Countering a theoretical argument with your single, personal, unverified experience? Sure, keep it coming.
Also, i never said it was a guaranteed win, on the contrary, i was arguing that the advantage can diminish under certain circumstances.
But thank you for the comment, nevertheless.
To prove something is not always true, you only need one instance of it not being the case. Besides, my response was more directed as a result of your claim that people, perhaps including me, were
playing stupid and pretend(ing) they dont get the topic?
as well as being to others who may read this thread. Sorry, I did misunderstand your paragraph of the GA analogy, but your main argument was you felt it was still a significant difference. Potentially, though not definitely, as a result of your single, personal, unverified experience, if you see what I mean. I also didn't say it doesn't present an advantage, my stance is still there isn't really a way to prove that it has an effect, so people who think it does are basing it off feeling. Regardless I appreciate the effort and actual thought put in over most of the comments on the matter.
I already read about that guild. However, @DarkstarSunrise insinuates that higher GP guilds in general do it. Hence my question.
ok fair point, in general I think most guilds aim for full participation. Those that don't like the guild I mentioned are probably few and exceptions.
In our guild ~250m gp we at least try and have everyone participate we'll msg members if they didn't join close to player lock. However if a member will be busy and can't actively participate we do ask them not to join.
Countering a theoretical argument with your single, personal, unverified experience? Sure, keep it coming.
Also, i never said it was a guaranteed win, on the contrary, i was arguing that the advantage can diminish under certain circumstances.
But thank you for the comment, nevertheless.
In your theoretical situation, you can still be setting a good enough wall if someone in the guild has a focused roster. And at 2.4 million on average there should be at least 1-2 squads with G12 and relics to possibly form a wall.
But again, raw GP can be misleading. There's someone at the top of D4 in kyber with ZERO zetas and one G12. I could beat his 3 mil roster with my 1.1 mil alt account, so TW rewards focused roster. Not sandbagging guilds.
I already read about that guild. However, @DarkstarSunrise insinuates that higher GP guilds in general do it. Hence my question.
ok fair point, in general I think most guilds aim for full participation.
I doubt you have any stats that prove this assertion and I would fully disagree. Granted, I don't have any statistics either but I would wager that the vast majority of guilds in swgoh are casual and likely don't care if people join TW or not. This game has 1000's of guilds and certainly the only ones you can point to and say are truly competitive are the ones who exist in the top 20. Even in the top 200-300 where my guild lies, we frequently (1 out of 4 or 5 TW) run into other guilds that don't even bother playing.
I already read about that guild. However, @DarkstarSunrise insinuates that higher GP guilds in general do it. Hence my question.
ok fair point, in general I think most guilds aim for full participation.
I doubt you have any stats that prove this assertion and I would fully disagree. Granted, I don't have any statistics either but I would wager that the vast majority of guilds in swgoh are casual and likely don't care if people join TW or not. This game has 1000's of guilds and certainly the only ones you can point to and say are truly competitive are the ones who exist in the top 20. Even in the top 200-300 where my guild lies, we frequently (1 out of 4 or 5 TW) run into other guilds that don't even bother playing.
I think all he is saying is that guilds are not intentionally sitting people out. There's just no justifiable reason someone purposely forgoes rewards AND content in a game that many think lacks content. Even the alt accounts, why would someone sit out one of their accounts so the other has an arguably higher chance to get an extra zeta?
hmm ok I guess my view is to much from a competitive stance and I probably should have stated most competitive guilds that take tw serious will aim for full participation.
Your assessment on casual guilds is probably right.
In your theoretical situation, you can still be setting a good enough wall if someone in the guild has a focused roster. And at 2.4 million on average there should be at least 1-2 squads with G12 and relics to possibly form a wall.
But again, raw GP can be misleading. There's someone at the top of D4 in kyber with ZERO zetas and one G12. I could beat his 3 mil roster with my 1.1 mil alt account, so TW rewards focused roster. Not sandbagging guilds.
I am getting baffled at this. You guys are totally not countering the points i try to raise. (Btw good luck with that focused defense of yours)
So firstly, there is the squad AND the fleet meta, which is currently being dominated by characters that are directly linked to guild-performance.
Before you try to derail the topic by stating that a smaller guild can achieve better results on a TB/TW let me assure you that i am aware of it. Still, i state that the bigger the guild is, the more currency they have in general.
