Q&A: Sandbagging Response

"Mysticus;c-2038624" wrote:
It was much worse before changes done last year.
But solution is easy - most important factor for marchmaking should be Average GP of members.

Horrible idea

"EventineElessedil;c-2030328" wrote:
"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.

"StarSon;c-2038674" wrote:


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.

"thecarterologist958;c-2038782" wrote:

"StarSon;c-2038674" wrote:


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.

"Waqui;c-2038800" wrote:


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.

"Waqui;c-2038800" wrote:

"thecarterologist958;c-2038782" wrote:

"StarSon;c-2038674" wrote:


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.

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

"thecarterologist958;c-2038802" wrote:

"Waqui;c-2038800" wrote:


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.

Not really relevant

"BobcatSkywalker;c-2038809" wrote:

"Waqui;c-2038800" wrote:

"thecarterologist958;c-2038782" wrote:

"StarSon;c-2038674" wrote:


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.

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.

"Waqui;c-2038812" wrote:

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.

"Waqui;c-2038812" wrote:

It could, yes, but does it?

No, because correlation is not causation, same as with your experiences.

"Waqui;c-2038812" wrote:

Not really relevant

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...

"thecarterologist958;c-2037759" wrote:

"nottenst;c-2037384" wrote:


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.