Preface: I have done many data pulls to test SBMM and it’s effects in pubs. I have statistical evidence that matchmaking intentionally gives strong players weak teammates. I once posted my Arenas data where I got a new player (under level 10) ONE HUNDRED GAMES in a row. You literally cannot convince me that matchmaking isn’t intentionally trying to handicap skilled players.All that being said— I want to know what the general consensus is on quitting the game when my teammates are intentionally below average. I have to be honest— when I am the only one using my mic and trying to coordinate, I am ignored 95% of the time by players who do everything but work as a team. Sometimes I quit the match without even being downed. I just can’t stand the experience of landing in a lobby that is legitimately 50% Masters players but my teammates are under level 100 (and aren’t smurfing). I mean I do sort of feel bad— it’s not these players fault for being paired with me.Is someone in my position justified for choosing not to play these matches out— or am I legitimately a *?

Its intentionally done to stop noobs from quitting the game. Because they try to attract a SJW audience, the players they get are mentally fragile, so they must give them the illusion of skill.

@BalladalidilaHmmm, I don’t think I want an “advantage”, I just don’t want to intentionally be at a disadvantage. If the matchmaking were random, then the law of averages would grant me average-level teammates the majority of the time (like a bell curve).But that’s very clearly not what’s happening. I’m getting BELOW average teammates the majority of the time (in both BR and Arenas). If the rest of the lobby comprised similar teams (one good player and two weaker players, that would be fine). But that’s not what’s happening. Based on contrails (and on how absolutely difficult the lobbies are) I am typically in lobbies where there are 3-6 (estimated) premade Diamond/Master/Pred teams. I would wager that each of the remaining teams has a Diamond-level player on them too (at least).And lets play Devil’s Advocate and pretend that yes— “because I am higher skilled I should be put in extra challenging scenarios like these.” How is this fun for a weaker player? A weaker player occasionally running into Master-level players sucks but it’s not horrible. But a weaker player being dropped into a lobby that’s primarily Diamond/Master/Pred— that is a miserable experience.

@Axs5626Sxa5001 I agree with most of your logic but I honestly think we overestimate what an "average" Apex player is. There are so many players who just play a couple of hours a week just for funsies with 40 fps and on PC speakers, players that fight-wise would go average 1 k/d in silver lobbies if they were allowed to play there indefinitely. So if we, for the sake of the argument, assume that these kind of players make up the bulk of the player base, than obviously will for instance a "diamond+" player feel that such teammates were useless even though he actually is average.I did a test on the matchmaking a while ago where I played 30 consecutive casual matches with randoms (with image evidence etc). You can find it here:Solved: Statistical proof of rigged matchmaking over 30 consecutive matches with Randoms - Answer HQ (ea.com)If you dont wanna read it, I did most damage in 22 of those 30 matches and in 18 of those 22, I even did MORE damage than both my randoms combined. My K/D over these 30 matches was 2.6 which is very close to my overall K/D (2.57) So based on this experiment, I think you can draw the conclusion that even if I very very often get much much worse teammates that me, most of my enemy squads are ALSO much much worse than me.But you are absolutely right about the full stacked premade Master/Pred squads that are allowed to play in lobbies where the majority of teams are made up of randoms. This is actually a farce from a competitive fairness stand-point but I guess this is a part of EAs "Engagement Optimized matchmaking". But the question here is how many of those squads REALLY exist in an average casual lobby? Some people here claim they have 8-15 such squads in every lobby but I disagree. Once again; if this was the case, then my study would have got a totally different result. I would estimate that there only are 1-2 such 3-man stacked squads on average in my lobbies.And yeah, I guess it must be a bit frustrating to be a bad player that constantly get destroyed but what is the alternative? A strict SBMM also in pubs? I think that would kill the game. The reason why a strict SBMM works in ranked mode is because you have other and stronger incentives to play, i.e the RP gain/the climb. Thats why it can be fun and rewarding to play in lobbies where literally everyone is exactly your skill. But these incentives simply dont exist in pubs.

100% same here. I try to be tactical, use my mic, coordinate, and when everyone else does it is AMAZING, but the other 95% of the time which is usually followed by a losing streak it is horrible. Not fun and pretty sickening sometimes. I would rather play any game with someone who is on mic then someone who isn't.