This guild-linked meta is new. Well, not brand new, but not even Revan was guild-related more than any other meta before. Malak changed this, and the Malo/Nego changed the fleet meta as well.
The vast majority of the player pool is still not saturated with these teams (Malak, GAS, Malo, Nego), in fact i dont think anyone was able to max star both capital ships just yet. They are definitely not Zeb, whom you can max within weeks, and probably 99% of lvl 85 players have it max starred.
Thus, you cannot really put a defense that defies these teams, or you have to completely cripple your own attack which would result in defeat just as well. Try to setup a focused defense against a 5* Malo + 5 Nego fleet when you have 5* nego only.
Oh and I havent talked about the chances when it comes to a (drevan) mirror match. Who do you think will be the faster one? You really think it will be you, because you are the only one who figured out how to mod a TW/GAC team? With the higher average GP they have been playing the Great Mod Lottery [EDIT:for a longer time], so as a matter of fact I would be betting against you.
Please stop telling me how you can beat a person as opponent whom you would most likely reject as a guildmate within a second. I can beat up children in the kindergarden and it doesnt make me a pro kick-boxer. I am trying to avoid to use any offensive terms, but certainly, ppl who are organizing sandbagging are not braindead so i totally find your arguments off spot.
Sandbagging is an attempt to manipulate the average GP of your opponent (to reduce it, to be more precise). By reducing the other team's average GP, you gain an advantage when it comes to the quantity of the rosters. Nobody talked about quality of squads, you might even be at disadvantage when it comes to that. But the quantity will grant you the upper hand and it is REALLY hard to compensate it for the other team.
If you fail to see that sandbagging (especially sandbagging with a focused roster....) is a viable tactic, then i cannot help you any more than this.
Its not that people are failing to grasp the theory of how "sandbagging" could help in TW, its that there is no concrete proof it actually affects outcomes (we have been provided anecdotal evidence on both sides) and it is impossible to prove "sandbagging". This manipulation of average GP requires intent to truly be "sandbagging", however a great many guilds are TW optional, or are not full, thus devising a system that would "punish" sandbagging guilds and not TW optional or not full guilds would be an excessive amount of work for zero gain.
I am amazed there are still people nowadays complaining about TW matching algorithm.
Honestly, who gives **** about winning or losing a TW? The reward difference is insignificant. Winning only brings you pride. That's it. All big boys care about now are TB and upcoming GL event
Its not that people are failing to grasp the theory of how "sandbagging" could help in TW, its that there is no concrete proof it actually affects outcomes (we have been provided anecdotal evidence on both sides) and it is impossible to prove "sandbagging". This manipulation of average GP requires intent to truly be "sandbagging", however a great many guilds are TW optional, or are not full, thus devising a system that would "punish" sandbagging guilds and not TW optional or not full guilds would be an excessive amount of work for zero gain.
Yeah i got your point. Many ppl who claim their opponents are sandbagging are simply wrong. Personally, i am not sure if we ever encountered any, maybe one time, but still, we cannot prove it as you pointed out.
But upon reading the topic i got the feeling that people are indeed failing the whole concept at all, that's why i wrote the comment in the first place. Sandbagging sounds like a solid strategy with some setback when it comes to raiding tickets so I totally think that it most likely exist at some scale.
Remember the guild's name and check up on them during a TB. If they are still only 25-30, they are not sandbaggers. If during the TW they were 50 and only joined like 25-30 of them, it might be a half-dead guild, or they are pulling d*ck moves on the lesser members by denying the join from them.
But if they are 30 during the TW and 50 during a TB, then i would say that the claim is proven beyond reasonable doubt.
IF they make it AVG GP of the signed up players , what stops guild signing up 50 members 45 being 4-5mill + and the last 5 below 1 mill to drop the AVG
5 mill * 45 + (4.5mill for alt accounts ) ÷ 50
= 4.5 mill GP AVG
Actual playing GP per player would still be 5mill.
If players are willing to sit out and get no rewards as some are claiming then I wouldn't be surprised if this happened too.
In your theoretical situation, you can still be setting a good enough wall if someone in the guild has a focused roster. And at 2.4 million on average there should be at least 1-2 squads with G12 and relics to possibly form a wall.
But again, raw GP can be misleading. There's someone at the top of D4 in kyber with ZERO zetas and one G12. I could beat his 3 mil roster with my 1.1 mil alt account, so TW rewards focused roster. Not sandbagging guilds.
