Riot encourages players to give up a game. UNACCEPTABLE.

Snowman Arc··160 votes·24,306 views

It's one thing if the players themselves want to give up because they don't see any chance to victory, and another for RIOT THEMSELVES encouraging them.

Just finished watching the game between Clutch Gaming vs Echo Fox, where the game crashed at around 32 minutes, and because there was no way of recreating the game back to that point and continue on playing, the Riot officials decided to stop the game and award the victory to Echo Fox, who at the time were up 10k gold and one inhibitor, stating that "because they were so far ahead, there was no real possibility that CG could get back in the game, so we are awarding the victory to FOX".

Now, to me, that's unacceptable. For one, how the fuck do you decide to just terminate a match and hand over a victory like that? Remaking the game isn't the best solution, but I can't just accept you just handed over a victory like that.

What does this mean? What is the example you are giving to the players in the community? That games are basically over if a team has a 10k lead? Or if they are an inhibitor down? Before the crash happened, CG actually won a small fight where they killed one guy, so a comeback, even though unlikely, was entirely possible. What am I supposed to think as a solo Q player? Oh, look, we are down 3 towers at 15 minutes, might as well surrender, because Riot themselves said the chances of winning are minimal. Oh, by the way, someone said no to the surrender vote, might as well just AFK now, since Riot agrees that it's pretty much a waste of time to try and come back.

We all know how most games go. Most of them are a stomp that are decided around 10 minutes and the chance of a comeback is low. I don't think anyone denies it. Trying to come back in most games is an impossible task, and the effort that's required is almost never worth it. But now, if Riot embraces it, where does it lead us? Are we supposed to surrender if we're down an X amount of gold now? Is AFKing acceptable now? Is it trolling and an offense if you don't surrender under certain conditions?

Honestly, I'm lost for words. I can't possibly understand how they can just hand over a victory like that. Unacceptable, both to the losing team for their effort, but also to the community who is supposed to be having the correct standards shown by the game's creators, at least. This is a huge middle finger to all those players who were penalized because they AFKed in lost matches. Fuck you, Riot.

203 Comments

Jamaree43 votes

To be fair, what else were they supposed to do, a remake isn't exactly fair for the other side either.

cajunstyle13 votes

Just give them a tie. Sucks but fair for both. We don't know what would have happened. However unlikely, a comeback could have still happened.

Jamaree19 votes

{quoted}

Just give them a tie. Sucks but fair for both.

Not really, I would say that is pretty unfair for the team that was ahead honestly.

cajunstyle2 votes

I added to my statement which I find validates it.

Jamaree13 votes

{quoted}

I added to my statement which I find validates it.

Still doesn't really make it fair, people say how much a snowball this game is, so forcing the team that was winning to just start over, give up their lead they had earned, the catches they had made and revealed their hand and strats, how well they played things, their champion picks, all that info, not really fair.

cajunstyle4 votes

Doesn't make it fair to just give the ahead team the win. I've been in plenty of games where we are pushed to our base. But we win a couple of fights then push and win. People say how much of a snowball this game is, so forcing a team that could have won a team fight to turn things around, allow them to push mid, maybe a baron, and perhaps a comeback to accept a loss, not really fair.

Jamaree9 votes

{quoted}

Doesn't make it fair to just give the ahead team the win. I've been in plenty of games where we are pushed to our base. But we win a couple of fights then push and win. People say how much of a snowball this game is, so forcing a team that could have won a team fight to turn things around, allow them to push mid, maybe a baron, and perhaps a comeback to accept a loss, not really fair.

Nor is it really fair to deny the team that is ahead their victory. Yes, we have ALL had games where we were HEAVILY behind and managed to pull back, that 1 in 100 game. The other 99 games when you are ten k gold behind, either now or even back in the day, you stayed losing and lost.

cajunstyle6 votes

So like I said, give them a tie. Or both wins. Or as someone else said, make it a best of 3 or something. But it is not fair to just hand out a win. No matter what was revealed by a team ahead, the game wasn't over.

Jamaree7 votes

{quoted}

So like I said, give them a tie. Or both wins. Or as someone else said, make it a best of 3 or something. But it is not fair to just hand out a win. No matter what was revealed by a team ahead, the game wasn't over.

A tie isn't fair either, I don't care who you are, but when you are trying to win something at that high of a competitive level and then something happens outside of your control that favors your opponent, you aren't just going to be like "Well ok, yeah sure." You were working hard to earn your victory, you were playing better then your opponent, you were very VERY likely going to win, you shouldn't just be denied it.

