I can't help but wonder if the GP bug is messing up TW match-ups even more this go. Our guild has 18 of us over 5 million GP. Our opponents have 29 at 5+ million including 6 over 6 million (we have none over 6 million). It's an absolute route. Oh....and they're "shorthanded".
I can't help but wonder if the GP bug is messing up TW match-ups even more this go. Our guild has 18 of us over 5 million GP. Our opponents have 29 at 5+ million including 6 over 6 million (we have none over 6 million). It's an absolute route. Oh....and they're "shorthanded".
Rout.
Thanks.
In game name: Lucas Gregory FORMER PLAYER - - - -"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*
We are in the middle of a sandbagged TW at the moment. We are a 180M GP guild and are fighting against a 217M GP guild. It’s obvious and blatant sandbagging ****! Here are some pics from their .gg profile
I know it’s hard to prove but this one is ridiculously obvious!
How many people have you had join, just out of curiosity? Also I could have made the same claim for our current territory war, another round of us having more players against a higher GP guild with fewer participants, but we are winning, so clearly it having more people join is always advantageous.
Here is an example of such a match up. My guild (230M, with 49 signed up) was paired against this guild (250M, with ~45 signed up). These are the numbers for the full guild, but I'm sure you can see that it's still incredibly uneven. Some of this is due to differences in roster focus, but their average player is 400k GP higher than our average player.
We have no way of knowing if they intentionally sat players out or they are just TW optional, etc. But this really hurts guilds like ours who have very high participation and regularly get matched to guilds 20m+ GP above us.
There are lots of variables to it, so "sandbagging" isn't necessarily either good or bad.
Since there are lots of variables to it, sandbagging could still be good in this case as well. I doubt the (un)intentional sandbagging is the reason for the loss.
Sandbagging happens and CG algorithm promotes it.
Even if guilds aren't doing it, CG INTENTIONALLY is..
For that to be the case, the algorithm would have to be specifically setting full participation guilds against shorthanded ones, what evidence do you have to suggest this isn't just random?
We went up against a guild with a higher GP that cleared our board in 2 hours. Now, if they are organized enough to clear us in 2 hours, I would think they should have been able to get their full roster together and be against a closer opponent.
We went up against a guild with a higher GP that cleared our board in 2 hours. Now, if they are organized enough to clear us in 2 hours, I would think they should have been able to get their full roster together and be against a closer opponent.
We went up against a guild with a higher GP that cleared our board in 2 hours. Now, if they are organized enough to clear us in 2 hours, I would think they should have been able to get their full roster together and be against a closer opponent.
Over Christmas?
Yes, just this week. We couldn't believe that the day after the Christmas they organized themselves to wipe us out in 2 hours.
We went up against a guild with a higher GP that cleared our board in 2 hours. Now, if they are organized enough to clear us in 2 hours, I would think they should have been able to get their full roster together and be against a closer opponent.
Over Christmas?
Yes, just this week. We couldn't believe that the day after the Christmas they organized themselves to wipe us out in 2 hours.
What else would they do? Not attack you because it was xmas yesterday? most people have the day after xmas off and people play this game in their free time. So... makes sense people play the game on the day after xmas.
We went up against a guild with a higher GP that cleared our board in 2 hours. Now, if they are organized enough to clear us in 2 hours, I would think they should have been able to get their full roster together and be against a closer opponent.
Over Christmas?
Yes, just this week. We couldn't believe that the day after the Christmas they organized themselves to wipe us out in 2 hours.
If they organize well at other times, why not now as well? Most of the attack phase happened on the 27th - an almost normal work day, here in most of Europe.
If they organize well at other times, why not now as well? Most of the attack phase happened on the 27th - an almost normal work day, here in most of Europe.
That example shows it's not about the 27th, but your point still stands.
"Shorthanded"
Fits the situation better. No intent.
Then we can focus on the real issue: whether the matching provides an advantage to the shorthanded team.
Shorthanded it is.
Shorthanding a TW will almost always give you an advantage, as has been shown many times in this thread.
Shorthanding a TW will almost always give you an advantage, as has been shown many times in this thread.
Bar all the clearly irrelevant examples I've given each territory war this conversation has been active for. There is no way to guarantee an advantage is given, just as my examples are not proof that having the bigger guild is an advantage, there are other factors.
Shorthanding a TW will almost always give you an advantage, as has been shown many times in this thread.
Bar all the clearly irrelevant examples I've given each territory war this conversation has been active for. There is no way to guarantee an advantage is given, just as my examples are not proof that having the bigger guild is an advantage, there are other factors.
You can still be at an advantage in one factor even if you're at a disadvantage on other factors. You can still have an advantage from sandbagging/shorthanding/whatever even if you lose.
You can still be at an advantage in one factor even if you're at a disadvantage on other factors. You can still have an advantage from sandbagging/shorthanding/whatever even if you lose.
You can, but there is no proof that you do, just speculation based on personal experience, much as my personal experience could make me say more participants is better, but I honestly don't care either way and think there are more important factors. If you want to put in 25 players maximum because it may increase win rates, that's your problem.
Shorthanding a TW will almost always give you an advantage, as has been shown many times in this thread.
Bar all the clearly irrelevant examples I've given each territory war this conversation has been active for. There is no way to guarantee an advantage is given, just as my examples are not proof that having the bigger guild is an advantage, there are other factors.
You can still be at an advantage in one factor even if you're at a disadvantage on other factors. You can still have an advantage from sandbagging/shorthanding/whatever even if you lose.
If the advantage it gives doesn't change the outcome (winning or losing) then it isnt really much of an advantage is it?