I am getting baffled at this. You guys are totally not countering the points i try to raise. (Btw good luck with that focused defense of yours)
So firstly, there is the squad AND the fleet meta, which is currently being dominated by characters that are directly linked to guild-performance.
Before you try to derail the topic by stating that a smaller guild can achieve better results on a TB/TW let me assure you that i am aware of it. Still, i state that the bigger the guild is, the more currency they have in general.
This guild-linked meta is new. Well, not brand new, but not even Revan was guild-related more than any other meta before. Malak changed this, and the Malo/Nego changed the fleet meta as well.
The vast majority of the player pool is still not saturated with these teams (Malak, GAS, Malo, Nego), in fact i dont think anyone was able to max star both capital ships just yet. They are definitely not Zeb, whom you can max within weeks, and probably 99% of lvl 85 players have it max starred.
Thus, you cannot really put a defense that defies these teams, or you have to completely cripple your own attack which would result in defeat just as well. Try to setup a focused defense against a 5* Malo + 5 Nego fleet when you have 5* nego only.
Oh and I havent talked about the chances when it comes to a (drevan) mirror match. Who do you think will be the faster one? You really think it will be you, because you are the only one who figured out how to mod a TW/GAC team? With the higher average GP they have been playing the Great Mod Lottery [EDIT:for a longer time], so as a matter of fact I would be betting against you.
Please stop telling me how you can beat a person as opponent whom you would most likely reject as a guildmate within a second. I can beat up children in the kindergarden and it doesnt make me a pro kick-boxer. I am trying to avoid to use any offensive terms, but certainly, ppl who are organizing sandbagging are not braindead so i totally find your arguments off spot.
Sandbagging is an attempt to manipulate the average GP of your opponent (to reduce it, to be more precise). By reducing the other team's average GP, you gain an advantage when it comes to the quantity of the rosters. Nobody talked about quality of squads, you might even be at disadvantage when it comes to that. But the quantity will grant you the upper hand and it is REALLY hard to compensate it for the other team.
If you fail to see that sandbagging (especially sandbagging with a focused roster....) is a viable tactic, then i cannot help you any more than this.
Sigh.. I'm not braggin about beating up a kindergardener....I'm providing actual factual data to prove why higher gp does not always equal a win in this. And if the guy is active at 3 mil, he can absolutely join my guild, but thanks for speaking for me. I'm fully aware of the concept, my point is the guild with the smarter walls and traps and etc will win more often than not. Sometimes you get outmatched and can't do much, like GAC. Sometimes it is because the guild didn't get everyone to join (note, rarely on purpose, if at all-- still no evidence on that front) and sometimes it is two full guilds and there is one super-powered team you can't get by. This game rewards efficiency with it's matchmaking. What do you want it to favor instead?
Remember the guild's name and check up on them during a TB. If they are still only 25-30, they are not sandbaggers. If during the TW they were 50 and only joined like 25-30 of them, it might be a half-dead guild, or they are pulling d*ck moves on the lesser members by denying the join from them.
But if they are 30 during the TW and 50 during a TB, then i would say that the claim is proven beyond reasonable doubt.
The join period last 24 hours, some people are busy outside of this game... TB provides 6 days to contribute without a lock-in phase. Pretty common to see 32-38/50 join our TWs and have 40-45 at least provide something in TB
Remember the guild's name and check up on them during a TB. If they are still only 25-30, they are not sandbaggers. If during the TW they were 50 and only joined like 25-30 of them, it might be a half-dead guild, or they are pulling d*ck moves on the lesser members by denying the join from them.
But if they are 30 during the TW and 50 during a TB, then i would say that the claim is proven beyond reasonable doubt.
No, it would not prove it at all. It would be evidence that they have better participation in TB than TW. not everyone likes every game mode. Is it fishy? Sure. Proof? Not really.
IF they make it AVG GP of the signed up players , what stops guild signing up 50 members 45 being 4-5mill + and the last 5 below 1 mill to drop the AVG
5 mill * 45 + (4.5mill for alt accounts ) ÷ 50
= 4.5 mill GP AVG
Actual playing GP per player would still be 5mill.
If players are willing to sit out and get no rewards as some are claiming then I wouldn't be surprised if this happened too.
BC the avg reduction is very small, and you still (might) end up with a table of 25. It grants some minor advantage but they can achieve much bigger advantage if executed properly
No, it would not prove it at all. It would be evidence that they have better participation in TB than TW. not everyone likes every game mode. Is it fishy? Sure. Proof? Not really.
