Can we discuss TW and sitting players for better matchups?

"SWEVV1;c-1620553" wrote:

"Vinny_Vader_Vedi;c-1620542" wrote:

I want to know how the people sitting out are selected or actually go along with it. Is it a penalty or just picking straws? Is there incentive for them? Do they get first in raids? Idk just seems to be a bad choice for a guild to do.

The people selected go along with it the same way they would to post a zero damage in some type of raid. Everyone misses the same number of TW's with the rotation public and posted to Discord or some other site. I know of guilds that make it work in a number of different ways. If 3 people sit (dependent on GP) then you are only sitting out 1 time every 16 TW's.

"EventineElessedil;c-1620572" wrote:
There is no proof anywhere that entering TW at any level below full participation provides an advantage.

OP's argument is based on the poor assumption that dropping GP into a lower prize tier changes the available opponent pool. Devs have already stated that matching is not based on a guilds prize tier. Cross-tier matches are allowed.

"Kyno;c-1620573" wrote:

"SWEVV1;d-178648" wrote:
As most people know the general strategy in guilds above 120 million is to have a rotational number of players sit out Territory Wars in order to push total GP below 140 million (120 - 140 million bracket is lowest to get 3 zetas for winning). This is because there are no rewards increases after the 3 zetas received for winning these battles. The result is that the 139 million GP guild is almost always 45+ trayas and rosters with no weak spots. For the guilds trying to climb and just getting over 120 million its a nice 'Welcome!' when every matchup is against these types of guilds. End result is you get completely wrecked each time which isn't much fun. The winning guilds members wind up net positive over the long run because winning 100% of 3 zeta TW's is better than 50% 3 zeta/2 zeta results when everyone plays 'fair' and uses their whole roster.

Is there a way to base matchups with the additional consideration of matching the number of active participants in each guild? Feel like it would take a lot of advantage away from the top dogs just having their way with the up and comers.

That would defeat the whole purpose of a sign up period. It's nice to let people take breaks from an event if they are busy and cant participate. It's nice to finally get a game mode that doesnt make you or your guild suffer if you cant be on your phone.

"SWEVV1;c-1622158" wrote:

"Kyno;c-1620573" wrote:

"SWEVV1;d-178648" wrote:
As most people know the general strategy in guilds above 120 million is to have a rotational number of players sit out Territory Wars in order to push total GP below 140 million (120 - 140 million bracket is lowest to get 3 zetas for winning). This is because there are no rewards increases after the 3 zetas received for winning these battles. The result is that the 139 million GP guild is almost always 45+ trayas and rosters with no weak spots. For the guilds trying to climb and just getting over 120 million its a nice 'Welcome!' when every matchup is against these types of guilds. End result is you get completely wrecked each time which isn't much fun. The winning guilds members wind up net positive over the long run because winning 100% of 3 zeta TW's is better than 50% 3 zeta/2 zeta results when everyone plays 'fair' and uses their whole roster.

Is there a way to base matchups with the additional consideration of matching the number of active participants in each guild? Feel like it would take a lot of advantage away from the top dogs just having their way with the up and comers.

That would defeat the whole purpose of a sign up period. It's nice to let people take breaks from an event if they are busy and cant participate. It's nice to finally get a game mode that doesnt make you or your guild suffer if you cant be on your phone.

Totally agree that the sign up period allows people to play and sit out accordingly as their schedules permit. What would defeat the purpose of it? I'm not following.