 5.5M GP can overrun a guild of 50 with 4.4M GP in TW?
q3dep818gfve.jpg
Post edited by StoemKnight on

Replies

  • Kyno
    22220 posts Moderator
    Sandbagging is not losing to a stronger opponent. Sandbagging is an intentional act to try and force a favorable match.

    What you are talking about is an issue with matchmaking that should be addressed.

    What he was asking for is information to look at a guild to see if they did this intentionally.

    These are 2 different things.
  • I totally agree with @StarSon.. it may be unintentional sometimes, but it happens all the time intentionally.
  • sorry for my lack of knowledge, but can someone briefly explain how sandbagging works? It seems likes it’s not possible for it to give you an advantage, but I would assume I just don’t know how it works.

    To me it just seems that the matchmaking system just does a not-so-great job at taking into account the varying rosters across the board.
  • sorry for my lack of knowledge, but can someone briefly explain how sandbagging works? It seems likes it’s not possible for it to give you an advantage, but I would assume I just don’t know how it works.

    To me it just seems that the matchmaking system just does a not-so-great job at taking into account the varying rosters across the board.

    Guilds with a true power of 220 million can intentionally leave out gp and get matched with a guild with 195 million GP. In this case, say the bigger guild is running only 38 of their members, resulting in a GP of 198, That means their members are sporting an avg of 5.2 million. The full guild at 195 is only at 3.9 million. That leaves 1.3 million per member to have some very high powered teams.
    Most of the time this happens due to people not wanting to play this greedy game, but there are also instances where this is done to game the system
  • I can't imagine it's that common an occurrence, why would useful and active guild members agree to sit out to increase the likelihood of the rest of the guild winning? It just means they get no rewards, so I doubt people would volunteer to lose two zetas once in order to win one later regularly.
  • sorry for my lack of knowledge, but can someone briefly explain how sandbagging works? It seems likes it’s not possible for it to give you an advantage, but I would assume I just don’t know how it works.

    To me it just seems that the matchmaking system just does a not-so-great job at taking into account the varying rosters across the board.

    A group of 40 players, with 5.5M GP (mostly relic'd) takes on a guild of 50 players, mostly 4.4M (barely relic'd), both are 220M guilds...
    Who do you think wins easily?
  • I can't imagine it's that common an occurrence, why would useful and active guild members agree to sit out to increase the likelihood of the rest of the guild winning? It just means they get no rewards, so I doubt people would volunteer to lose two zetas once in order to win one later regularly.

    It really is not that common, at least the intentional act of sandbagging. My guild recently has struggled to get more than 38-40/49 to join. We are not sandbagging. Most of the time it is happening with the alliance guild I would assume since they tend to have filler and alt profiles to generate tix
  • Over 200M+ guild GP, it is very common.
  • Jack1210
    508 posts Member
    edited December 2019
    AnnerDoon wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Sandbagging is an intentional act to try and force a favorable match.

    Exactly. And CG_Cyanides said he doesn't see how reducing GP could effect matchmaking. So, he either doesn't understand how sandbagging works, or he doesn't understand how matchmaking works (I'll assume it's not the latter), which is the point of the original post.

    At a certain point this feigned ignorance has to stop. They have to know how this works, they just don't want to acknowledge it as a problem since they have so many others to fix. At least that is how they make it seem.
  • sorry for my lack of knowledge, but can someone briefly explain how sandbagging works? It seems likes it’s not possible for it to give you an advantage, but I would assume I just don’t know how it works.

    To me it just seems that the matchmaking system just does a not-so-great job at taking into account the varying rosters across the board.

    A group of 40 players, with 5.5M GP (mostly relic'd) takes on a guild of 50 players, mostly 4.4M (barely relic'd), both are 220M guilds...
    Who do you think wins easily?

    If you are 4.4M and barely relic'd, then that is your problem, I'm 3.3-ish mil and I would qualify myself as barely relic'd.
  • sorry for my lack of knowledge, but can someone briefly explain how sandbagging works? It seems likes it’s not possible for it to give you an advantage, but I would assume I just don’t know how it works.

