What's up with double duo vs full pug

[Khalisto.5780]

What's the highest priority when forming a team? it seems it's team comp, cuz it's very hard to explain that, i've faced 2 plat 2 duos while we had 1 plat 2, 1 plat 1 + 3 gold, they could not be over 1600+ at the time but they're were still players that are often top 50 and all 4 were in the same team.

 

Even when it's not that drastic i don't remember double duo ever losing to full pug.

[Ragnar.4257]

What's up with people still unable to grasp that being in a duo doesn't magically make you stronger.

[Ivarian.9018]

8 hours ago, Ragnar.4257 said:

What's up with people still unable to grasp that being in a duo doesn't magically make you stronger.

From a match perspective yes it does as you remove the RNG factor of one of your teammate without talking of all the other benefits that come with it because the MMS is calibrated for soloQ.

[Ragnar.4257]

1 hour ago, Ivarian.9018 said:

From a match perspective yes it does as you remove the RNG factor of one of your teammate without talking of all the other benefits that come with it because the MMS is calibrated for soloQ.

That would only affect your overall rating across many matches over a season.

 

Within a specific match, being in a duo is irrelevant.

 

It's very simple:

 

Team 1: 1620, 1600, 1580, 1560, 1540

Team 2: 1615, 1605, 1585, 1555, 1540

 

These teams are well balanced. Now lets say the 1600 and 1580 in T1 are part of a duo. Does that suddenly mean the match is not balanced? No, it does not.

 

To put it another way, there are 3 outcomes when you queue:

 

1) Easy-mode matchup where your team is stacked

2) Balanced game, could be win or lose, all players relatively even

3) Unwinnable matchup, your team are clueless or do not work together

 

Being in a duo does reduce (but not eliminate) the risk of getting scenario 3). It reduces the chance of getting a potato on your team by 25%.

 

However, if the matchup you get is scenario 2), then being in a duo does NOT increase your likelihood of winning this matchup.

 

And your argument for MMR being calibrated for soloQ actually works against you. If players who routinely duo-Q are having their rating artificially inflated by duo-ing, then they will end up being placed in harder matches where they're expected to carry more frequently. In the scenario above, if the 1600 and 1580 from T1 in a duo should have a "real" rating of 1550 and 1530, then they're dragging their team down.

 

But it's okay, I'm just posting this for my own amusement. I know nothing will change the mindset of players who just want to blame "the system" for their failing.

Edited May 19, 2021 by Ragnar.4257

[Disney.7826]

1 hour ago, Ragnar.4257 said:

That would only affect your overall rating across many matches over a season.

 

Within a specific match, being in a duo is irrelevant.

 

It's very simple:

 

Team 1: 1620, 1600, 1580, 1560, 1540

Team 2: 1615, 1605, 1585, 1555, 1540

 

These teams are well balanced. Now lets say the 1600 and 1580 in T1 are part of a duo. Does that suddenly mean the match is not balanced? No, it does not.

 

To put it another way, there are 3 outcomes when you queue:

 

1) Easy-mode matchup where your team is stacked

2) Balanced game, could be win or lose, all players relatively even

3) Unwinnable matchup, your team are clueless or do not work together

 

Being in a duo does reduce (but not eliminate) the risk of getting scenario 3). It reduces the chance of getting a potato on your team by 25%.

 

However, if the matchup you get is scenario 2), then being in a duo does NOT increase your likelihood of winning this matchup.

 

And your argument for MMR being calibrated for soloQ actually works against you. If players who routinely duo-Q are having their rating artificially inflated by duo-ing, then they will end up being placed in harder matches where they're expected to carry more frequently. In the scenario above, if the 1600 and 1580 from T1 in a duo should have a "real" rating of 1550 and 1530, then they're dragging their team down.

 

But it's okay, I'm just posting this for my own amusement. I know nothing will change the mindset of players who just want to blame "the system" for their failing.

Beside rating, there is difference between no namers and legends, which arenanet cant control.

[Avatar.3568]

I see so often double duo loosing to full pug 

 

In the end most of the time it doesn't matter, as long silvers, golds and plats are in 1 match and the duos are not 2 legends, will it still be completely random 

[Spellhunter.9675]

5 hours ago, Ragnar.4257 said:

 

1) Easy-mode matchup where your team is stacked

2) Balanced game, could be win or lose, all players relatively even

3) Unwinnable matchup, your team are clueless or do not work together

 

Being in a duo does reduce (but not eliminate) the risk of getting scenario 3). It reduces the chance of getting a potato on your team by 25%.

 

Statistically, this increases winrate of a duo by 10%.

[Ivarian.9018]

5 hours ago, Ragnar.4257 said:

That would only affect your overall rating across many matches over a season.

 

Within a specific match, being in a duo is irrelevant.

 

It's very simple:

 

Team 1: 1620, 1600, 1580, 1560, 1540

Team 2: 1615, 1605, 1585, 1555, 1540

 

These teams are well balanced. Now lets say the 1600 and 1580 in T1 are part of a duo. Does that suddenly mean the match is not balanced? No, it does not.

 

To put it another way, there are 3 outcomes when you queue:

 

1) Easy-mode matchup where your team is stacked

2) Balanced game, could be win or lose, all players relatively even

3) Unwinnable matchup, your team are clueless or do not work together

 

Being in a duo does reduce (but not eliminate) the risk of getting scenario 3). It reduces the chance of getting a potato on your team by 25%.

 

However, if the matchup you get is scenario 2), then being in a duo does NOT increase your likelihood of winning this matchup.

