Re: why duo queue in ranked?

@Balladalidila 

First off, I'd like to say that playing on a secondary account will not produce proper data to be used, even it's something like this.

The system assumes you're a new player when you're on a new account, so multiple accounts won't really count for multiple experiences.

Now these issues you're speaking of, how are you sure these won't occur in full on solo matched teammates?

As mentioned before, 2 players can like each other more than the other player on the team, so they tend to push more into the same direction and prioritize each other more.

Other issues might even arise, which we aren't even aware of at this moment.

It isn't even guaranteed that solo queue players will get better match quality, we're just assuming this is the direct cause due to the experience of some players.

(We really need much more data from other players to prove this is an urgent matter)

And well again, you can just get into a premade trio, the Apex Discord has an entire LFG system that works fine.

Next to that there are plenty of other places where you can find players to play with.

By queueing as a trio, you're practically solving this issue without making any changes that could cause issues.

@Danskermand  

Do note that there are over 300k players playing every day.

Accounting for Origin and console platforms, I'd say roughly 500k to maybe 600k on a day.

Now let's go with 500k, you get 2 players every match... which would mean you get around 0.00039999999999999996% of the playerbase within your match.

Even with more matches played that have it guaranteed that you have other players, it would be an extremely small portion of the playerbase.

Therefore your experience is pretty much a statistic that can be thrown away by the devs.

If you want to make a point about this, then we'll have to collect much much more data.

Though then again, you can queue with a trio through LFG systems as I mentioned earlier in this exact reply.

That way we prevent creating issues and fix ongoing problems.

@XHelperZ 

The difference is obvious? In a team of randoms, you know that its the quality of your actions/positioning/choices that determines if you are the one that is sided with or if you are the one who need to adapt to the other two, that is IF you want to play as a functioning 3-man team. In a solo + duo premade constellation, you now that you always are the one who need to adapt to the other two IF you want to paly as a functioning 3-man team, regardless of the quality of your actions/positioning/choices.

 I have no problem getting a 3-man or a 2-man premade squad together. I am already a member of several discord with 1000 + members so that is not the issue for me. The issue is that the system forces you in a situation that I think should be voluntary. As a matter of fact; I ONLY play premade 3-stack ranked on my main account. The reason I play solo ranked on my smurfs is ofc because you cant play solo Q in platinum lobbies unless you are a Predator smurf.

But yes, solo Qers are exactly as responsible as premade duos to find one premade to become the premade duo or two premades to become a full-stack team if they complain too much. I dont really complain. I choose to play solo Q, usually because my premade squad isnt online, but also sometimes when I dont wanna talk or play super drunk or whatever. But bottom line is that this forced system forces me to play like a egoistic * which also gets me alot of hate from the premade duo, i.e overall everyone gets screwed. 

 Like Ive said many times before. I play by one rule. I start off the game with the intentions of playing as a team exactly as I would with a premade trio of friends. But at the FIRST SIGN of premade duo BS towards me, I go into solo mode. Sure, I might still fight with the teammates but I wont care one bit if they have to die so I can run away and survive. Its a lose lose for everyone. Just look at this print screen of my inbox.. So many times Ive reported premade duos who type the most vile things to me because of this forced system.

@Balladalidila 

Well for the first part, that might be more of an issue with a specific group, I myself haven't really encountered it in such a way that I had to adapt.

Typically we communicated well enough to compromise for each other.

Though with the choice of getting into a premade, what's the issue with leaving it as is?

If people want a serious match, they get into a premade, if they don't care about integrity they go for the solo Q option.

But from what you're saying... competitive integrity doesn't matter to you that much.

You want to play super drunk or don't want to communicate?

Why should ranked be adjusted just because you play ranked like casual?

When you take it seriously you go with your premade, which shows the system is fine when players like their integrity.

Now I understand your premade can go offline, again, the LFG system comes in here, you can go into a public discord and you're easily matched up.

I don't see why we should adjust ranked for someone who isn't playing it as intended.

Personally I also think now that you really aren't really someone I'd trust for feedback now, though that's just me.

Since you're showing:

• That you're smurfing, which by definition is playing below your rank, thus throwing
• One thing meant towards you from a duo could be misinterpreted, thus resulting in you making the match worse for them... which doesn't really show you care about their quality 
• Your amount of reports, it's not exactly reportable to play with a specific playstyle, whilst it might seem like they don't pick up your banner on purpose, they might have different priorities to securing the win or making sure their site is safe

If you want to go casual, play casual, not ranked.

@Danskermand 

Saying that without trying to explain it just makes it look like you're trying to invoke a specific reaction, that's not a good thing.

And I do get the issues that exist, but the chance of encountering it according to current data seems really small.

If you don't want to get into a premade, then I don't see why duo's have to suffer.

The solution has no downsides whatsoever.

