Is there any indication that CG will eventually address TW sand bagging? We (480m GP) just got annihilated by a 521m GP guild. The problem? When looking at their last 20 battles...they never put up more than 460m GP. Doing this has given them an 18-2 record during that period. Obviously sand-bagging has been a problem for YEARS.....and I'm wondering if CG at least acknowledges its a problem they want to fix. My guess is they don't give a bleep.

What you call sandbagging is what we call TW being optional. Out of our 50 members, usually around 36-38 join because they want to. As a GL, I'd much rather play with people who WANT to participate in a game mode rather than force people to do something they don't like and end up not showing up, costing us the match.

For a guild to sandbag intentionally, its members would have to all sign up to some sort of rotation system where a portion of them don't sign up for each TW. Let's say that portion is 20%. Assuming they then go on to win every time, everyone over a period of time gets 80% of the winner's rewards. On the other hand, if everyone plays, and for some odd reason they just lose every war, so everyone over the same period of time would get 100% of the loser's rewards. Is there enough difference between the two to make sandbagging worth while?

"VicMackey;d-269251" wrote:Is there any indication that CG will eventually address TW sand bagging? We (480m GP) just got annihilated by a 521m GP guild. The problem? When looking at their last 20 battles...they never put up more than 460m GP. Doing this has given them an 18-2 record during that period. Obviously sand-bagging has been a problem for YEARS.....and I'm wondering if CG at least acknowledges its a problem they want to fix. My guess is they don't give a bleep. not everyone in the guild has time or likes TW

"PeachyPeachSWGOH;c-2462790" wrote:For a guild to sandbag intentionally, its members would have to all sign up to some sort of rotation system where a portion of them don't sign up for each TW. Let's say that portion is 20%. Assuming they then go on to win every time, everyone over a period of time gets 80% of the winner's rewards. On the other hand, if everyone plays, and for some odd reason they just lose every war, so everyone over the same period of time would get 100% of the loser's rewards. Is there enough difference between the two to make sandbagging worth while?Yes, since the rewards for a win at 5x higher for droid brains, 3x higher for MK3 reroll mats, 80% of that is still betterIt's also probably not an even rotation, as the officers aren't likely rotating out. There needs to be a wholesale change to tw, including matchmaking in a GAC style skill rating honestly

Intentional sandbagging is bad. There are guilds that don't allow their weaker members to join.There could be an easy quick fix, by just adding additional reward tiers. Currently it goes only to 380m and there are guilds that will soon be at 700m. This would encourage guilds to join with more GP, because they would get better rewards.

TW Sand-Bagging - will it EVER be addressed by CG?

26 Replies

nottenst
Seasoned Ace
2 years ago
Our guild is 395 GP and in the last 10 TWs we have ranged from 305M active GP to 361M active GP (going 6-4). It is discouraging to not get as many participants as we want, but life happens. We are not "sandbagging." The TW algorithm doesn't even match active GP anyway, so I can't see how you can go in planning to "sandbag".
In any case, they definitely need to change matchmaking. I agree that some skill rating would be preferable. The statistics are out there for win-loss record, they could use them.
scuba75
Legend
2 years ago
Spend more boost your GP. Not higher GP guilds fault you don't want to spend. See can go either way.
Yes the match making in tw sucks. Completely agree it would be better going to a skill rating system like GAC.
Sincerely a guild that does optional TW and many times is the higher GP guild.
Pulsipher
Rising Ace
2 years ago
Agreed- when we get matched with a guild that has 40-60 mil GP advantage I attribute it to the algorithm and recent records. Whatever sandbagging concerns people may have now pale in comparison to the lean rosters that would only gear the top characters - and the guilds that didn’t want you if you GP was bloated on ineffective characters.
burby888
Seasoned Traveler
2 years ago
The problem with using a skill rating approach is the same problem as GAC. Guilds will lose on purpose to drop and then go on a big winning streak against even more lopsided matchups. Have all 50 members join for minimal rewards followed by a huge winning reward streak. Rinse and repeat.
ALLSBROS22
Rising Scout
2 years ago
Yes it is! It's a major problem! Your probably in a guild that sandbags with that statement.
Sandbaging significantly reduces the chances of having a chance to win. The fight should be relatively fair based on win to loss ration. My guild fights sandbaging guilds about 80% of the time. We win 1 fight then immediately go back to being sandbaged. This makes it to where our guild won't spend any money on TWs because it's not worth it and CG losses out on it. I'm sure my guild isn't the only guild that feels this way.
DarthJobbie
Seasoned Veteran
2 years ago
Im not sure i understand what the problem here is. Surely GP differences in total guild GP arent relevent, its the numbers of whom makes up the TW GP versus a certain range of opponents TW GP?
Just saying that a guild with a 100m gp plus of yours doesnt mean you are battling that 100m gp.
And no offence, in any case, if you cant figure a way round it then you need to rethink TW.

Forum Discussion

TW Sand-Bagging - will it EVER be addressed by CG?

26 Replies

About SWGOH General Discussion

Community Highlights

Weekly Shipment Request

Kit Reveal: Morgan Elsbeth

Recent Discussions

Mods!!!

Malgus LSB

How conquest could feel like less of a hassle

Misleading Light speed token.

DG-712 and LS-116: Kit Concepts