Two weeks ago, I shared my Arenas data while duo-queueing:
https://answers.ea.com/t5/General-Discussion/Literally-100-percent-of-my-Arenas-teammates-are-under-...
Here is my 2nd test, which involved a full squad of Masters queuing together.
Total consecutive matches:100
Average wait time for a match: 4:51 minutes
Total matches won: 38
Opponents: 100% of our matches involved at least one Predator/20bomb/4k player— But not all matches were 3 stacked preds. Most were a mix or Masters and Preds (judging from badges). All of our matches were competitive in that there were no 3-0’s, although we had 42 3-1’s (in the opponents favor). We had some matches where our opponents didn’t have teammates so I didn’t count them in the data.
Thoughts:
These findings are a lot more encouraging than my last test. When duo queueing, we were given a new player as a third and we won 4% of our games. Here, we were still playing opponents who were better then us, but at least we won 38% of the time.
Am I mad that I am forced to almost exclusively play Masters and Preds while losing more than average (50%)? Nah. I have accepted that modern day gaming wants casual players winning as much as possible and that being above average puts you in a lower priority position. Of course, the absolute best players (Preds) will still win the majority of their games because the algorithm pits them against Masters often. I’m fodder for the best players in the world, lol. A player can be “better” than 95% of the playerbase but still lose as frequently as someone who is about average. It is what it is.
My next Arenas test will be solo queue. Stay tuned!
