Q&A: Sandbagging Response

"EventineElessedil;c-2023785" wrote:

"StoemKnight;c-2023775" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023770" wrote:

"TVF;c-2023767" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023762" wrote:
None of this is proof.

"Balthasar666;c-2023743" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023732" wrote:

"StoemKnight;c-2023719" wrote:

"trevyclause;c-2023712" 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.

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;c-2023744" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023732" wrote:

"StoemKnight;c-2023719" wrote:

"trevyclause;c-2023712" 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;c-2023749" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023714" 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.

@EventineElessedil I noticed you responded to everyone but me.

I didn't see yours. You have proof?

You're are wrong. How do you sign up with 50 players and only able to post 20 squads/fleets?

Me? I don't, because I've never seen it happen. In this scenario you paint here, if you can only place 20 squads on D per territory but you have 50 players registered in your guild, then that would mean the opposing guild only has 40 registered players. I have never seen a situation this extreme.

I have seen 49 vs 42, as stated. Who is right, me or you?

"EventineElessedil;c-2023762" wrote:
None of this is proof.

"Balthasar666;c-2023743" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023732" wrote:

"StoemKnight;c-2023719" wrote:

"trevyclause;c-2023712" 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.

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.

You're wrong about this. Reports here on these forums of guilds with 50 participants having far significantly less than 25 defensive slots in each zone.

"TVF;c-2023792" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023785" wrote:

"StoemKnight;c-2023775" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023770" wrote:

"TVF;c-2023767" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023762" wrote:
None of this is proof.

"Balthasar666;c-2023743" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023732" wrote:

"StoemKnight;c-2023719" wrote:

"trevyclause;c-2023712" 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.

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;c-2023744" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023732" wrote:

"StoemKnight;c-2023719" wrote:

"trevyclause;c-2023712" 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;c-2023749" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023714" 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.

@EventineElessedil I noticed you responded to everyone but me.

I didn't see yours. You have proof?

You're are wrong. How do you sign up with 50 players and only able to post 20 squads/fleets?

Me? I don't, because I've never seen it happen. In this scenario you paint here, if you can only place 20 squads on D per territory but you have 50 players registered in your guild, then that would mean the opposing guild only has 40 registered players. I have never seen a situation this extreme.

I have seen 49 vs 42, as stated. Who is right, me or you?

The better question is "why does it matter?" ;)

"DarjeloSalas;c-2023779" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023770" wrote:

"TVF;c-2023767" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023762" wrote:
None of this is proof.

"Balthasar666;c-2023743" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023732" wrote:

"StoemKnight;c-2023719" wrote:

"trevyclause;c-2023712" 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.

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;c-2023744" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023732" wrote:

"StoemKnight;c-2023719" wrote:

"trevyclause;c-2023712" 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;c-2023749" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023714" 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.

@EventineElessedil I noticed you responded to everyone but me.

I didn't see yours. You have proof?

I can give you proof too. We usually go into TW with 47 or 48 signed up. Sometimes we’re setting 24 teams per zone, but several times we’ve set 23 or even 22 teams per zone.

The number of teams per zone is dictated by the smaller number signed up between the 2 guilds. These can be different.

Tbh, I’m surprised you weren’t aware of this.

I am aware of how the number of teams per zone is determined. What isn't clear is that the matching algorithm ignores the number of guild members registered for the TW. I find it hard to believe that total registered GP is the sole contributing factor.

If you have 48 signed up on both sides, you get 24 per zone. You know this, I know this, we all do. If you have 48 signed up and only get to place 23, that means the other guild registered either 47 or 46. If you can only place 22, then the other guild registered 45 or 44. At most the difference was your guild had 4 more players registered. That's far less than 10.

Again, not saying it doesn't happen, I've just never seen proof.

Most of the time people come in here claiming this happens but have no real proof, just some big assumptions.

"Kyno;c-2023766" wrote:

"Waqui;c-2023760" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2023687" 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.

As I said in my response, matchmaking should be changed to adjust for bad matches where you have what the OP described. By average GP or other factors.

But not every match that this is seen in is intentional as many seem to think it always is. Some guilds just dont force people to play if they dont want to.

Intentional or unintentional sandbagging aside:

Your interpretation of what Cyanides states he wishes to investigate was wrong.

"StoemKnight;c-2023719" wrote:

"trevyclause;c-2023712" 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?

My money would be on the guild with 50 players

Chances are they will have more meta toons/teams

50% of these negative responses probably ARE the sandbagging guilds. Haha..

"ShaggyB;c-2023778" wrote:
Yep. The idea of having to opt in to play is the cause. Just auto join the entire guild and match make based on that....

Or if you want a heartless approach match make based on gp of the guild at event start regardless of how many join

I'm sure CG can see the problems in both your suggestions.

"AnnerDoon;c-2023721" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2023687" 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.

I think your the one who doesn't understand matchmaking...

Matchmaking is based on the gp of players who have signed up for the war.

So... let's look at 2 scenarios

1. A guild of 250m gp at 5 m each player has 40 sign up. This reduces gp by 50m so they are matched against a guild with about 200m gp. It could be a guild of 25, 30, 40, even 50 players but the total registered gp will be equal at 200m. This is fair but feel free to suggest how to make it more fair if u see a way.

2. A guild of 250m gp at 6m gp each with 10 alta farming 600 a day at 200k gp each makes the alts sit out of the war. They have 40 sign up but still have 248m go registered so they are matched against a guild with about 248m gp. It could be 25, 30, 40 or 50 players but their opponent guild will have 248m gp roughly registered. Again fair, but feel free to suggest how to make it better.

"DarjeloSalas;c-2023801" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023798" wrote:

"DarjeloSalas;c-2023779" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023770" wrote:

"TVF;c-2023767" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023762" wrote:
None of this is proof.

"Balthasar666;c-2023743" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023732" wrote:

"StoemKnight;c-2023719" wrote:

"trevyclause;c-2023712" 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.

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;c-2023744" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023732" wrote:

"StoemKnight;c-2023719" wrote:

"trevyclause;c-2023712" 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;c-2023749" wrote:

"EventineElessedil;c-2023714" 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.

@EventineElessedil I noticed you responded to everyone but me.

I didn't see yours. You have proof?

I can give you proof too. We usually go into TW with 47 or 48 signed up. Sometimes we’re setting 24 teams per zone, but several times we’ve set 23 or even 22 teams per zone.

The number of teams per zone is dictated by the smaller number signed up between the 2 guilds. These can be different.

Tbh, I’m surprised you weren’t aware of this.

I am aware of how the number of teams per zone is determined. What isn't clear is that the matching algorithm ignores the number of guild members registered for the TW. I find it hard to believe that total registered GP is the sole contributing factor.

If you have 48 signed up on both sides, you get 24 per zone. You know this, I know this, we all do. If you have 48 signed up and only get to place 23, that means the other guild registered either 47 or 46. If you can only place 22, then the other guild registered 45 or 44. At most the difference was your guild had 4 more players registered. That's far less than 10.

Again, not saying it doesn't happen, I've just never seen proof.

Most of the time people come in here claiming this happens but have no real proof, just some big assumptions.

Can you not read TVF’s post?

Not usually, no.