“The Road to Better World War Matchmaking” aka Sandbagging!

S_How

Approved user
Joined
Oct 22, 2015
Messages
688
Nb4powerup DomiNationsVigiles

Its so bad. Here is our current match. Im sure they are skilled players, but its ridiculous that this kind of match ever occurs. They have 5 out of rank bases(max atomic glitch), and a 3 person (just 12% sandbag). Their average level all in is 178, compared to our 175, actually seems fair by BHG's horribly flawed matching algorithm (I think anything within 10-15 is pretty fair). But, drop those 3 sandbags at the bottom, and their average level is 202. Yes, only 3 iron age bases drops their level by 24 lol. They go from max atomic level 235 in their 22nd spot, to iron age level 10 at their 23rd spot. Its an average difference of almost 30 levels in the normal bases. Anyone near atomic can tell you that a 30 level gap is absolutely massive, and when its the average gap of players, its absolutely insurmountable. There is no glory penalty for this terrible mismatch, they can actually win 700+ glory from us, something we've fought several wars to accumulate. But, I dont really care about glory or ranking, this is just about the least fun experience you can deliver to players, and its happening all the time with the current system.

We've played at an average of 200 and gotten matches in the past when we brought in others from friendly alliances, so it cant be matchmaking times causing problems. There is just zero incentive for them to go in full weight, when they could easily just get a match that is so imbalanced and not have to worry about troop tactics, strongholds, etc. This kind of level gap makes any tiny bit of strategy meaningless. Funny thing is, their sandbags are trash talking the top spending korean teams, Im guessing because they are frustrated with stronghold ptw changes (I am too, dont blame them there). But, while that makes them mad, there is clearly no problem in manipulating matches so you put other teams at a near 30 level average difference. Haha the irony.

But, BHG is ultimately the one at fault. They are the ones that have implemented a system that by far rewards this behavior more than any other. It doesnt reward battling peers, it encourages making sure you have manipulated your match better than your opponent. It is so much more rewarding for a team to sit talented players, and instead take iron ages created yesterday.

zstUZ8j.png
 
Last edited:

Equal

Approved user
Joined
Mar 10, 2016
Messages
152
and we are planing in the future, if nothing changes, do a draft in our two alliances, start two new ones, which would be run by two irons each and war between each other from time to time. better to crash, or face sandbags if h2h is not succesful, when actual glory does not matter. ;-) war ends, everybody goes to their alliances. one week later comes new draft and repeat again.:)) we not gonna play by nexon glory rules.
 

LordJestix

Approved user
Joined
May 12, 2017
Messages
805
Nb4powerup DomiNationsVigiles

...

There is just zero incentive for them to go in full weight, when they could easily just get a match that is so imbalanced and not have to worry about troop tactics, strongholds, etc.

...

No one should have to worry about tactics, etc because p2w shouldnt be in world wars.

Wars should be strictly about skill and strategy.

I know sandbagging is a horrible problem, but once fixed its going to exacerbate the p2w problem because thats mainly going to be the only way to win wars once everyone is put on an equal alliance to alliance level.

There is no way this game last 10 years on its current path with bugs, exploits, poor customer service, and no communication with the player base. The CEO is delusional.
 

Quovatis

Approved user
Joined
Aug 29, 2015
Messages
1,454
Do I really have to embarrass you and post a pic of your own sandbags in the same war? You have iron age sandbags. Come on.
 
Last edited:

DynoBot

Approved user
Joined
Jul 17, 2016
Messages
52
You also have 6 sandbags. You guys are a real piece of work. Every comment you guys make is ridiculous. You can't make sense out of nonsense.
 
Last edited:

DUSTY1

Approved user
Joined
Oct 18, 2016
Messages
124
So are you saying the long time teams should no longer take in new players? Or leave them off the list? Or that the ranking algorithm should be adjusted.
 

DUSTY1

Approved user
Joined
Oct 18, 2016
Messages
124
No Title

I'm posting a photo which shows that with the very latest updates there are still 2 problems. 1) you will see our opponents are sandbagging and the mismatch put 13 of our players at significant disadvantage and 2) the ordering rank is still not correct as you can see our laterals are whack-a-doodle out of order.
Due to the turning off of the world war replays, we are unable to show that our opponents have defenses far and away in excess of their capacity, their level superiority notwithstanding. The world war replay understandably gives away tactics used, but on the other hand exposes cheating.
 

