Question about tw

Its 2x the number of positions, with a possible +1.

So 16 would mean 32-33.

So first, be mindful that it's not always intentional, so calling it sandbagging doesnt help further a productive conversation. Yes the numbers not being equal should be addressed, whether it is intentional or not, but it's best not to assume and just move on.

If a guild doesnt have a full set of players on swgoh.gg, then it's more than likely they are not very strict and more casual, so it's possible they just dont require sign up.

How difficult is it to modify the match making to also include number of players joined in addition to total joined GP? It seems this would solve a lot of issues

"Giodude2000;c-2178489" wrote:
How difficult is it to modify the match making to also include number of players joined in addition to total joined GP? It seems this would solve a lot of issues

It is not likely to find another guild who had X (+/-Y) number of players join and have the same active GP.

The system to match would have to be more complex to make any situation work, and its going to need multiple factors.....but also need the ability to sometimes ignore one or more of those factors to then actually make the match.... it doesnt seem that simple at all.

I never said it was simple, I just suggested that it might help address on of the biggest criticisms (i.e. sandbagging) of TW and the TW matchmaking system. How many guilds are there out there? Surely it can't be that unlikely to match on 2 criteria instead of just one??

We almost always have 16 or 17 slots. People in my guild hate TW and since its not a requirement, usually we only get between 30-40 that sign up. It's not sandbagging, its apathy.

"Giodude2000;c-2178550" wrote:
I never said it was simple, I just suggested that it might help address on of the biggest criticisms (i.e. sandbagging) of TW and the TW matchmaking system. How many guilds are there out there? Surely it can't be that unlikely to match on 2 criteria instead of just one??

surely it can be. thats the issue. also once you introduce 2 criteria, you also have to weight them for when you can't match on both.... honestly it gets very complex very quick when you start to look at it.

I wasn't saying it shouldn't be addressed, just that its not as simple as just adding in another criteria.

how many guilds, probably way more than either of us realize. There is a post about a player using GAC data to estimate the number of players, take that and divide by 50 and that gets you somewhere in the ball park of the lowest number.

I get what you are saying but I'm uncomfortable with such a defeatist attitude. No wonder CG has thrown it into the too hard basket.

"Giodude2000;c-2179104" wrote:
I get what you are saying but I'm uncomfortable with such a defeatist attitude. No wonder CG has thrown it into the too hard basket.

at no point am I saying it shouldn't be looked at. I'm just giving some perspective to the "it can't be to hard to do X" camp. it actually is hard, and there are many things to consider, which is why when it does get looked at, it will not be a simple solution.