Why do Some Argue Against Skill Based MM?

Death_on_2_Treads, on Jul 28 2021 - 14:01, said: Lets face it, you have almost as many posts as games. That should tell everyone something. This is your identity. You get some notoriety from your position amongst the random fanboys. You are the keeper of the sacred data.  Never mind it has been worked with a purpose, supported by hypothesis and assumption with a outcome in mind, you are all they have to support their otherwise weak arguments about how this flawed system is really best for everyone. Just stop with all the BS. You and those that support it are afraid that under a system that is fair, one where you face like opponents and even teams, that it would drop your currently artificially inflated stats and win rate to those of a mere mortal. You could no longer boast about being great (well, not you specifically, but others) . You support random because it allows you an advantage that you wouldn't otherwise have, and anyone with half a brain can figure that out. We don't really need to discuss the "why and how" of this anymore because its all been done, to look at your manipulated stats and formulas as your try desperately to convince the many that a bad gaming experience is OK because it benefits the few. I don't buy it, and neither do many of the people on here. It isn't because they are "bad at math or logic (and the game)". 


Death_on_2_Treads, on Jul 28 2021 - 15:53, said: Yeah, its not jealously, although I commend you on doing what you always do, misdirection. Its about fairness and equality. You like a world where some people get an advantage, and that advantage leads to better win chance and better stats. It a world where battles started out roughly even, those wins and stats would decrease. it is therefore a fact, not jealously, that under the current system those stats are artificially inflated by the unfairness of the system. I would be on the losing end of that equation too, so jealous isn't my motive. Fairness is. I can live in world with better battles, less blowouts, and even teams at the start much better then the crap we have now. You can deny that all you want, but until you can produce data THAT WAS DERIVED IN AN SBMM SYSTEM,  you are only simulating and guessing. Furthermore, you have a bias. Throw that all together and your data applied to SBMM is meaningless. Great work on the random data though, it does show what happens in a random system where 40%-60% of that battles are unbalanced crap. Thanks for bringing that to light.


Death_on_2_Treads, on Jul 28 2021 - 18:40, said: You said a lot that said nothing. When backed up against the wall, talk a lot,  tell people they don't understand, and hope no one ever nails you down. No one mentioned XVM.  The only thing XVM tells anyone is the win8 of a player anymore. It stopped calculating win chance when the name anonymity started. Stop with all the distraction BS. Its YOUR chart that says the better PR you have, the better the win chance you have, not XVM. Do I need to repost your own chart that says the better PR you have, the better win chance you have? Maybe you forgot about it? That is the advantage better players get.  Once the PR is roughly equal between teams, that advantage disappears. That's what would happen in SBMM, and their win rates drop. That is the advantage they want to keep, because more times then not in random  they end up on the team with the higher PR due to their higher PR.