Attachments

  • photo10165.jpg
    photo10165.jpg
    112.8 KB · Views: 37

JNation

Approved user
Joined
Oct 22, 2016
Messages
146
I know this won't fix sandbagging but it would keep people from putting inactive players in war. Why can't Nexon when they roll out a new update make it so that you can't include anyone that hasnt updated their game. This happens with donated troops, if you updated your game but another person who is asking from troops hasn't then you are unable to donate troops to them until they update too. Why cant the same thing apply to war participants too? If that player hasn't updated the game they cant be allowed to war. I know it wont entirely fix the issue but it would stop those from including inactive players.
 

Master Contrail Program

Approved user
Joined
Oct 1, 2016
Messages
350
Because those bases are already updated when the parent account is I'd assume? Sure, not all of them may be on the same devices though I'd bet most are. All one has to do is start the game on a new device, link it to IOS/Google/Facebook and voila.

I assume if one is going to take the time to make a sandbag account they're likely to set it up to where it can have troops in the tc and stronghold.

I have three accounts on my phone I didn't have to update them three separate times.
 
Last edited:

DUSTY1

Approved user
Joined
Oct 18, 2016
Messages
124
No Title

My matchup today indicates a fairly poor matchup. The top 5 players on my squad are outmatched on average by 2 ages and 54 levels. I don't show the bottom 5 of this 20 player match up as that is just the stack factor.
 

Attachments

  • photo10168.jpg
    photo10168.jpg
    79.7 KB · Views: 44

DUSTY1

Approved user
Joined
Oct 18, 2016
Messages
124
3 methods to kill sandbagging

1. Develop an algorithm that dismisses the bottom players from the matching algorithm where there is a disproportionate variance from the otherwise alliance average without them and swap in the average level for their weight.

2. The simplest formula would simply average the levels of the top 50%, as they get 2 attacks each and could theoretically play the entire lineup.

3. Develop a handicap system like #2 but be more modest - use the top 3/4 of players only: use the top 8 of a 10 player team, top 11 of a 15 player team, top 15 of 20, top 18 of 25 and so on.

Any of these would utterly devastate the sandbagging strategy.
 
Last edited:

DUSTY1

Approved user
Joined
Oct 18, 2016
Messages
124
Another solution would be to develop leagues that teams could opt in for war.
Scratch - where sandbagging is fully permitted (as a strategy). 0 handicap / straight average used
Handicap 1 - where top 75% of players used for average
Handicap 2 - where top 2/3 of players used
Handicap 3 - where top 50% are used
Top 3 match - everyone plays but matches are based on the top 3 players only.

Each war you pick your style of play.
 

Xenno

Approved user
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
19
I still standthat the best way to destroy the sandbagging strategy is quite simple.. make war single attack. Then they won't bring in the guys who are not going to attack. War will zbe won and fault on skill and strategy. Also who ha the most active players will win. It will eliment stalemate as going back to get try and get that 5* will be less likely. 100% victory will be something to celebrate about because
1. Everybody participated
2. Everybody got 5* using their own skills and abilities.
 
Last edited:

DUSTY1

Approved user
Joined
Oct 18, 2016
Messages
124
No Title

DomiNations here is the top 5 for my latest war matchup. Do you think it's better now?
 

Attachments

  • photo10192.jpg
    photo10192.jpg
    38.3 KB · Views: 44

Master Contrail Program

Approved user
Joined
Oct 1, 2016
Messages
350
Double defense would be better. Do you really want to spend 47 hours on one attack? Presumably get half the war loot (which already sucks) too?
 

Xenno

Approved user
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
19
I think I would probably cut prep time down AND increase loot. But yes, I double defence would not discourage sandbanging. Where as if you go in a 30 on 30 war and your top 15 are awsome and bottom 15 are trash that has no entention of attacking. You will lose every time. Right now the top 15 use both attacks and take out everybody and of bottom 15 finds a target they may attack it for loot.
 

DUSTY1

Approved user
Joined
Oct 18, 2016
Messages
124
No Title

22 July 2017 war matchup. Average level for TOP 5, 136.8 vs 181.2.
 

Attachments

  • photo10199.jpg
    photo10199.jpg
    77.9 KB · Views: 43

DUSTY1

Approved user
Joined
Oct 18, 2016
Messages
124
Yep, and I hope DN has a team continuously looking at this problem. Hence I will keep posting my matchups to they can assess the accuracy of their hard work.
 
Top