 

And your argument for MMR being calibrated for soloQ actually works against you. If players who routinely duo-Q are having their rating artificially inflated by duo-ing, then they will end up being placed in harder matches where they're expected to carry more frequently. In the scenario above, if the 1600 and 1580 from T1 in a duo should have a "real" rating of 1550 and 1530, then they're dragging their team down.

 

But it's okay, I'm just posting this for my own amusement. I know nothing will change the mindset of players who just want to blame "the system" for their failing.

As I read it, you are just saying that DuoQ improves your chance of a favorable outcome. And regarding players having their rating inflated because they duoQ (from the perspective it offers an advantage) they will not end up in harder matches... unless they soloQ.

And by the way, the OP had a genuine question that was not about blaming the system. To answer the OP, from my experience the MMS is still designed around individual rank and team comp as to not pile up the same class more than twice. The only influence that DuoQ as over the MMS is that the MMS will consider the 2 individuals as being linked when forming 2 teams for a match. That's why you can face 2 duoQs as a full pug team.

Edited May 19, 2021 by Ivarian.9018

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

12 hours ago, Ragnar.4257 said:

Within a specific match, being in a duo is irrelevant.

 

Being in a duo does reduce (but not eliminate) the risk of getting scenario 3). It reduces the chance of getting a potato on your team by 25%.

Oh yeah. DuoQ totally doesn't matter,  besides that part where it reduces potato chances by 25%.

The potato chance should actually be 40%, shouldn't it? You've guaranteed  2 people to the same team. 2/5 = 40% of a team.

 

Either way, being able to determine who 25/40% of your team would be while most-everyone is stuck to random potatoes? Oh yes, completely irrelevant to a match

Edited May 19, 2021 by Multicolorhipster.9751

[Ragnar.4257]

2 hours ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

Oh yeah. DuoQ totally doesn't matter,  besides that part where it reduces potato chances by 25%.

The potato chance should actually be 40%, shouldn't it? You've guaranteed  2 people to the same team. 2/5 = 40% of a team.

 

Either way, being able to determine who 25/40% of your team would be while most-everyone is stuck to random potatoes? Oh yes, completely irrelevant to a match

 /sigh

 

It's relevant to your score trend over the season, as it reduces chances of those potato matches. 

 

It's not relevant to the matches where everyone involved is a non-potato. In these matches, duo will have zero impact. If you lose a balanced matchup, you can't then look at the scoreboard and go "aha, they were in duo, that explains everything". MMR was even on both sides, duo had no affect.

 

The impact of duo is on avoiding the potato matches. It does nothing, absolutely nothing at all, to affect the outcome of a balanced match. It doesn't give you extra HP or lower cooldowns, and it doesn't make you play better.

 

Explain to me, how in the scenario I outlined above, explain how duo affects this matchup:

 

Team 1: 1620, 1600, 1580, 1560, 1540

Team 2: 1615, 1605, 1585, 1555, 1540

 

These teams are well balanced. Now lets say the 1600 and 1580 in T1 are part of a duo.

Edited May 20, 2021 by Ragnar.4257

[Essence Snow.3194]

51 minutes ago, Ragnar.4257 said:

 /sigh

 

It's relevant to your score trend over the season, as it reduces chances of those potato matches. 

 

It's not relevant to the matches where everyone involved is a non-potato. In these matches, duo will have zero impact. If you lose a balanced matchup, you can't then look at the scoreboard and go "aha, they were in duo, that explains everything". MMR was even on both sides, duo had no affect.

 

The impact of duo is on avoiding the potato matches. It does nothing, absolutely nothing at all, to affect the outcome of a balanced match. It doesn't give you extra HP or lower cooldowns, and it doesn't make you play better.

 

Explain to me, how in the scenario I outlined above, explain how duo affects this matchup:

 

Team 1: 1620, 1600, 1580, 1560, 1540

Team 2: 1615, 1605, 1585, 1555, 1540

 

These teams are well balanced. Now lets say the 1600 and 1580 in T1 are part of a duo.

Build synergy, voip likelyhood, and/or playstyle cohesiveness are much more likely in duo than in solo queue.

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

19 hours ago, Essence Snow.3194 said:

Build synergy, voip likelyhood, and/or playstyle cohesiveness are much more likely in duo than in solo queue.

Ah good, beat me to it. Thanko.

 

20 hours ago, Ragnar.4257 said:

Explain to me, how in the scenario I outlined above, explain how duo affects this matchup:

 

Team 1: 1620, 1600, 1580, 1560, 1540

Team 2: 1615, 1605, 1585, 1555, 1540

 

These teams are well balanced. Now lets say the 1600 and 1580 in T1 are part of a duo.

I guess i'll add in that this scenario is just entirely unlikely too. At plat2 - plat3 most the duo games I was seeing would look more like:

 

{1800 1780}(Duo), 1500, 1490, 1480 (1610)

VS

1650, 1620, 1600, 1580, 1520(1594)

 

Average rating for each time is about in the same ballpark since lower ranked players fill the gaps on the high-level DuoQ's team and bring down their team's matchmaking rating.

 

And that's  not accounting for the DuoQ maybe doing something shady like alting or smurfing which I have also seen. A lot.

 

Do you want to know what the average rating is for a rank 1800 legend queued with a friend that tanked their rating down to 900(silver 1) is? It's 1350, which would be finding games in gold, and I don't think two top players are going to have the hardest time winning gold matches.

The actual rating gains for the 1800 rating player would be terrible; don't get me wrong, but when you're winning every game it hardly matters anyway. Just an easy way to maintain a rating while keeping up with the leaderboard requirements.