    To me it just seems that the matchmaking system just does a not-so-great job at taking into account the varying rosters across the board.

    A group of 40 players, with 5.5M GP (mostly relic'd) takes on a guild of 50 players, mostly 4.4M (barely relic'd), both are 220M guilds...
    Who do you think wins easily?

    Except this never happens ... because the number of players registered for the TW is part of the matching process. You don't get group of 40 competing against a group of 50.
    You have any proof of this? It would interest me. People love to claim this but I've never seen any proof.
  • sorry for my lack of knowledge, but can someone briefly explain how sandbagging works? It seems likes it’s not possible for it to give you an advantage, but I would assume I just don’t know how it works.

    To me it just seems that the matchmaking system just does a not-so-great job at taking into account the varying rosters across the board.

    A group of 40 players, with 5.5M GP (mostly relic'd) takes on a guild of 50 players, mostly 4.4M (barely relic'd), both are 220M guilds...
    Who do you think wins easily?

    Except this never happens ... because the number of players registered for the TW is part of the matching process. You don't get group of 40 competing against a group of 50.
    You have any proof of this? It would interest me. People love to claim this but I've never seen any proof.

    Are you able to see how many people are in the other guild's TW roster?
  • Kyno
    22220 posts Moderator
    StarSon wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Sandbagging is not losing to a stronger opponent. Sandbagging is an intentional act to try and force a favorable match.

    What you are talking about is an issue with matchmaking that should be addressed.

    What he was asking for is information to look at a guild to see if they did this intentionally.

    These are 2 different things.

    Disagree here. His response clearly indicates he doesn't think intentionally sandbagging is possible. We know that it is. And we know that it's not always intentional.

    I understand that his response does say that, but to the OPs point there is a difference between having an opponent who doesnt have a guild full of players who want to play TW, and guilds that try to force a situation. They are not one in the same, as many seem to think, regardless of relics,zetas or GP, and other factors.
  • sorry for my lack of knowledge, but can someone briefly explain how sandbagging works? It seems likes it’s not possible for it to give you an advantage, but I would assume I just don’t know how it works.

    To me it just seems that the matchmaking system just does a not-so-great job at taking into account the varying rosters across the board.

    A group of 40 players, with 5.5M GP (mostly relic'd) takes on a guild of 50 players, mostly 4.4M (barely relic'd), both are 220M guilds...
    Who do you think wins easily?

    If you are 4.4M and barely relic'd, then that is your problem, I'm 3.3-ish mil and I would qualify myself as barely relic'd.

    It was just an example of what can happen.
  • Over 200M+ guild GP, it is very common.

    See above. I am in 200+ million guild as well and respectfully disagree.
    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*
  • sorry for my lack of knowledge, but can someone briefly explain how sandbagging works? It seems likes it’s not possible for it to give you an advantage, but I would assume I just don’t know how it works.

    To me it just seems that the matchmaking system just does a not-so-great job at taking into account the varying rosters across the board.

    A group of 40 players, with 5.5M GP (mostly relic'd) takes on a guild of 50 players, mostly 4.4M (barely relic'd), both are 220M guilds...
    Who do you think wins easily?

    Except this never happens ... because the number of players registered for the TW is part of the matching process. You don't get group of 40 competing against a group of 50.
    You have any proof of this? It would interest me. People love to claim this but I've never seen any proof.

    If you register with 50 people and the other guild has 40 million more gp in total
    What do you think happens if you get matched with the same active gp? Of course they are less than 50 then
    This is by far the easiest point to check
  • sorry for my lack of knowledge, but can someone briefly explain how sandbagging works? It seems likes it’s not possible for it to give you an advantage, but I would assume I just don’t know how it works.

    To me it just seems that the matchmaking system just does a not-so-great job at taking into account the varying rosters across the board.

    A group of 40 players, with 5.5M GP (mostly relic'd) takes on a guild of 50 players, mostly 4.4M (barely relic'd), both are 220M guilds...
    Who do you think wins easily?