@Axs5626Sxa5001 "I have done many data pulls to test SBMM and it’s effects in pubs. I have statistical evidence that matchmaking intentionally gives strong players weak teammates."Totally agree. I think its very safe to say that casual matchmaking does NOT match equally skilled player against each other (thank god for that; why would I want wait 5 mins for a causal match and have it like an average Diamond2 lobby?). It seems to me that the matchmaking is either rigged to spread out the 20 best players in the lobby in 20 different team and then fill up the team with the rest player. But honestly, it can also be that the matchmaking is totally random, because if we assume that the player skill distribution of all queuing players is normal (bell) distributed, an above average player will ofc be more statistically likely to get "worse" teammates compared to him in most matches.. Its simple statistics and same logic goes for Arena pubs I guess. "when I am the only one using my mic and trying to coordinate, I am ignored 95% of the time by players who do everything but work as a team."True, but I am gonna play the devils advocate here and ask "did they agree to make you the teams shot-caller?". Not listening to a random teammates verbal communication, ordering you around and making calls that you dont even agree with, it NOT a sign of being weak per se. Sometimes, when I get a random teammate, especially in pubs, who tries to micro manage every single step I take over the coms, I just want to scream "STFU" (but I usually just mute him)But to answer your question of the threat "Is someone in my position justified for choosing not to play these matches out— or am I legitimately a *? "Since this squad constellation of one good and two bad is the same for the majority of the squads in the lobby where only a handful of the squads are stacked with three good players, then yeah, I guess you are kind of a * if you leave even before you get downed=) Because if you keep leaving every time you dont good random teammates; the logic that you are following is : "I will only play this game when I randomly have been given a clear advantage". Also here, the same logic goes for Arena pubs.

Taking accountability: I often quit when I intentionally get weak teammates

14 Replies

Ev3rM0r3
4 years ago
100% same here. I try to be tactical, use my mic, coordinate, and when everyone else does it is AMAZING, but the other 95% of the time which is usually followed by a losing streak it is horrible. Not fun and pretty sickening sometimes. I would rather play any game with someone who is on mic then someone who isn't.
swingingmeatbal
4 years ago
Its intentionally done to stop noobs from quitting the game. Because they try to attract a SJW audience, the players they get are mentally fragile, so they must give them the illusion of skill.
Balladalidila
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
@Axs5626Sxa5001
"I have done many data pulls to test SBMM and it’s effects in pubs. I have statistical evidence that matchmaking intentionally gives strong players weak teammates."
Totally agree. I think its very safe to say that casual matchmaking does NOT match equally skilled player against each other (thank god for that; why would I want wait 5 mins for a causal match and have it like an average Diamond2 lobby?). It seems to me that the matchmaking is either rigged to spread out the 20 best players in the lobby in 20 different team and then fill up the team with the rest player. But honestly, it can also be that the matchmaking is totally random, because if we assume that the player skill distribution of all queuing players is normal (bell) distributed, an above average player will ofc be more statistically likely to get "worse" teammates compared to him in most matches.. Its simple statistics and same logic goes for Arena pubs I guess.
"when I am the only one using my mic and trying to coordinate, I am ignored 95% of the time by players who do everything but work as a team."
True, but I am gonna play the devils advocate here and ask "did they agree to make you the teams shot-caller?". Not listening to a random teammates verbal communication, ordering you around and making calls that you dont even agree with, it NOT a sign of being weak per se. Sometimes, when I get a random teammate, especially in pubs, who tries to micro manage every single step I take over the coms, I just want to scream "STFU" (but I usually just mute him)

But to answer your question of the threat
"Is someone in my position justified for choosing not to play these matches out— or am I legitimately a *? "
Since this squad constellation of one good and two bad is the same for the majority of the squads in the lobby where only a handful of the squads are stacked with three good players, then yeah, I guess you are kind of a * if you leave even before you get downed=) Because if you keep leaving every time you dont good random teammates; the logic that you are following is : "I will only play this game when I randomly have been given a clear advantage". Also here, the same logic goes for Arena pubs.
$fractured-29's avatar$
fractured-29
4 years ago
@Axs5626Sxa5001 That's why the game is the way it is now if random's don't want to listen and play as a team I say f**k' em just give us solos like we asked for since season 0
worstSoloQever
4 years ago
@fractured-29 i lost hope for in ......
Eshshshss
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
@Axs5626Sxa5001 I just don't play arenas, ranked arenas or pubs, problem solved...almost, given situation is not ideal even in Diamond level ranked given what I see on daily basis there when playing without set squad - literarly people on Diamond level can't do basisc as:

- landing in a safe place
- using at least ingame ping system (total silence most of the time until they die and then I realize they have mics as they curse via them)
- separating 3 different ways on ranked to run into 1 vs multiple
- ragequitting / toxic plays (not picking up banners or picking it up and intentionally not respawning, and I mean cases where respawn beakon is like right next to people)

So yeah Matchmaking is bad and the community is not far behind plus given all the stat boosts and account boosting for money this system is far from ideal even in ranked BR.=> get the set squad and no problem 🙂
CCbathwater
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
@Balladalidila"But honestly, it can also be that the matchmaking is totally random, because if we assume that the player skill distribution of all queuing players is normal (bell) distributed, an above average player will ofc be more statistically likely to get "worse" teammates compared to him in most matches"

I would have to be one of the best players in the game then, which I am not, as I can go 10, 20, 30 games where we end in top-5 and always be lead damage person. It would seem impossible that I rarely get a teammate who out-damages me if it was totally random.
Axs5626Sxa5001
4 years ago
@Balladalidila

Hmmm, I don’t think I want an “advantage”, I just don’t want to intentionally be at a disadvantage. If the matchmaking were random, then the law of averages would grant me average-level teammates the majority of the time (like a bell curve).

