I already know my SBMM method would yield an eventual 50% win rate (using wins and losses to increase or decrease a rating that is used to place that person in a match). Some people have suggested other methods they think will lead to fair matches but not a 50% win rate. Personally, that doesn't make any sense, as keeping people who win more from continuing to win more is precisely the point of SBMM, but whatever.

So, lets try a different approach. We'll use the a method of SBMM described in a previous post: Placing players of similar skill on opposite teams, balancing the teams. For instance, if 4 green players in a match, 2 green per side: 10 yellow, then 5 yellow per side, etc.

Now, some people claim that this won't screw over better players, because better players win more close games and that's how they have their high win rate. What is actually true is once a player has their high rating, they will win half of their 50% games, but they still win more games because due to random MM, they get more 51%+ chance to win games (it's because their high rating is being calculated into the chance to win). For some reason, it is difficult to convince people of this, and there is this continuous proclamation of: But good people win more battles when evenly matched, so therefore all the good players will still somehow keep winning more than 50%.

It's the equivalent of saying "Yeah, it's balanced, but then magic happens, and good people still win more, see?" Unfortunately, this can't happen. You see, if you have an equivalent player on the other side, then for each fight, there are two "players who are good and should win more" and one loses, the other wins (net of 50%). No matter how many battles you run, no matter how many are on each side, as long as it is balanced (same number on each side) some number of good players win, and an equal number of good players lose.

Match 1

Team1 vs Team 2

Team1: B G G G Y Y Y Y O O O R R R R

Team2: B G G G Y Y Y Y O O O R R R R

Team 1 wins

The result for wins/losses by skill gradient:

W/L

0/0

1/1

3/3

4/4

3/3

4/4

You can repeat that match as many times as you want. It won't matter. Regardless of who wins, the end result is the same. 50% win rate between the players of equal skill. This is true for 1 battle. It is true for 1k battles. What's worse, if someone from one of the skill brackets does manage to win more, they have pushed another player from that bracket BELOW 50%, which is completely insane if you think that is fair.

And BTW, it only gets worse when you consider that Draws are losses for both sides...

So, after 10 battles:

W/L

0/0

10/10

30/30

40/40

30/30

40/40

And as I already said, if they don't split those matches 50%, then 1 blue player is below 50%, 3 green players are below 50%, 4 red players are above 50%, etc.

And holy hell, it's doesn't matter if this is just "speculation." It is the application of logic, reason, and simple math.

**I challenge anyone who thinks SBMM won't drive people to 50%, and/or screw over good players unjustly, to show teams and battle results that somehow show this! You have free reign to make team composition however you like and what ever team you want to win, as long as the teams are balanced. You can make different teams each match (still has to be balanced). Go ahead. Show me how this magic is supposed to work. Show me how you can place greens against greens, blues against blues, and somehow not end up with that category at 50% win rate (each player will either be 50% even, or some of those "good players who always manage to win more than they lose" will actual lose more than 50% so that another person in that category can win more than 50%).**

**Edited by DeviouslyCursed, May 19 2019 - 18:07.**