position about “sandbagging”?

Filter all guilds by members joined (+/-2 to allow wiggle room or an odd number of guilds with x amount of players), then filter by total GP joined, then if you want to go a step further, average GP of those joined, then matchmake the guilds.

Stop matching 50 versus less than 40. Shouldn't happen at all.

We don’t purposely sandbag. Instead we mandate if you join the TW, you will place 4 squads and 1 fleet on defense and attack within 6 hours of it opening. If you can commit to the attack, then don’t join. We are tired of the slackers collecting rewards with no pressure beyond placing metas on D. No ticket alts allowed either. Based on our rules we average 43 to 48 joining.

This has been happening as long as TW has been out which is quite a long time now. I can't remember if anyone has explicitly commented but given that I think it is safe to assume they have no intention of doing anything about it.

You could also note sandbagging (or deliberately sitting people out) is rather different to having TW being voluntary.

I agree with a filter on numbers as well, should be enough guilds it doesn't mess most matching up but that really isn't the point, they aren't doing it or they would have a long time ago.

I doubt CG plan to mitigate the sandbagging. 2 years ago they seemed to not even understand what the problem was and asked players to explain it. Nothing happened for 2 years. I doubt they have anything planned.

"Waqui;c-2218997" wrote:
I doubt CG plan to mitigate the sandbagging. 2 years ago they seemed to not even understand what the problem was and asked players to explain it. Nothing happened for 2 years. I doubt they have anything planned.

Sadly, this is true. I'm not sure why this is so difficult to correct. Vendi gave a perfect (and simple) way to filter the matchmaking. Simply having the algorithm try to match up same sized guilds as the first priority would probably fix 90% of these issues. Most of the time, it's when one guild has 49 or 50 join and the other has 46 or less. Our chat always jokes "Uh oh, we're over 46, we're dead" - and that is almost always the case....unless we're matched with 48+ on the other side as well.

CG guys are likely reading my post( or any other related to this problem-even in the past), so they probably don’t care or they want the matchmaker to be broken like this.
Still, hope is the last to die, or a least they say.

We were 171m, 50 joined. They had 38/9, similar joined GP. Total GP: 218m. It meant they had an average of 1m+ more GP per person. You think that one million was all low gear starter teams? Nope.

They're likely just thinking how they can monetise a better system.
Part of the oceans of content coming...

"Waqui;c-2218997" wrote:
I doubt CG plan to mitigate the sandbagging. 2 years ago they seemed to not even understand what the problem was and asked players to explain it. Nothing happened for 2 years. I doubt they have anything planned.

This was exact response. They understand the concern but, knowing exactly how MM works, just don't believe that sandbagging can give an advantage.

"Range1974;c-2219241" wrote:
We don’t purposely sandbag. Instead we mandate if you join the TW, you will place 4 squads and 1 fleet on defense and attack within 6 hours of it opening. If you can commit to the attack, then don’t join. We are tired of the slackers collecting rewards with no pressure beyond placing metas on D. No ticket alts allowed either. Based on our rules we average 43 to 48 joining.

Maybe you and your guild dont purposely sandbag.
There are guilds out there that keep out 7-9 players in rotation every TW(the ones with not as good rosters) so that they can lower their total GP and get an easier match up.
Vendi got it too. And as far as I know is a very common thing to do among guild with 240-280M power.