Why do you allow guilds to be matched based solely on the registered players for a Territory War. A select few of the so called bigger guilds are manipulating the system to their own advantage by rotating a few players out of each TW in order to compete at a lower tier than they should be. Thus virtually guaranteeing a win at the lower level, which will give them almost the same rewards as a win at the higher level.My guild is at 124m GP, and we compete at the 120-139m GP tier, our opponents on this last TW had a GP of 151m, so should be in the 140-159m tier. This is happening on a regular basis. Would it not be best when matchmaking to base the match on a guilds total GP so guilds have to compete at their own level, or indeed increase the rewards at the 140-159m tier so that it is not beneficial to drop down a tier, as is the case as guilds step up to the 120m bracket.

tbh, this doesn't seem like a problem to me.This is a case of players shooting themselves in the foot because they are OCD about winning. If I was in a guild that wanted me to not play and not get rewards so most everyone else could get better rewards, I'd be gone from that guild. I prefer playing in a guild where people like all of their members to participate and earn rewards.I feel the same way about those that deliberately sacrifice their defense so they can be assured of a tie. Playing to lose is both not fun and not rewarding.Rewards for losing are not that much less than rewards for winning. This is one of the great things about Territory Wars. It is a lot more about fun and comradery than maxing every corner of the game.

With all due respect... no NHL team would have a problem with being allowed to compete at the AHL level, and smoking their way to the championship.Except, yes they would. Hockey players thrive on challenge, and want to be in the highest league. No self-respecting major league team (hockey or otherwise) would be proud of winning at the semi-pro or minor-league level. This is the issue in my mind. It's about sportsmanship, and about honor, win or lose. The rewards skew this issue. And the fact that an additional Zeta/Omega is guaranteed to the big guilds that do this is obviously too much of a temptation for some. Sportsmanship, fair play, camaraderie between guilds... I don't see any of that here. I see "haves" stomping on "have-nots".Though that may be in CG/EAs plan all along. It is, after all, how this game works.

Sandbagging at it's finest!Let's say guild A at 151m GP has dropped their roster down to 46, to eek into the lower bracket at 139GP (3m GP avg). Meanwhile guild B is participating at 50 with a overall 125m GP (2.5m GP avg).You may say it's all fair since, guild A has less members, but what does that 500k GP difference really mean? It's about 5 fully modded/geared G12 teams in translation. We'll call it 4 to take fleet gains into accountSo lets say each 2.5m GP player is worth 8 good teams to put forward in TW, that puts a 3m GP player at 12 teams. Guild A has 552 available teams for offense (8) and defense (4 per player/territory). Guild B has 400 available teams for offense (5) and defense (3 per player/territory).Not exactly an even fight. Things would be slightly more even if A was forced to fill 25 defense slots instead of 23 per territory, to make up the difference in GP even though they have fewer members. Competing at 23 is basically rewarding them. But the bigger problem is a 14m GP difference is friggen huge! The match-making needs to take in a much smaller GP difference (say 1-2m ideally) to keep things fair.* For the purposes of clarity, I haven't considered fleet, but it doesn't change the story much since fleets are typically bound by the number available in game.

Also, here is a very important fact that I feel needs to be made explicit: a GoH ground squad that has 100k power is not just 25% more powerful than an 80k power team. More often, the 100k power team has been crafted much more meticulously, has been modded much more heavily for speed and other important stats, has insane perks from multiple zetas, and has the TM advantage against every team after the first. That 100k team, on defense, is often worth multiple 80k teams... sometimes more than 5. My point is, a 150M power guild is not 20% more powerful than a 125M guild. The disparity between the two is quite a bit more than that. How much more? Who knows. The math isn't straightforward. How much depends on the mods, squad synergy, zetas, and countless other factors. But straight GP obfuscates just how lopsided these matchups can be.

@TwiggleBerry gets it - and if sandbagging on defense bothers you as much or more than broken matchmaking (either inadvertent or intentional), your sense of fairness is off kilter. Should the lower guild have to lay down and take their beating as appropriate so big brother can get their extra zeta? I think not. Sometimes a tie is a win and moral victories are important.

Territory Wars Matchmaking Manipulation

51 Replies

Dretzle
8 years ago
tbh, this doesn't seem like a problem to me.

This is a case of players shooting themselves in the foot because they are OCD about winning. If I was in a guild that wanted me to not play and not get rewards so most everyone else could get better rewards, I'd be gone from that guild. I prefer playing in a guild where people like all of their members to participate and earn rewards.

I feel the same way about those that deliberately sacrifice their defense so they can be assured of a tie. Playing to lose is both not fun and not rewarding.

Rewards for losing are not that much less than rewards for winning. This is one of the great things about Territory Wars. It is a lot more about fun and comradery than maxing every corner of the game.
ludmeister77
8 years ago
To my mind, this is like an NHL team dropping two players from their 23-man roster, and then being allowed to compete at the AHL level. Nothing about that is strange... nothing to see here. Move along.