    Except this never happens ... because the number of players registered for the TW is part of the matching process. You don't get group of 40 competing against a group of 50.

    That's simply not true.
  • Waqui
    6479 posts Member
    I have never seen a TW that matched 40 players against 50. You guys sure you aren't on glue?

    I've seen it in my alt's guild. We were a handful of players short (42-43 active players) and made sign up to TW voluntary, since some players disliked the game mode. Back then we often had only about 36-38 sign-ups for TW and most of our matches were VERY easy victories. I assume, we were often matched with full guilds of less average GP than ours. We have since become a full guild of 50 active members, with almost everyone joining TW. Matches are now far more even.
  • Nikoms565 wrote: »
    StarSon wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Sandbagging is not losing to a stronger opponent. Sandbagging is an intentional act to try and force a favorable match.

    What you are talking about is an issue with matchmaking that should be addressed.

    What he was asking for is information to look at a guild to see if they did this intentionally.

    These are 2 different things.

    Disagree here. His response clearly indicates he doesn't think intentionally sandbagging is possible. We know that it is. And we know that it's not always intentional.

    Just to be clear - by definition, there is no such thing as "unintentional sandbagging". If it's unintentional (i.e. players are busy IRL so choose not to sign up, people forgot to sign up, people have left the guild, etc.) that's not sandbagging.

    I only make that differentiation because I think guilds are shorthanded unintentionally much more often than they are sandbagging. Think about it. If you were in a 200+ million GP guild and you were asked/forced to sit out of TW and not got any rewards, how long would you stay in that guild?

    And if there are some alt accounts or ticket mules in the guild that are there to keep their mouths shut and simply collect Traya shards? They could easily be asked/forced to sit out, could they not?
  • sorry for my lack of knowledge, but can someone briefly explain how sandbagging works? It seems likes it’s not possible for it to give you an advantage, but I would assume I just don’t know how it works.

    To me it just seems that the matchmaking system just does a not-so-great job at taking into account the varying rosters across the board.

    A group of 40 players, with 5.5M GP (mostly relic'd) takes on a guild of 50 players, mostly 4.4M (barely relic'd), both are 220M guilds...
    Who do you think wins easily?
    TVF wrote: »
    sorry for my lack of knowledge, but can someone briefly explain how sandbagging works? It seems likes it’s not possible for it to give you an advantage, but I would assume I just don’t know how it works.

    To me it just seems that the matchmaking system just does a not-so-great job at taking into account the varying rosters across the board.

    A group of 40 players, with 5.5M GP (mostly relic'd) takes on a guild of 50 players, mostly 4.4M (barely relic'd), both are 220M guilds...
    Who do you think wins easily?

    Except this never happens ... because the number of players registered for the TW is part of the matching process. You don't get group of 40 competing against a group of 50.
    You have any proof of this? It would interest me. People love to claim this but I've never seen any proof.

    We had 49 people sign up last TW. They had no more than 42, which we know because there were 21 D slots per territory.

    It happens plenty. Now, that doesn't mean they sandbagged, but the disparity in number of players registered absolutely happens.

    Ah. More to do with slots available that anything.
  • My first question was as the Q&A response.
    How do they NOT know this?
  • AndySCovell
    682 posts Member
    edited December 2019
    Sandbagging is usually where they have average accounts of extras that no longer play that they have then sit out for rewards from easier matchups. Nerfherders Elite Force is a common sandbagging guild. Not bad players but it is a guild that utilizes that to get easier matchups yes.
  • Nikoms565
    12150 posts Member
    edited December 2019
    AnnerDoon wrote: »
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    StarSon wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Sandbagging is not losing to a stronger opponent. Sandbagging is an intentional act to try and force a favorable match.

    What you are talking about is an issue with matchmaking that should be addressed.

    What he was asking for is information to look at a guild to see if they did this intentionally.

    These are 2 different things.

    Disagree here. His response clearly indicates he doesn't think intentionally sandbagging is possible. We know that it is. And we know that it's not always intentional.

