That seems a bit thin. And adversarial. And perhaps not true.
To be less adversarial, you have to list the advantages of separate queues; you've focused on possible negatives of separate queues. That style of presentation is what one would expect where two adversaries are arguing opposing points, with each adversary putting forth arguments tending to their point. To be non-adversarial, you have to look at both points, and make arguments for and against both points.
And, the second and third points seem easily disputable: Restricting premades to face matching teams doesn't seem any more artificial than normalizing gear. Also, queue times would be increased for premades, only. PUGs might see queue times increase, increase slightly, or even decrease, if the separation increased the number of players in PVP.
Also, using "artificial" to argue against a point seems odd: What is bad about an artificial means? In this case, there is a meaningful point to make, but using the term "artificial" hides the point. Better to go directly to the harm, rather than reach the point indirectly.
Thx!
P
Bookmarks