Tw sandbagging and Total defense spots

"DarthEagames;d-147184" wrote:
So we are a 99mil gp guild the team across from us is at 103 mil gp so we shouldn't be playing them...but wait 1or 2 members didn't join and now they are on are lvl. Its not cheating but it still stinks, I'm not really upset with that. What I am upset about is that we get punished because since they are missing players we can only set 24 defensive teams we have all 50 we should not be punished for another team being unable to produce weather it is intentional or not.

☝️

"Charzypants;c-1371757" wrote:
We are 35 million playing a 49 million gp squad.

So relax you are pretty much equal

All you really said here is that you don’t know what sandbagging means.

"DarthEagames;d-147184" wrote:
So we are a 99mil gp guild the team across from us is at 103 mil gp so we shouldn't be playing them...but wait 1or 2 members didn't join and now they are on are lvl. Its not cheating but it still stinks, I'm not really upset with that. What I am upset about is that we get punished because since they are missing players we can only set 24 defensive teams we have all 50 we should not be punished for another team being unable to produce weather it is intentional or not.

So you basically want to win from the start just because you have 50 members joining the TW whilst they only have 48. The game should just send you the winning rewards right after matchmaking then.

"DarthGazza;c-1374374" wrote:
How can you see your opponents GP?

Do a guild search under advanced search. Type their name in.

"TyrBloodhand;c-1371963" wrote:
Yeah your point is that it isn't fair that you don't get more spots because you assume you will tie. By limiting you to 25 spots that means that you have more attackers yes, but it also means you can use some stronger chars on defense and use that to your advantage to help prevent them from clearing. You having more people gives you an advantage any way you look at it. You have a better chance of atippimg them and preventing them from clearing. If you are going to simply assume you're gonna get cleared maybe you need to worry about your strategy. If you faced a guild with 50 people in and got your 25 spots it isn't going to stop them from clearing your board and you ending up tied. You're crying because the advantage you're getting isn't the one you want. If your strategy is good you can win any way you shake it. This is PvP, sorry there is no simple auto win option for you, if you're that upset go play a game with no PvP because you're never gonna get handed a win.

"DarjeloSalas;c-1374920" wrote:

"DarthEagames;c-1371908" wrote:
I agree but combined if you have but if combined 50 is equal to the other teams and then 25 if your guys don't show up how is that the other guilds problem? Need to crack the whip on your guild.

This is the equivalent of the penalty shootout in football, where a team with 11 players against a team with 10 must nominate someone to sit out the penalties so that the team with fewer players don’t get the advantage of their best penalty takers going earlier than the others if it gets that far. Except on this occasion you can send in your best more frequently than if it were 25 slots.

Just prior to the second TW our Guild had someone leave for personal reasons, someone rushed into hospital for an operation and someone who couldn’t register as they were in a remote location with no internet during sign up.

That put us on 47 and we had a max defence slot of 23.

Imagine our opponent still had 25, as you’re suggesting would be fair? What possible motivation would there be for us to bother fighting any battles?

I understand stand that things happen but it is still a system that does in fact punish one side for having all of their team. To use your example I don't know the rules of football as I am a dirty American. If the game was about to start and one team showed up with one less man required to actually take would it be fair to make the other team sit a player? For the sake of argument the other team with more players is going to have more subs to come in. But how much does that happen in football? I don't know much but I don't think it's alot I could be wrong though. If they just set the rule that it was always 25 defensive teams then that's fine but they don't and because of that I have issue because my defensive placement is based on the other teams ablity to bring all their players to the battle. And my team should not be effected by that. That's all I'm trying to say.

"FitzChivalry;c-1374427" wrote:

"DarthEagames;d-147184" wrote:
So we are a 99mil gp guild the team across from us is at 103 mil gp so we shouldn't be playing them...but wait 1or 2 members didn't join and now they are on are lvl. Its not cheating but it still stinks, I'm not really upset with that. What I am upset about is that we get punished because since they are missing players we can only set 24 defensive teams we have all 50 we should not be punished for another team being unable to produce weather it is intentional or not.