You are confusing the member's numbers with the participant's numbers. I was talking about the members, not the participants. In fact, in your citation i exactly said that if the participant number is fluctuating they are probably NOT sandbaggers. If the members are fluctuating it is a different issue. Anyway i am done with this topic, this is getting frustrating.
The main reason sandbagging is a myth is as follows:
1. Person A cares enough about the game to actually want rewards.
2. Person A is told to sit out so of TB so that his guild has a hypothetical opportunity to collect marginally better rewards (but of course... not him).
3. Person A tells guild "stick it where sun don't shine".
4. Person A joins new guild.
No, it would not prove it at all. It would be evidence that they have better participation in TB than TW. not everyone likes every game mode. Is it fishy? Sure. Proof? Not really.
You are confusing the member's numbers with the participant's numbers. I was talking about the members, not the participants. In fact, in your citation i exactly said that if the participant number is fluctuating they are probably NOT sandbaggers. If the members are fluctuating it is a different issue. Anyway i am done with this topic, this is getting frustrating.
It is frustrating because it is a fallacy that was started when a guild was losing too much. Yes there's weight to the mathematical idea of it, but there really isn't any reason people are ok forgoing rewards for a payback phase that takes 7-8 weeks (someone did the math and if you win and rotate who sits out, over 7 or so TWs then forcing people to sit pays off) and likely creates tension/frustration within the guild.
IF they make it AVG GP of the signed up players , what stops guild signing up 50 members 45 being 4-5mill + and the last 5 below 1 mill to drop the AVG
5 mill * 45 + (4.5mill for alt accounts ) ÷ 50
= 4.5 mill GP AVG
Actual playing GP per player would still be 5mill.
If players are willing to sit out and get no rewards as some are claiming then I wouldn't be surprised if this happened too.
BC the avg reduction is very small, and you still (might) end up with a table of 25. It grants some minor advantage but they can achieve much bigger advantage if executed properly
So having 5 members sit out and having 5 members under 1 million GP makes the AVG 4.5 Vs 4.59 .
My point being you are still able to drop AVG GP to 4.5 while the actual GP of those doing things is still 5 mill , no matter if the GP is calculated as a whole guild or those who only signed up people will still find a way of sandbagging .
I personally think that people have life's outside the game hense why my guild or any I've been in for the last 4 years never seem to get full participation or maybe they have been messaging guildmates to drop out and no one told me .
Remember the guild's name and check up on them during a TB. If they are still only 25-30, they are not sandbaggers. If during the TW they were 50 and only joined like 25-30 of them, it might be a half-dead guild, or they are pulling d*ck moves on the lesser members by denying the join from them.
But if they are 30 during the TW and 50 during a TB, then i would say that the claim is proven beyond reasonable doubt.
The two modes are totally different. Two big reasons come to mind and there are others (like mods, lock in, etc.) that also exist.
-A TB phase lasts 36 hours, and a players contribution can occur essentially anytime within that period. Someone busy with real life can still find a few minutes at their leisure to take part in TB.
TW needs players active throughout the event to help when needed. It has less flexibility.
-A player who knows that they can’t help much during tw May choose to sit out rather than hurt their guilds chances (as they are boosting guild GP but contributing nothing). Extra GP during TB has no down side, even if the member does nothing at all.
I wont hold my breath waiting for a screen shot of your Phoenix defenses dont worry lol.
Our defense is legit, and if you played the game you would know there is no way to review TW once the review period is over. I'm not gonna post our defense strats in public, but we're not new to this. Our D is comprised of shaak, GS, GG, revan, D revan, NS, CLS, etc. There's a link in my sig, you can see my guild there. Where's yours?
This isn't a thread about TW stategy, it's about the terrible matchmaking this game continues to propagate on its players. Not all the time, mind you, but when it happens it's so blatant that there's nothing you can do against it. Our loss here was not a loss of strategy, it was a battle that could not be won and had nothing to do with focusing south and middle first. The team comps on their defense dictated what teams are viable on offense where, we did what we could.
I'm not insinuating anything here other than the matchmaking algorithm needs to account for number of players on each side, as well as GP.
I already read about that guild. However, @DarkstarSunrise insinuates that higher GP guilds in general do it. Hence my question.
ok fair point, in general I think most guilds aim for full participation. Those that don't like the guild I mentioned are probably few and exceptions.