But that’s very clearly not what’s happening. I’m getting BELOW average teammates the majority of the time (in both BR and Arenas). If the rest of the lobby comprised similar teams (one good player and two weaker players, that would be fine). But that’s not what’s happening. Based on contrails (and on how absolutely difficult the lobbies are) I am typically in lobbies where there are 3-6 (estimated) premade Diamond/Master/Pred teams. I would wager that each of the remaining teams has a Diamond-level player on them too (at least).

And lets play Devil’s Advocate and pretend that yes— “because I am higher skilled I should be put in extra challenging scenarios like these.” How is this fun for a weaker player? A weaker player occasionally running into Master-level players sucks but it’s not horrible. But a weaker player being dropped into a lobby that’s primarily Diamond/Master/Pred— that is a miserable experience.
Balladalidila
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
@Axs5626Sxa5001
I agree with most of your logic but I honestly think we overestimate what an "average" Apex player is. There are so many players who just play a couple of hours a week just for funsies with 40 fps and on PC speakers, players that fight-wise would go average 1 k/d in silver lobbies if they were allowed to play there indefinitely. So if we, for the sake of the argument, assume that these kind of players make up the bulk of the player base, than obviously will for instance a "diamond+" player feel that such teammates were useless even though he actually is average.
I did a test on the matchmaking a while ago where I played 30 consecutive casual matches with randoms (with image evidence etc). You can find it here:
Solved: Statistical proof of rigged matchmaking over 30 consecutive matches with Randoms - Answer HQ (ea.com)
If you dont wanna read it, I did most damage in 22 of those 30 matches and in 18 of those 22, I even did MORE damage than both my randoms combined. My K/D over these 30 matches was 2.6 which is very close to my overall K/D (2.57) So based on this experiment, I think you can draw the conclusion that even if I very very often get much much worse teammates that me, most of my enemy squads are ALSO much much worse than me.
But you are absolutely right about the full stacked premade Master/Pred squads that are allowed to play in lobbies where the majority of teams are made up of randoms. This is actually a farce from a competitive fairness stand-point but I guess this is a part of EAs "Engagement Optimized matchmaking". But the question here is how many of those squads REALLY exist in an average casual lobby? Some people here claim they have 8-15 such squads in every lobby but I disagree. Once again; if this was the case, then my study would have got a totally different result. I would estimate that there only are 1-2 such 3-man stacked squads on average in my lobbies.
And yeah, I guess it must be a bit frustrating to be a bad player that constantly get destroyed but what is the alternative? A strict SBMM also in pubs? I think that would kill the game. The reason why a strict SBMM works in ranked mode is because you have other and stronger incentives to play, i.e the RP gain/the climb. Thats why it can be fun and rewarding to play in lobbies where literally everyone is exactly your skill. But these incentives simply dont exist in pubs.
Eshshshss
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
@Balladalidila - I read the whole post (initial) about your experiment (great job!). Yet I see that it is from public games right?
If so I personally think that such test must be done in ranked, because:
a) public is played for fun, many don't try, some try to get 4k 20 bomb, some are just testing whatever they want to apply in ranked
b) given in public there is no "reward/penalty" per se, a situation with matchmaking in my opinion matters much less if at all there.

What I have a problem with and potential @Axs5626Sxa5001 is referencing to are situations like ranked games, when you go all in, want to have a great, fair game no matter the placement and other stats, yet Apex ruins that by this matchmaking of an extreme mix, if you may - mixing boiling hot water with ice-cold just to get overall usable, warm water. That clearly does not work in Apex as e.g. combination of you (Master) level player + 2 lower/much lower-ranked players will most of the time lose to a squad with 3 average, solid players who will be able to identify fast enough that you are the strongest member of the team, focus fire you and then deal with other two.

In my opinion why we have only a few "satisfying games" when playing with randoms over a longer period of time - my experience you have 1-3 such games per day of playing around 6h in ranked - because those 1-3 games are the ones where you get sililarly ranked players on the team, while the rest are mix between you having a team you need to carry or lobby containing high(-er) percentage of set squads (potentially also higher ranked) who will eventually eliminate 20%+ of the lobby.

Even if you say that "average" player is much worse, I would still expect then my ratio of satisfying games, teams to be higher as I can't just be that odd guy who during 6h gets only 1-3 games with solid squad of randoms meaning that for the rest of the time I was just the one odd who was demoted by the system and not being able to have a sold squad or vice versa treated as top dog even when I have lost badly X games in a row... it just makes no sense.