Really?
JoeSolo10
8 years ago
"Dretzle;c-1418497" wrote:
tbh, this doesn't seem like a problem to me.

This is a case of players shooting themselves in the foot because they are OCD about winning. If I was in a guild that wanted me to not play and not get rewards so most everyone else could get better rewards, I'd be gone from that guild. I prefer playing in a guild where people like all of their members to participate and earn rewards.

I feel the same way about those that deliberately sacrifice their defense so they can be assured of a tie. Playing to lose is both not fun and not rewarding.

Rewards for losing are not that much less than rewards for winning. This is one of the great things about Territory Wars. It is a lot more about fun and comradery than maxing every corner of the game.

I’m with you Dretzle
emvedebe
8 years ago
"Dretzle;c-1418497" wrote:
tbh, this doesn't seem like a problem to me.

This is a case of players shooting themselves in the foot because they are OCD about winning. If I was in a guild that wanted me to not play and not get rewards so most everyone else could get better rewards, I'd be gone from that guild. I prefer playing in a guild where people like all of their members to participate and earn rewards.

I feel the same way about those that deliberately sacrifice their defense so they can be assured of a tie. Playing to lose is both not fun and not rewarding.

Rewards for losing are not that much less than rewards for winning. This is one of the great things about Territory Wars. It is a lot more about fun and comradery than maxing every corner of the game.

Well, it's annoying for the guilds facing those guilds nontheless, whether they shoot themselfs in the foot or not.
Other than that i agree with you.
ludmeister77
8 years ago
With all due respect... no NHL team would have a problem with being allowed to compete at the AHL level, and smoking their way to the championship.

Except, yes they would. Hockey players thrive on challenge, and want to be in the highest league. No self-respecting major league team (hockey or otherwise) would be proud of winning at the semi-pro or minor-league level. This is the issue in my mind. It's about sportsmanship, and about honor, win or lose.

The rewards skew this issue. And the fact that an additional Zeta/Omega is guaranteed to the big guilds that do this is obviously too much of a temptation for some. Sportsmanship, fair play, camaraderie between guilds... I don't see any of that here. I see "haves" stomping on "have-nots".

Though that may be in CG/EAs plan all along. It is, after all, how this game works.
NyKynoe
8 years ago
Moved to correct sub forum.
WLMorris
8 years ago
I'm just not sure the game designers intended for the matchmaking system to work this way. There should be no way a top 10 guild should be matched with a guild in the high 90s. If they cant compete with the guilds at their own level then they need to find a way to improve, not simply rotate players out in order to go down a level
NinJeezus
8 years ago
Sandbagging at it's finest!
Let's say guild A at 151m GP has dropped their roster down to 46, to eek into the lower bracket at 139GP (3m GP avg). Meanwhile guild B is participating at 50 with a overall 125m GP (2.5m GP avg).
You may say it's all fair since, guild A has less members, but what does that 500k GP difference really mean? It's about 5 fully modded/geared G12 teams in translation. We'll call it 4 to take fleet gains into account
So lets say each 2.5m GP player is worth 8 good teams to put forward in TW, that puts a 3m GP player at 12 teams.

Guild A has 552 available teams for offense (8) and defense (4 per player/territory).
Guild B has 400 available teams for offense (5) and defense (3 per player/territory).

Not exactly an even fight.
Things would be slightly more even if A was forced to fill 25 defense slots instead of 23 per territory, to make up the difference in GP even though they have fewer members. Competing at 23 is basically rewarding them. But the bigger problem is a 14m GP difference is friggen huge! The match-making needs to take in a much smaller GP difference (say 1-2m ideally) to keep things fair.
* For the purposes of clarity, I haven't considered fleet, but it doesn't change the story much since fleets are typically bound by the number available in game.
ludmeister77
8 years ago
Also, here is a very important fact that I feel needs to be made explicit: a GoH ground squad that has 100k power is not just 25% more powerful than an 80k power team. More often, the 100k power team has been crafted much more meticulously, has been modded much more heavily for speed and other important stats, has insane perks from multiple zetas, and has the TM advantage against every team after the first. That 100k team, on defense, is often worth multiple 80k teams... sometimes more than 5.

My point is, a 150M power guild is not 20% more powerful than a 125M guild. The disparity between the two is quite a bit more than that. How much more? Who knows. The math isn't straightforward. How much depends on the mods, squad synergy, zetas, and countless other factors. But straight GP obfuscates just how lopsided these matchups can be.
Neo_GGamer
8 years ago
@TwiggleBerry gets it - and if sandbagging on defense bothers you as much or more than broken matchmaking (either inadvertent or intentional), your sense of fairness is off kilter. Should the lower guild have to lay down and take their beating as appropriate so big brother can get their extra zeta? I think not. Sometimes a tie is a win and moral victories are important.