In our guild ~250m gp we at least try and have everyone participate we'll msg members if they didn't join close to player lock. However if a member will be busy and can't actively participate we do ask them not to join.
We do the same and always have (near) full participation.
The main reason sandbagging is a myth is as follows:
1. Person A cares enough about the game to actually want rewards.
2. Person A is told to sit out so of TB so that his guild has a hypothetical opportunity to collect marginally better rewards (but of course... not him).
3. Person A tells guild "stick it where sun don't shine".
4. Person A joins new guild.
The only way sandbagging exists is as follows:
1. Player A makes an alt char to be carried by the guild and provides 600raid tickets.
2. The Alt char is sometimes made to sit out of TW if it helps the guild with a better match-up,
3. Player 1 knows he is riding the coat tails of his guild and doesn’t matter to him for a TW here and there. Player 1 would rather build up GK/Traya shards before he enters arena.
4. Player 1 buys the HyperDrive bundle and swaps his alt for his main and dominates.
When you say #4 you lose all credibility for everything else you said. Lol buying hyperdrive wont make you dominate anything with lvl 85 g8 slow characters.
But even so #1 and #2 and #3 all drag the guild down in TB... so unless all other 49 people are in on a plot to build up this alt account at their own expense this scenario isnt realistic.
The main reason sandbagging is a myth is as follows:
1. Person A cares enough about the game to actually want rewards.
2. Person A is told to sit out so of TB so that his guild has a hypothetical opportunity to collect marginally better rewards (but of course... not him).
3. Person A tells guild "stick it where sun don't shine".
4. Person A joins new guild.
The only way sandbagging exists is as follows:
1. Player A makes an alt char to be carried by the guild and provides 600raid tickets.
2. The Alt char is sometimes made to sit out of TW if it helps the guild with a better match-up,
3. Player 1 knows he is riding the coat tails of his guild and doesn’t matter to him for a TW here and there. Player 1 would rather build up GK/Traya shards before he enters arena.
4. Player 1 buys the HyperDrive bundle and swaps his alt for his main and dominates.
I think sitting out ticket mules is not considered as sandbagging — they are temporary accounts while guilds try their best at recruiting legitimate players and they don’t help with TW at all
I think going in 49/50 is a big disadvantage since opponent has 1 of each meta team more than you
1) people suggesting that any and all guilds, regardless of their total GP, are deliberately dropping players for TW are manifestly wrong.
2) people suggesting that going into TW matchmaking with <50 are guaranteed an easier match are manifestly wrong, as there is no guarantee they won’t get drawn against another guild with <50.
It’s a facile argument based on two points that are wrong.
1) people suggesting that any and all guilds, regardless of their total GP, are deliberately dropping players for TW are manifestly wrong.
2) people suggesting that going into TW matchmaking with <50 are guaranteed an easier match are manifestly wrong, as there is no guarantee they won’t get drawn against another guild with <50.
It’s a facile argument based on two points that are wrong.
Also people are saying that the hyperdrive bundle causes them to dominate which is entirely incorrect since it provides no mods at all and your stuck with a lot of useless gp with all those g8 characters...
This is like the thread of all the conspiracies in one.
Replies
To prove something is not always true, you only need one instance of it not being the case. Besides, my response was more directed as a result of your claim that people, perhaps including me, were
as well as being to others who may read this thread. Sorry, I did misunderstand your paragraph of the GA analogy, but your main argument was you felt it was still a significant difference. Potentially, though not definitely, as a result of your single, personal, unverified experience, if you see what I mean. I also didn't say it doesn't present an advantage, my stance is still there isn't really a way to prove that it has an effect, so people who think it does are basing it off feeling. Regardless I appreciate the effort and actual thought put in over most of the comments on the matter.
ok fair point, in general I think most guilds aim for full participation. Those that don't like the guild I mentioned are probably few and exceptions.
In our guild ~250m gp we at least try and have everyone participate we'll msg members if they didn't join close to player lock. However if a member will be busy and can't actively participate we do ask them not to join.
In your theoretical situation, you can still be setting a good enough wall if someone in the guild has a focused roster. And at 2.4 million on average there should be at least 1-2 squads with G12 and relics to possibly form a wall.
But again, raw GP can be misleading. There's someone at the top of D4 in kyber with ZERO zetas and one G12. I could beat his 3 mil roster with my 1.1 mil alt account, so TW rewards focused roster. Not sandbagging guilds.