Both wins also isn't fair, you can't say it isn't fair to give the team winning the win then say it is fair to just give both sides the win.

cajunstyle3 votes

Both teams were working hard to get a victory ans just because one side is doing better than the other up until a certain point doesn't mean anything. There are stages in this game and some teams do better in certain stages. It isn't fair to give the team winning at a certain point the win and say, "Well ok, you were gonna win anyways." Tell that to Ronaldo. Tell that to Tom Brady.

Jamaree7 votes

{quoted}

Both teams were working hard to get a victory ans just because one side is doing better than the other up until a certain point doesn't mean anything. There are stages in this game and some teams do better in certain stages. It isn't fair to give the team winning at a certain point the win and say, "Well ok, you were gonna win anyways." Tell that to Ronaldo. Tell that to Tom Brady.

Nor is it fair to deny them the win.

cajunstyle4 votes

So I go back to my original statements. Fairest thing for all parties involved. Not totally fair to one side or the other if you do anything else.

Jamaree6 votes

{quoted}

So I go back to my original statements. Fairest thing for all parties involved. Not totally fair to one side or the other if you do anything else.

But it is unfair.

Jamaree4 votes

{quoted}

FAIREST thing.

It isn't the fairest thing, nothing about this entire thing is fair for either side. Riot fucked up by something even going wrong in the first place for this to happen, but just telling the winning team to start over ISN'T fair.

Jamaree2 votes

{quoted}

They did mess up but nothing you do can make it fair for both. Just telling the behind team at that point in the game they lose ISN'T fair. Give them a tie or make it a best of 3 to be the fairest outcome for both parties. It sucks for both teams but giving a win and lost before the game is over is the worst outcome.

If it was a closer game, I would be right there with you to agree with this, and yes, there have been games, both on the casual and competitive level where teams have banded together to swing back the game. HOWEVER, in most cases, and I mean MOST, probably at least 90+% of cases, hell, I will use you as an example. In your past 20 SR games, there was literally ONE game where someone was down 10 k gold did you win, every other game where the advantage was THAT high, was a win in that team's favor, but they should still restart though right?

Jamaree2 votes

{quoted}

There were two this weekend where we did just that.

I see one, the Braum game, all others, odds were pretty set with games swinging back in forth in some, with a game where the opponent was 4 k ahead and you got back, but no more 10 k deficits.

Nankyoku1 votes

and now it's unfair for the losing team, gg

Jamaree2 votes

{quoted}

and now it's unfair for the losing team, gg

They were ten k gold behind, they weren't coming back.

Nankyoku3 votes

Unless you know something that we don't, the game wasn't lost yet. Might as well encourage the "gg open mid" mindset of most soloqers that give up when the team is behind.

Jamaree2 votes

{quoted}

Unless you know something that we don't, the game wasn't lost yet. Might as well encourage the "gg open mid" mindset of most soloqers that give up when the team is behind.

I want you to look at your match history right now, look for all the games where either team had a 10 k gold deficit, how many of those games did the team win?

Nankyoku2 votes

There's a huge difference between solo queue and LCS, especially regarding the consequences of just "deciding" which match is lost and which isn't beforehand.

Jamaree2 votes

{quoted}

There's a huge difference between solo queue and LCS, especially regarding the consequences of just "deciding" which match is lost and which isn't beforehand.

Fine, do it for pro play then, look at every game where the gold deficit is that much, tell me how many times where they came back?

Snowman Arc2 votes

FNC vs Schalke, this week. Schalke had a respectable lead, I think round 5k gold lead at 25 minutes or something, which is comparable to 10k at 32 minutes, because if they kept on the pressure and got Baron and stuff, they would definitely get there. Instead, somehow FNC managed to get a good teamfight and that turned the game and they won in the end.

Jamaree2 votes

[{quoted}](name=Snowman Arc,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7IM9AJdu,comment-id=0001000000000001000000000000000000000001,timestamp=2018-06-18T10:40:25.018+0000)

FNC vs Schalke, this week. Schalke had a respectable lead, I think round 5k gold lead at 25 minutes or something, which is comparable to 10k at 32 minutes, because if they kept on the pressure and got Baron and stuff, they would definitely get there. Instead, somehow FNC managed to get a good teamfight and that turned the game and they won in the end.

Yes indeed, that happened, now I repeat, and the other massive majority of games where a team has a 10k gold deficit, what happened?

