This is an honest question, and was just wondering if people would rather have somebody who was severely toxic on their team or somebody who is just horrible and solo loses a game.
If you feel like it, please state why in the comments.
Odds are if you have a Toxic player it's because your team is already not doing well. Which just makes it 10x worse and tilts good players who are struggling. Good players can inspire a bad player and still rally the team. Very hard to do that with a toxic player in the game. The problem is when you have a bad player AND a toxic player on the same team. That can feel impossible
I can take bad players and try to carry them instead of 100% of toxicity which I don't want.
There's a built in fix for having garbage players on your team. It's called MMR. Garbage players fall, good players rise. Eventually.
A nice garbage player will at least try to get carried while you're busy carrying them.
A toxic player is there to own the game. If they're carrying, okay whatever but it's still toxic to be with them and it leaves bad tastes in mouth; however if they're losing, oh boy, then you can bet your ass that the match is harder to carry than any garbage player who feed because they don't know what to do.
By comparison, I'd rather have a garbage player (strictly just not good at the game, no personality flaws, at least not vocal) because then I'd get less cancer overall and actually have an easier time carrying a garbage player if the toxic player is to feed.
I'll take the baddie over the temper tantrum any day.
Also, toxicity and badness aren't mutually exclusive. A person can be both at once.