So you basically want to win from the start just because you have 50 members joining the TW whilst they only have 48. The game should just send you the winning rewards right after matchmaking then.

Funny you say that we tied and the game gave us 10 less points so the other team won. So there "disadvantage" didn't hurt them at all. Even with all our "extra teams" which boils down to like 6 if that.

"Roughing_the_Snapper;c-1374400" wrote:

"DarthEagames;d-147184" wrote:
So we are a 99mil gp guild the team across from us is at 103 mil gp so we shouldn't be playing them...but wait 1or 2 members didn't join and now they are on are lvl. Its not cheating but it still stinks, I'm not really upset with that. What I am upset about is that we get punished because since they are missing players we can only set 24 defensive teams we have all 50 we should not be punished for another team being unable to produce weather it is intentional or not.

☝️

"Charzypants;c-1371757" wrote:
We are 35 million playing a 49 million gp squad.

So relax you are pretty much equal

All you really said here is that you don’t know what sandbagging means.

To sandbag is to hold back to get an advantage they were at 103 mil dropped down to 99mil had they been at 103 they could have played a team that had a total of 110 so and not saying they did it intentionally they dropped back to be on the high end of the bracket hopping to get a crappy tram team to get the win. Like the person who is mentioned in my thread about fighting a much stronger guild.

"DarthEagames;c-1385631" wrote:

"Roughing_the_Snapper;c-1374400" wrote:

"DarthEagames;d-147184" wrote:
So we are a 99mil gp guild the team across from us is at 103 mil gp so we shouldn't be playing them...but wait 1or 2 members didn't join and now they are on are lvl. Its not cheating but it still stinks, I'm not really upset with that. What I am upset about is that we get punished because since they are missing players we can only set 24 defensive teams we have all 50 we should not be punished for another team being unable to produce weather it is intentional or not.

☝️

"Charzypants;c-1371757" wrote:
We are 35 million playing a 49 million gp squad.

So relax you are pretty much equal

All you really said here is that you don’t know what sandbagging means.

To sandbag is to hold back to get an advantage they were at 103 mil dropped down to 99mil had they been at 103 they could have played a team that had a total of 110 so and not saying they did it intentionally they dropped back to be on the high end of the bracket hopping to get a **** tram team to get the win. Like the person who is mentioned in my thread about fighting a much stronger guild.

Or maybe 2/3 is their guild members never signed up for TW , therefore kept in the lower bracket. How is this wrong?
Some people are busy and also some guilds should be able to make the executive decision to play or bench a player. It’s pretty similar to professional sports getting close to the playoffs. Bench some people to get an advantage

"AnnerDoon;c-1371805" wrote:
Maybe I'm missing something. But, how is it a 'punishment' to get to use less of your weaker defensive squads? Unless you have enough uber-defensive squads to fill every slot...?

First off you could gain an additional 20 per member that they didn't get locked in. And second they will have to use extra squads to clear each area. Both of those would really help in beating these sandbagging guilds

Our guild has all 50 members locked in and yet we can only place 23. So the guild (with 10.5mil more gp)that sandbagged to drop into our bracket only sent 46. We should be able to place 25 in our areas and them only 23. Since this is a much larger guild that chooses to manipulate the system they should be made to pay some consequences. By allowing the full 50 guild those 2 extra defense per area adds up to an additional 400 banners. As well as costing the other guild an additional 20+ squads to clear the 2 extra defensive placements per area. Would probably make these sandbagged a little less likely to do so if they have to start in a hole.

"Shanara68;c-1393075" wrote:
Our guild has all 50 members locked in and yet we can only place 23. So the guild (with 10.5mil more gp)that sandbagged to drop into our bracket only sent 46. We should be able to place 25 in our areas and them only 23. Since this is a much larger guild that chooses to manipulate the system they should be made to pay some consequences. By allowing the full 50 guild those 2 extra defense per area adds up to an additional 400 banners. As well as costing the other guild an additional 20+ squads to clear the 2 extra defensive placements per area. Would probably make these sandbagged a little less likely to do so if they have to start in a hole.

that would be super unfair. What if a guild only has 48 members?