I doubt you have any stats that prove this assertion and I would fully disagree. Granted, I don't have any statistics either but I would wager that the vast majority of guilds in swgoh are casual and likely don't care if people join TW or not. This game has 1000's of guilds and certainly the only ones you can point to and say are truly competitive are the ones who exist in the top 20. Even in the top 200-300 where my guild lies, we frequently (1 out of 4 or 5 TW) run into other guilds that don't even bother playing.
I think all he is saying is that guilds are not intentionally sitting people out. There's just no justifiable reason someone purposely forgoes rewards AND content in a game that many think lacks content. Even the alt accounts, why would someone sit out one of their accounts so the other has an arguably higher chance to get an extra zeta?
Your assessment on casual guilds is probably right.
I am getting baffled at this. You guys are totally not countering the points i try to raise. (Btw good luck with that focused defense of yours)
So firstly, there is the squad AND the fleet meta, which is currently being dominated by characters that are directly linked to guild-performance.
Before you try to derail the topic by stating that a smaller guild can achieve better results on a TB/TW let me assure you that i am aware of it. Still, i state that the bigger the guild is, the more currency they have in general.
This guild-linked meta is new. Well, not brand new, but not even Revan was guild-related more than any other meta before. Malak changed this, and the Malo/Nego changed the fleet meta as well.
The vast majority of the player pool is still not saturated with these teams (Malak, GAS, Malo, Nego), in fact i dont think anyone was able to max star both capital ships just yet. They are definitely not Zeb, whom you can max within weeks, and probably 99% of lvl 85 players have it max starred.
Thus, you cannot really put a defense that defies these teams, or you have to completely cripple your own attack which would result in defeat just as well. Try to setup a focused defense against a 5* Malo + 5 Nego fleet when you have 5* nego only.
Oh and I havent talked about the chances when it comes to a (drevan) mirror match. Who do you think will be the faster one? You really think it will be you, because you are the only one who figured out how to mod a TW/GAC team? With the higher average GP they have been playing the Great Mod Lottery [EDIT:for a longer time], so as a matter of fact I would be betting against you.
Please stop telling me how you can beat a person as opponent whom you would most likely reject as a guildmate within a second. I can beat up children in the kindergarden and it doesnt make me a pro kick-boxer. I am trying to avoid to use any offensive terms, but certainly, ppl who are organizing sandbagging are not braindead so i totally find your arguments off spot.
Sandbagging is an attempt to manipulate the average GP of your opponent (to reduce it, to be more precise). By reducing the other team's average GP, you gain an advantage when it comes to the quantity of the rosters. Nobody talked about quality of squads, you might even be at disadvantage when it comes to that. But the quantity will grant you the upper hand and it is REALLY hard to compensate it for the other team.
If you fail to see that sandbagging (especially sandbagging with a focused roster....) is a viable tactic, then i cannot help you any more than this.
Honestly, who gives **** about winning or losing a TW? The reward difference is insignificant. Winning only brings you pride. That's it. All big boys care about now are TB and upcoming GL event
Yeah i got your point. Many ppl who claim their opponents are sandbagging are simply wrong. Personally, i am not sure if we ever encountered any, maybe one time, but still, we cannot prove it as you pointed out.
But upon reading the topic i got the feeling that people are indeed failing the whole concept at all, that's why i wrote the comment in the first place. Sandbagging sounds like a solid strategy with some setback when it comes to raiding tickets so I totally think that it most likely exist at some scale.
Remember the guild's name and check up on them during a TB. If they are still only 25-30, they are not sandbaggers. If during the TW they were 50 and only joined like 25-30 of them, it might be a half-dead guild, or they are pulling d*ck moves on the lesser members by denying the join from them.
But if they are 30 during the TW and 50 during a TB, then i would say that the claim is proven beyond reasonable doubt.
5 mill * 45 + (4.5mill for alt accounts ) ÷ 50
= 4.5 mill GP AVG
Actual playing GP per player would still be 5mill.
If players are willing to sit out and get no rewards as some are claiming then I wouldn't be surprised if this happened too.
Sigh.. I'm not braggin about beating up a kindergardener....I'm providing actual factual data to prove why higher gp does not always equal a win in this. And if the guy is active at 3 mil, he can absolutely join my guild, but thanks for speaking for me. I'm fully aware of the concept, my point is the guild with the smarter walls and traps and etc will win more often than not. Sometimes you get outmatched and can't do much, like GAC. Sometimes it is because the guild didn't get everyone to join (note, rarely on purpose, if at all-- still no evidence on that front) and sometimes it is two full guilds and there is one super-powered team you can't get by. This game rewards efficiency with it's matchmaking. What do you want it to favor instead?