Does it take longer? Yes, but that is the price to pay for better quality matches. (Queue times would increase anyways)
Ranked isn't meant for a quick game, it has to be taken seriously, so technically you shouldn't solo queue, ever, if you care about the integrity of your match.

@XHelperZ 

I start to wonder who you are and if you just are trolling for the sake of trolling. Why are you defending premade duos right to force a solo Q against his will into their team so that the duo can play in their preferred constellation when you in the same argument think that solo Qs are just sooo stupid and ridiculous to want the option to play in HIS preferred constellation? Why are a premade duo "more serious" than a solo Q, since you argue that you should only play ranked as a premade trio if you "are a man of competitive integrity"?  Dont you realize that every argument you come up with against solo Qs rights can be said against premade duos as well? All I want is the OPTION to choose. 

But whatever..Since I am not trustworthy feedback to you then I guess its no use to keep up this discussion. I bet only people that agree with you give trustworthy feedback haha. 

@Balladalidila 

Now I find it actually a bit offensive that you think that I'm trolling, I'm literally just sharing my opinion.

You shouldn't really attack another in a discussion, that's not nice at all.

I've said it multiple times, not all duo's are like this.

You shouldn't punish all duo's for something that only a few do.

I've literally mentioned that you all lack data, you don't have enough proof to show that this is an urgent issue that many players are experiencing.

If you can't convince me, then I doubt you can convince the devs to make a change that would ruin many things just because a few players encountered it.

I'm defending it because your solution involves breaking the design of the game, practically removing the duo queue from existence or inconveniencing them greatly without trying other options. This goes against game design 101, you don't make big changes like this just because of that.

You have a solution in your hands, premade matches through an LFG system.

It's literally the same as solo-q, except that it might take a little bit longer, there is 0 downsides to doing it.

Yes Duo's can also get into a trio, though they are already in a premade of 2, which already shows they care about competitive integrity enough.

They can work together with the solo player in their lobby as intended, no issues will present themselves.

Both Duo's and Solo's can get into a trios group, though it seems like solo's are having the problem here, so why not let them fix it themselves?

There are no "rights" duo's get matched with solo players, solo players get matched with duo's, that's just how it is.

You are having a problem, you have a solution.

You don't want to use the solution? Then it's not something that should be adjusted by changing the game.

You exhaust all the other solutions before trying to fix it directly.

You've that you're playing casually in competitive, yet you care about competitive integrity?

That doesn't make sense.

Also about that "I bet only people that agree with you give trustworthy feedback"

You're calling me a troll purely because I disagree with you, a hint of hipocrisy, don't you think?

@Danskermand 

You are missing the point.

I am well aware that an issue is present.

Issues can be solved in multiple ways, 2 ways to do that is:

• Using a workaround (Ideally one that doesn't require much work)
• Fixing it by changing something in the game

Ideally you don't want to change the game, this way you can keep the affected users to a minimum whilst the issue resolves itself on it's own.

Though if the issue becomes unbearable and it affects a large portion of the playerbase, only then should the game be changed to resolve this issue.

\/

We can show this in 3 scenarios:

Scenario 1

The issue crashes the game of 1 in 10000 players, this means that there is a 0.010% chance of the game crashing.

In this case it is a small issue, which typically indicates that it's also fixable by the userbase itself.

This does not warrant a change of the game.

Scenario 2

The issue crashes the game of 1 in 10, which is a 10% chance of your game crashing.

This means that a large portion of the game suffers of this, if it's fixable by doing something then it's ideal, though if no other options are available we should alter the game.

Scenario 3

The issue crashes the game of 1 in 5 players, which is a 50% chance.

At this point it's typically the best to change the game to fix the issue, that way we can prevent the playercount from dropping.

Now in our case, there isn't enough data to prove there is an issue.

You are the one that should provide data.

In you are correct, there would be an issue, though if I were correct, there wouldn't be one.

How exactly do you want to tell the devs to fix an issue of which you cannot even verify that it exists amongst a big part of the playerbase?

Even if a large portion of the playerbase experiences it, it would be better to use the workaround I mentioned.

Your change would ruin the quality of the game for others, it tosses the competitive integrity out of the window, which would mean you would be hurting the playerbase in the end.

It disregards what others want, it's a selfish change that will not guarantee improvement, though it will guarantee that the game becomes worse in other parts.

I'm not ignoring the problem, far from it.

I'm giving you a solution to the issue, that minimizes damage.

Sure, I'm not putting you in 1st place, the wellbeing of the general playerbase will always be prioritized.

Though if you can't prove this issue is extremely bad and affecting many players, then it's not smart to make such a drastic change.

You're not willing to take the solution, why should we adjust the game to someone who isn't even willing to adjust themselves?

So if you want the devs to take your advice, show them it's an urgent matter.

If you can't then apparently it isn't such an issue.

Make polls, ask people on SNS's and so forth, with that kind of information you can prove it.

Make a step for what the community wants, not put your needs and maybe that of a smaller group infront of the playerbase, that would be selfish.