A good analogy is that the tread on shoes gives an advantage on the basketball court but it doesn't mean one team or another will win... that usually is based on other factors like what guild is most active and has a strategy
You can still be at an advantage in one factor even if you're at a disadvantage on other factors. You can still have an advantage from sandbagging/shorthanding/whatever even if you lose.
You can, but there is no proof that you do, just speculation based on personal experience,..
There may not be hard evidence / proof, but I still believe it's and advantage. That's my personal experience after having been on both ends of the stick. Feel free to prove me wrong.
... much as my personal experience could make me say more participants is better,...
It could, yes, but does it?
but I honestly don't care either way and think there are more important factors.
I believe it's a quite important factor.
If you want to put in 25 players maximum because it may increase win rates, that's your problem.
Shorthanding a TW will almost always give you an advantage, as has been shown many times in this thread.
Bar all the clearly irrelevant examples I've given each territory war this conversation has been active for. There is no way to guarantee an advantage is given, just as my examples are not proof that having the bigger guild is an advantage, there are other factors.
You can still be at an advantage in one factor even if you're at a disadvantage on other factors. You can still have an advantage from sandbagging/shorthanding/whatever even if you lose.
If the advantage it gives doesn't change the outcome (winning or losing) then it isnt really much of an advantage is it?
A good analogy is that the tread on shoes gives an advantage on the basketball court but it doesn't mean one team or another will win... that usually is based on other factors like what guild is most active and has a strategy
Having a better tread than the opponent team could still be an advantage - even if you lose or are at a disadvantage overall.
A boxer having a significantly longer reach than his opponent still has an advantage in that factor - whether he wins or not.
There may not be hard evidence / proof, but I still believe it's and advantage. That's my personal experience after having been on both ends of the stick. Feel free to prove me wrong.
Believe what you will, my point is you can't prove either way, just as I can't prove you wrong, there is no proof you are right.
Yes, just this week. We couldn't believe that the day after the Christmas they organized themselves to wipe us out in 2 hours.
Day after Christmas nobody is doing anything often, I meant you're expecting them to be calling people out on Christmas day?
If they are organized enough to complete 190 or more battles over 2 hours, then I would expect that they could have had more members participating if they wanted to. That's all.
We have never seen an opposing guild able to clean us out so quickly even when previously outmatched. It just looked suspicious.
Replies
Rout.
Thanks.
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*
Ok then...there is obvious intent here.
People are assuming no intent.
I know it’s hard to prove but this one is ridiculously obvious!
We have no way of knowing if they intentionally sat players out or they are just TW optional, etc. But this really hurts guilds like ours who have very high participation and regularly get matched to guilds 20m+ GP above us.
And this is how it's going so far:
There are lots of variables to it, so "sandbagging" isn't necessarily either good or bad.
Since there are lots of variables to it, sandbagging could still be good in this case as well. I doubt the (un)intentional sandbagging is the reason for the loss.
Even if guilds aren't doing it, CG INTENTIONALLY is..
For that to be the case, the algorithm would have to be specifically setting full participation guilds against shorthanded ones, what evidence do you have to suggest this isn't just random?
Over Christmas?
Yes, just this week. We couldn't believe that the day after the Christmas they organized themselves to wipe us out in 2 hours.
Day after Christmas nobody is doing anything often, I meant you're expecting them to be calling people out on Christmas day?
What else would they do? Not attack you because it was xmas yesterday? most people have the day after xmas off and people play this game in their free time. So... makes sense people play the game on the day after xmas.
If they organize well at other times, why not now as well? Most of the attack phase happened on the 27th - an almost normal work day, here in most of Europe.
That example shows it's not about the 27th, but your point still stands.
But solution is easy - most important factor for marchmaking should be Average GP of members.
Horrible idea
Shorthanded it is.
Shorthanding a TW will almost always give you an advantage, as has been shown many times in this thread.
Bar all the clearly irrelevant examples I've given each territory war this conversation has been active for. There is no way to guarantee an advantage is given, just as my examples are not proof that having the bigger guild is an advantage, there are other factors.
You can still be at an advantage in one factor even if you're at a disadvantage on other factors. You can still have an advantage from sandbagging/shorthanding/whatever even if you lose.
You can, but there is no proof that you do, just speculation based on personal experience, much as my personal experience could make me say more participants is better, but I honestly don't care either way and think there are more important factors. If you want to put in 25 players maximum because it may increase win rates, that's your problem.
If the advantage it gives doesn't change the outcome (winning or losing) then it isnt really much of an advantage is it?
A good analogy is that the tread on shoes gives an advantage on the basketball court but it doesn't mean one team or another will win... that usually is based on other factors like what guild is most active and has a strategy
There may not be hard evidence / proof, but I still believe it's and advantage. That's my personal experience after having been on both ends of the stick. Feel free to prove me wrong.
It could, yes, but does it?
I believe it's a quite important factor.
Not really relevant
Having a better tread than the opponent team could still be an advantage - even if you lose or are at a disadvantage overall.
A boxer having a significantly longer reach than his opponent still has an advantage in that factor - whether he wins or not.
Believe what you will, my point is you can't prove either way, just as I can't prove you wrong, there is no proof you are right.
No, because correlation is not causation, same as with your experiences.
Given 25 is as shorthanded as you could go, so it would presumably yield the best results, I would say it has relevance.
I now realise how awkward this type of post can be to reply to...
If they are organized enough to complete 190 or more battles over 2 hours, then I would expect that they could have had more members participating if they wanted to. That's all.
We have never seen an opposing guild able to clean us out so quickly even when previously outmatched. It just looked suspicious.