The join period last 24 hours, some people are busy outside of this game... TB provides 6 days to contribute without a lock-in phase. Pretty common to see 32-38/50 join our TWs and have 40-45 at least provide something in TB
No, it would not prove it at all. It would be evidence that they have better participation in TB than TW. not everyone likes every game mode. Is it fishy? Sure. Proof? Not really.
BC the avg reduction is very small, and you still (might) end up with a table of 25. It grants some minor advantage but they can achieve much bigger advantage if executed properly
You are confusing the member's numbers with the participant's numbers. I was talking about the members, not the participants. In fact, in your citation i exactly said that if the participant number is fluctuating they are probably NOT sandbaggers. If the members are fluctuating it is a different issue. Anyway i am done with this topic, this is getting frustrating.
1. Person A cares enough about the game to actually want rewards.
2. Person A is told to sit out so of TB so that his guild has a hypothetical opportunity to collect marginally better rewards (but of course... not him).
3. Person A tells guild "stick it where sun don't shine".
4. Person A joins new guild.
It is frustrating because it is a fallacy that was started when a guild was losing too much. Yes there's weight to the mathematical idea of it, but there really isn't any reason people are ok forgoing rewards for a payback phase that takes 7-8 weeks (someone did the math and if you win and rotate who sits out, over 7 or so TWs then forcing people to sit pays off) and likely creates tension/frustration within the guild.
So having 5 members sit out and having 5 members under 1 million GP makes the AVG 4.5 Vs 4.59 .
My point being you are still able to drop AVG GP to 4.5 while the actual GP of those doing things is still 5 mill , no matter if the GP is calculated as a whole guild or those who only signed up people will still find a way of sandbagging .
I personally think that people have life's outside the game hense why my guild or any I've been in for the last 4 years never seem to get full participation or maybe they have been messaging guildmates to drop out and no one told me .
The two modes are totally different. Two big reasons come to mind and there are others (like mods, lock in, etc.) that also exist.
-A TB phase lasts 36 hours, and a players contribution can occur essentially anytime within that period. Someone busy with real life can still find a few minutes at their leisure to take part in TB.
TW needs players active throughout the event to help when needed. It has less flexibility.
-A player who knows that they can’t help much during tw May choose to sit out rather than hurt their guilds chances (as they are boosting guild GP but contributing nothing). Extra GP during TB has no down side, even if the member does nothing at all.
Our defense is legit, and if you played the game you would know there is no way to review TW once the review period is over. I'm not gonna post our defense strats in public, but we're not new to this. Our D is comprised of shaak, GS, GG, revan, D revan, NS, CLS, etc. There's a link in my sig, you can see my guild there. Where's yours?
This isn't a thread about TW stategy, it's about the terrible matchmaking this game continues to propagate on its players. Not all the time, mind you, but when it happens it's so blatant that there's nothing you can do against it. Our loss here was not a loss of strategy, it was a battle that could not be won and had nothing to do with focusing south and middle first. The team comps on their defense dictated what teams are viable on offense where, we did what we could.
I'm not insinuating anything here other than the matchmaking algorithm needs to account for number of players on each side, as well as GP.
We do the same and always have (near) full participation.
When you say #4 you lose all credibility for everything else you said. Lol buying hyperdrive wont make you dominate anything with lvl 85 g8 slow characters.
But even so #1 and #2 and #3 all drag the guild down in TB... so unless all other 49 people are in on a plot to build up this alt account at their own expense this scenario isnt realistic.
I think going in 49/50 is a big disadvantage since opponent has 1 of each meta team more than you
1) people suggesting that any and all guilds, regardless of their total GP, are deliberately dropping players for TW are manifestly wrong.
2) people suggesting that going into TW matchmaking with <50 are guaranteed an easier match are manifestly wrong, as there is no guarantee they won’t get drawn against another guild with <50.
It’s a facile argument based on two points that are wrong.
Also people are saying that the hyperdrive bundle causes them to dominate which is entirely incorrect since it provides no mods at all and your stuck with a lot of useless gp with all those g8 characters...
This is like the thread of all the conspiracies in one.