Sandbagging - Nexon Responses

[Vixen]

I've seen a few responses from Nb4powerup regarding the Sandbagging issue
Thought I'd start putting them together to show where Nexon see this issue at this point.
Don't bag Nb4 - he is a forum moderator and quite friendly and reasonable
There are more responses .. will find them later

 

[Vixen]

and more..........

 

[Tower]

I hate Sandbagging... Completely ruins game experience.
we are now facing Love Korea who got FOUR iron age / classical in a 25vs25 match up. Thats almost 25%.

Checked their alliance page - none of those four have been active the last week...

we will loose this war - ruining our winning streak - and give us a glory plunge that will take a few wars to get back

 

[Tower]

We have now opened up our alliance completely - hoping for some low level recruits and will probably have to start Sandbagging ourselves if this ridicolousness isnt fixed..

We will not sink as low as creating low level alt acc...

 

[Tower]

So our war against Love Korea has started... Mind you - this is a 25x25 war... We have been "hiding" down there to avoid the rampant sandbagging of larger wars... But now we got it on our doorstep.

This is the match up Viking army vs Love Korea
Global: 7 vs 16 (2 of our just turned Global and are basically IA....)
Industrial 9 vs 4
Englightment 6 vs 0
Gunpowder 2 vs 1
Classical 1 vs 3
Iron age 0 vs 1

 

[Wendy]

sh_t 16 global vs 7 is a lot! gotta pray the crash God, or at least hope their number 1's ipad falls into the toilet while scouting.
we had a 25 fair match instead, the first of the last 4/5 wars.
Good job Croatian Knights, finally a good war to fight!

 

[Tower]

Yes this is very annoying and really kills the enjoyment of the war and the game...
With 16 Global (a couple of beasts) they will 5 star all of us... Getting a perfect score. As we have only 7 (5) global there is no way we can 5 star all of them...

So for us this is a 48 hrs of NOTHING...

 

[Radzeer]

Actually I like NEXON's stance on this.
Basically the matchmaking algorithm is completely unknown to us. We know some glimpses about an offensive and defensive point totals, but it seems the algorithm is not a fixed one, and probably it is constantly tweaked. We had horrendous matches in the past, but it is not happening anymore recently. We didn't ever had a stacking alliance opponent, like it is described by many of you.
We are fielding GA to high EA members for war, we have rarely met an alliance with a Gunpowder Age member.
I believe, Nexon should just make sure that the complaints about stackers meeting a flat balanced level alliances will not happen by a simple tweak and the should stay silent, as they did in the past when touching the matchmaking.

So back to You Tower: fielding a Classical Age member for a war together with Global members is a bit, hm, not really honest. Of course I do not know a reason and so, but maybe NEXON allows just one Age tolerance for the lowest level member and while you have Classical Age member that allows you to be matched against an alliance fielding Iron Age members.
As said above. We were never matched against an alliance with lower than Gunpowder Age member when we had the lowest level member in EA... Give it a try in the next war and field GA to EA members.

 

[Wendy]

you should at least try to fight. I've notice that many of them despite being global age players aren't that good, as they probably grow fast to have the global army. We always suggested our allies to take their time and grow constantly in everything.
anyway math is against you, and that's a shame

 

[Eddie F1]

Sit the war out. Nexon only make money if you play - they tend to move like a scalded cat and fix things when revenues are hit.

 

[Tower]

We have close to 10 Classical/Medieval players and we always let 1 or 2 join in war so that they can learn and grow. Who is picked is based on activity of the player.
If Nexon isn't fixing the sandbagging problem we will start putting all 10 into our rooster.

In any war the (especially in a 25vs25 war) the top 10 is what matters. They win the war (or loose it).

Looking at our current war with Love Korea, the avg level of their top 10 is 175, the avg level of our top 10 is 157. That's a big difference (making it even worse, looking at the bases our members have put more xp into economic buildings than the Koreans...)

Looking at bottom 5 (those who matters the least in any war) our players are: 106 - 109 - 53 - 38 - 38. Their bottom 5 is: 38 - 17 - 18 - 19 - 13. Checked their alliance page and none of these have been active the last week or so. Why would you include non active low level players? Hmmm...

Our two at level 38 is super active... One of them even donated close to 1000 classical troops in one season... much to the dismay of those who went into pvp with archers as back up ally troops

 

[Norcaltone]

We decided to war vs Korea Army B in a 25 and came within 10 of beating them...they did not achieve perfect due to some of our top guys strong D 15 max Global bases and 10 Iron- Medieval. Strong defenses at the top make them waste attacks and remember they are dealing with much less attacks than LEGIT war alliances. Next time we will not be afraid to face these guys, it can be done.

 

[GailWho]

Norcaltone Thats awesome! We've found we've become stronger from battling these teams. It's actually a great team building experience beyond our normal routine wars. Each pancake our team members make is celebrated more and even the waffles are appreciated We've also been able to incorporate some of their base designs into our repertoire so if anything the elite forces who are stacking are giving away their trade secrets to the up-and-coming alliances so once the matchmaking problems are solved there will be a greater pool of viable candidates for top teams. Only difference we have been in the trenches fighting it out and have the spark. They however have been slacking with easy targets and their pilot light is flickering. See there is a bright side to all this Keep fighting peeps! We can overcome this obstacle!

 

[Tower]

Agree with Gail in that wars like this is a training exercise - and we have asked our members to try new tactics new troop combo etc and not to bother about the score in this war - look at it as a learning opportunity - but it is still a problem that Nexon need to solve - if not all alliances will do it soon.... Because sandbagging is definitely increasing...

It is also a waste of resources... I am not throwing my 2 Flammepanzers and 2 Jagdpanzer into the battle this time... Want to save my cider... Need to as I have stopped having 2 workers free for hunting and gathering.

 

[Radzeer]

Tower, don't misunderstand me, but you are just trying explain the unexplainable. A Classical age player in a war, where Globals, IA and Enlightment Age players are taking 90% of the seats is just nothing else as sandbagging light. C'mon, they are still 3 ages down, as the 90% of the members! You are trying smoke up the same sneaky trick your opponent is using behind the activity of those smurf accounts. I respect You pretty much based on your multiple great comments here, but in this case, you look like a thief calling for catching the other thief.
Field the GA-EA squad in a 20vs20 war instead and see what are you capable of. I bet you'll not get Iron Age opponents.
Peace!

 

[Glacier]

Lol, I told y'all Nexon wasn't going to do anything! Nb4 just proved it lmao!

 

[Wendy]

don't you feel a strange kind of anxiety without two workers for gathering?
i certainly do!

 

[Brand Marrow]

Radzeer your barking up the wrong tree. Having active low Lvl players is not sandbagging. U haven't seen it so don't know it. The sandbag bases are very low level and completely undeveloped from inactive players, they gotta be to really sink an alliance down so they get their cowardly uneven match. We've seen it in zombies even though we didn't have any classical or Iron Age bases, just wait, you'll get ur turn soon enough, especially as the sandbag virus spreads

 

[Mythic]

lol. Love your 4/5 star analogies!

 

[S_How]

Im really waiting on an official response with detail and reasoning, one way or the other. The vague ones we've gotten seem to encourage it more than accept that it is a problem, which is very unfortunate in my opinion.