Snowman Arc2 votes

Let's assume that it's something like 5% chance? Like, out of the 20 games with such a lead, only one gets turned around? Then let's create a poll, put in 19 papers saying yes and 1 saying no. If, randomly, the picked paper is yes, give the win to the winners. If it's no, then give it to the losers. Fairer, right?

Jamaree2 votes

[{quoted}](name=Snowman Arc,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7IM9AJdu,comment-id=000100000000000100000000000000000000000100000000,timestamp=2018-06-18T12:14:05.963+0000)

Let's assume that it's something like 5% chance? Like, out of the 20 games with such a lead, only one gets turned around? Then let's create a poll, put in 19 papers saying yes and 1 saying no. If, randomly, the picked paper is yes, give the win to the winners. If it's no, then give it to the losers. Fairer, right?

That isn’t at all what happened though, it wasn’t random they had the lead, they had control of the match it isn’t like Riot just flipped a coin and said this side wins, they were well on their way to winning.

ModCaptainMårvelous48 votes

{quoted}

Just give them a tie. Sucks but fair for both. We don't know what would have happened. However unlikely, a comeback could have still happened.

Did you know a similar situation happened last year with Giants vs. Vitality? A game-problem forced the game to stop working. However, unlike this time, they had to remake it. Seems fair right?

Well, people hated it. They called BS and that the winning team (I forget which one) got absolutely fucked. Which lead to the reamke and the team who was losing to win.

There's no "fair" option here, as either team will argue "No we could have come back" or "No we had this in the bag". As for a tie, I think the problem there becomes how you score that: If each time has 1 added to their game, that means they could enter tiebreaker scenarios that wouldn't be possible if it wasn't for the bug. If they don't add one to each score, that means CG/EF now have one less point than any other team, win or loss, which can fuck up a season.

It's an ugly, messy issue and (if we're gonna blame anyone), the fault should be on Riot for missing a game-crashing bug on one of the new meta-defining junglers. Season 5 Worlds 2: Taliyah Boogaloo.

Honestly, I'm lost for words. I can't possibly understand how they can just hand over a victory like that. Unacceptable, both to the losing team for their effort, but also to the community who is supposed to be having the correct standards shown by the game's creators, at least. This is a huge middle finger to all those players who were penalized because they AFKed in lost matches. Fuck you, Riot.

On OP's point: There is a massive difference between deciding the victor of a bugged game in the pro-circuit vs. "fuck this team I afk" when four other people are trying. This is a faulty comparison by a long shot.

Snowman Arc5 votes

I'm not quite sure what the solution is, since they couldn't remake the game, but just handing out the victory is just wrong. It would be so much better if they just played a new game. If anything, they could just create a new game with the same champions, and try to recreate most of the game, like gold gained for each player, dragons and the inhibitor being down. I don't think it would be that hard to code it in.

EDIT: Or, at least, if you're gonna hand over the victory, make it a best of 3. Let Echo Fox start with the victory, but at least give CG the chance to earn a victory as well. If not a best of 3, maybe play one more game between the two, where if CG wins, they also get a victory point.

Jamaree4 votes

[{quoted}](name=Snowman Arc,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7IM9AJdu,comment-id=00010001,timestamp=2018-06-18T00:00:02.515+0000)

I'm not quite sure what the solution is, since they couldn't remake the game, but just handing out the victory is just wrong. It would be so much better if they just played a new game. If anything, they could just create a new game with the same champions, and try to recreate most of the game, like gold gained for each player, dragons and the inhibitor being down. I don't think it would be that hard to code it in.

You act like it is just that simple. These games aren't just that simple, that is like saying you should be able to start a fighting game over at a certain position of life, or start a battle royale game from a certain position. I'm not saying it isn't possible from a gameplay standpoint, but SO much goes into these games beyond JUST gold, and JUST objectives. The mindset, the information they have, the control of the field, the position the champions they were in which DOES matter, just how mentally prepared you are for the match itself. You can't JUST remake and expect the game to play out the exact same way it was before.

Deez Crits18 votes

I personally think the OP is twisting the narrative.

It isn't like the referees saw the lead on Echo Fox and said "Okay, you guys can stop. Echo Fox are going to win, hang it up! The game is over."

The servers crashed and, according to the rule book ( http://esports-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/production/files/rules/2018-LCS-Rule-Set-v18.8.pdf ) under section 13.1, the officials have the discretion of awarding the victory with the factors listed in mind. It's simply a matter of "Hey, with this big of a lead, Echo Fox was probably going to win the game." The officials did not go out of their way to end the game prematurely. It's simply analysis based off of the game state at the time that the game crashed.

