> I took a look at this match and interestingly enough the team with no duos won 503-498, which sounds like a great match. There are going to be some combinations of ratings where it makes sense for multiple duos/trios to be on the same team. For example, if the 3 highest rated players queue together and 2 lowest players queue together (with the other 5 all solo players), it probably makes sense for those 5 players to be on the same team. We could choose to always separate multi-man rosters when possible, but it would only result in worse matches.
lol nice try, only problem is that anet stated there will be a new way to avoid unbalanced team combs the win or loss does not really matter or did I misunderstood anets plan here?
Why is matchmaking so broken?
in Player vs. Player
Posted
> @"Cal Cohen.3527" said:
> > @"Kahrgan.7401" said:
> > https://imgur.com/a/oW6eq
>
> I took a look at this match and interestingly enough the team with no duos won 503-498, which sounds like a great match. There are going to be some combinations of ratings where it makes sense for multiple duos/trios to be on the same team. For example, if the 3 highest rated players queue together and 2 lowest players queue together (with the other 5 all solo players), it probably makes sense for those 5 players to be on the same team. We could choose to always separate multi-man rosters when possible, but it would only result in worse matches.
lol nice try, only problem is that anet stated there will be a new way to avoid unbalanced team combs the win or loss does not really matter or did I misunderstood anets plan here?