Let’s say the developers implemented any kind of matchmaker. No matter what kind. Whether it is win% based, KDR based, campaign level based or equipment based, does not matter. That part only decides what is a “good” player, a “mediocre” player or “bad” player. However, a question is then as to what to do with that information.
Would you prefer:
A: Equalling average team strength
Aka, both teams get 4 “good” players, 4 “mediocre” players and 4 “bad” players, at the downside that bad players can still get stomped by good players. This option is the best for team balance, aka for getting a 50% match win%.
Or:
B: Dividing by tier
Aka, have “good” players fight only “good” players, and same for “mediocre” or “bad”. However, there may be some more “tiers”, like “very good” or “very bad”, and you might experience an “uptier”, where you, as “mediocre” player, might fight “good” players, if matchmaking takes too long. This option is the best for individual player balance, aka a 50% “firefight” win%.
Vote by saying “A” or “B” in the comments. A thread that talks about what the preferred method of identifying what a “good” or “bad” player is will come later.