Why do Some Argue Against Skill Based MM?

SimplyPzB2, on Jul 16 2021 - 03:51, said:
Sigh.. so wrong.. - If my two player platoon had been replaced with two red tomatoes, my team would have had FOUR good players, to the enemy team's ONE good player.  Still rigged.  My toon was irrelevant to the rigging.  Hurp durr... - -
Um, rigging implies "intent".  WG knows the random mm creates a lot of unbalanced battles.  They have yet to fix the issue, thus they've CHOSEN to allow it to continue - that's "Intent".  Rigged.... - -
These ratios don't change under sbmm.  The only thing that changes under sbmm is the elimination of 20%/80% ctw type battles. (I.e. no garbage battles). - -
Yeah, WG want "LEVEL PLAYING FIELDS" at the start of all battles.  They've put massive efforts into balancing tank types, tank weights, hp, and tiers.  Yet skill is 10x more important than all those combined.  Ask yourself who would win:  15 purples in tier 8 tanks or 15 tomatoes in tier 10 tanks.   We all now the purples would crush the tomatoes.  - -
Welp, he's finally started typing pure gibberish.   Poor little fella...    61% is the 'low end' of "unbalanced in my favor" yes.   - My platoon does not pick the teams.  That the random mm routinely gives my team more skilled players is 100% on the random mm.  Under sbmm, it would be impossible for my toon to impact the skill balance between teams... - - Yes.  So if it's 1 good/14 bad vs 1 good/14 bad, both good players have equal opportunity to win.  Both good players have the same load to carry.  Under sbmm, this would be 100% of all their battles.  But under random, 15 bad vs 2 good/13 bad is common.  I.e. sbmm battles can't be rigged in one team's favor.  While that happens all the time in random. -