    Just to be clear - by definition, there is no such thing as "unintentional sandbagging". If it's unintentional (i.e. players are busy IRL so choose not to sign up, people forgot to sign up, people have left the guild, etc.) that's not sandbagging.

    I only make that differentiation because I think guilds are shorthanded unintentionally much more often than they are sandbagging. Think about it. If you were in a 200+ million GP guild and you were asked/forced to sit out of TW and not got any rewards, how long would you stay in that guild?

    And if there are some alt accounts or ticket mules in the guild that are there to keep their mouths shut and simply collect Traya shards? They could easily be asked/forced to sit out, could they not?

    Most guilds that have players with alts only do so because they can't find enough real players to fill up the guild. Most have their alts go elsewhere if they can find real players at higher levels. I don't consider 1 or 2 weak alts not signing up for TW as "sandbagging". Again, the range between "possible" and "actual" is much bigger than I think people presume.
    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*
  • Waqui
    6479 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    Sandbagging is not losing to a stronger opponent. Sandbagging is an intentional act to try and force a favorable match.

    What you are talking about is an issue with matchmaking that should be addressed.

    What he was asking for is information to look at a guild to see if they did this intentionally.

    These are 2 different things.

    Whether it's done intentionally or not, does not influence matchmaking. If there's a problem with matchmaking, it's a problem disregarding whether the sandbagging is intentional or not.

    No, Cyanides doesn't just wish to investigate whether some guilds sandbag intentionally or not. He clearly states that he doesn't see how sandbagging can be an advantage, and that he wants to investigate what advantage is gained.
  • None of this is proof.
    sorry for my lack of knowledge, but can someone briefly explain how sandbagging works? It seems likes it’s not possible for it to give you an advantage, but I would assume I just don’t know how it works.

    To me it just seems that the matchmaking system just does a not-so-great job at taking into account the varying rosters across the board.

    A group of 40 players, with 5.5M GP (mostly relic'd) takes on a guild of 50 players, mostly 4.4M (barely relic'd), both are 220M guilds...
    Who do you think wins easily?

    Except this never happens ... because the number of players registered for the TW is part of the matching process. You don't get group of 40 competing against a group of 50.
    You have any proof of this? It would interest me. People love to claim this but I've never seen any proof.

    If you register with 50 people and the other guild has 40 million more gp in total
    What do you think happens if you get matched with the same active gp? Of course they are less than 50 then
    This is by far the easiest point to check
    You have ignored the fact that the number of guild members registered for the TW is part of matchmaking. You don't get a 40 vs 50 match. You might get a 48-49 vs 50 match, but not 40 vs 50.

    AnnerDoon wrote: »
    sorry for my lack of knowledge, but can someone briefly explain how sandbagging works? It seems likes it’s not possible for it to give you an advantage, but I would assume I just don’t know how it works.

    To me it just seems that the matchmaking system just does a not-so-great job at taking into account the varying rosters across the board.

    A group of 40 players, with 5.5M GP (mostly relic'd) takes on a guild of 50 players, mostly 4.4M (barely relic'd), both are 220M guilds...
    Who do you think wins easily?

    Except this never happens ... because the number of players registered for the TW is part of the matching process. You don't get group of 40 competing against a group of 50.

    That's simply not true.
    I would love to be proven wrong. Show me the money.

    Waqui wrote: »
    I have never seen a TW that matched 40 players against 50. You guys sure you aren't on glue?

    I've seen it in my alt's guild. We were a handful of players short (42-43 active players) and made sign up to TW voluntary, since some players disliked the game mode. Back then we often had only about 36-38 sign-ups for TW and most of our matches were VERY easy victories. I assume, we were often matched with full guilds of less average GP than ours. We have since become a full guild of 50 active members, with almost everyone joining TW. Matches are now far more even.

    Your guild had 43 players, the opposing guild had 50 players. You had 38 players register for TW, but you don't know how many players were registered in the other guild. There is a big assumption in there.
Sign In or Register to comment.