There's nothing wrong with saying "This team was likely to win beyond reasonable doubt." Even when we play, it's ok to say "We probably won't win this one." We can acknowledge the state of the game. What isn't ok is for us give up before the surrender vote passes or the enemy has destroyed the nexus, which isn't what happened on stage.

It does suck for CG; maybe they would have had the miracle comeback from that deficit. But with the game being unrecoverable via chronobreak due to servers, it would be more unfair for Echo Fox to have to play an extra game or Bo3 (as others have suggested) than for the outcome of the game to be concluded based off of the state of the game. In the end, they chose the lesser of the two evils.

Divewing2 votes

You're 100% right.

I can ignore a lot of things, but this is pure BS being thrown around.

The entire scenario is so contextualised it's nuts. On top of that, it's a very nuanced process - all of which doesn't mean a thing to OP.

This is as gray a situation as you can get, but OP is looking at this in a naively childish black-and-white way.

Jamaree17 votes

Honestly, there is no right answer for this. By giving them the win, they deny the opponent a chance to make the comeback, no matter how unlikely it was. In turn, just saying "Well, deal with the fact you were winning and have to start over." isn't fair either. It was a tough call.

Dope Solo16 votes

They crashed? How unprofessional. I guess in a snowball, 1-burst meta, making these decisions are easy to call because turn-arounds in league don't really exist anymore. Thanks "balance team".

Sp33d Zer02 votes

Or the last time it happened people called B.S. because the team that was super ahead lost the remake game and were told that their efforts in the first game didn't matter at all.

cajunstyle11 votes

Don't forget fantasy. I didn't receive any points for the Echo Fox team while the individual players still got their points. What the hell? But shouldn't have just been given the win. Look at Fnatic. Getting stomped the whole game, win a fight, and push and win.

Sp33d Zer02 votes

Going in and fixing it for fantasy is easier than remaking the game. They did it with the azir bug for fantasy.

Also Fnatic weren't down 7 towers (which is the important part for the ruling under the 14.1 clause for LCS). They weren't down inhibs. They weren't down 4 dragons with elder coming up.

Judge Arcadia11 votes

Do you know how hard you have to throw a 10k gold lead? Especially at that level of play.

cajunstyle5 votes

Ask Schalke

Snowman Arc4 votes

Oh shit.

Hügö6 votes

Don't worry we got late.

Blåbæret4 votes

{quoted}

Don't worry we got late.

"WE GOT LATE GUYS".

The worst part is that no one legit says this anymore. Barely seen the phrase in over a year (whereas back then it used to be common).

Zane Zephyr5 votes

So, I play dek hockey and it's on an outside dek

Say my team is winning 14-2 and there's a period left in the game, then suddenly a car crashes through the dek and obviously interrupts the game

What do you do in that situation afterwards?

Would it be fair to say that the other team was thoroughly beat and call the game and give us the win, or decide that there was a chance they could have come back and completely deny the effort my team put in to get to that score and make us do it over again at some other point in time?

TheMinionLeader1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Zane Zephyr,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7IM9AJdu,comment-id=000d,timestamp=2018-06-18T05:02:55.694+0000)

So, I play dek hockey and it's on an outside dek

Say my team is winning 14-2 and there's a period left in the game, then suddenly a car crashes through the dek and obviously interrupts the game

What do you do in that situation afterwards?

Would it be fair to say that the other team was thoroughly beat and call the game and give us the win, or decide that there was a chance they could have come back and completely deny the effort my team put in to get to that score and make us do it over again at some other point in time?

What about giving you then win and making it a best of three. Giving the other team at least a fighting chance, and you an advantage.

Zane Zephyr4 votes

But still, how does that make it fair to my team that we have to potentially play two more games when we already completely wrecked them the first time? What does my team have to gain by playing more in that sense?

The team had a fighting chance in the first game that was played but they squandered it and let it get out of hand

And also that's going to be a nightmare for standings and stats.

Snowman Arc3 votes

If you hand over the win, you screw the losing team. If you remake the game, you screw the winning team. Therefore, a best of three seems like a kinda fair option.

You create a situation where you VALIDATE the victory for the winning team, so that's kinda fair, and to compensate the losing team, you give them the chance to fight for their win by having to win essentially a best of three where they are one win behind already.

Sp33d Zer02 votes

Except for the fact that a best of 3 scenario is still drastically favored for the losing team because even though the winning team only need a to win 1 more you are realistically giving two more chances to the losing team that they shouldn't have had in the first place.

TheMinionLeader1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Sp33d Zer0,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7IM9AJdu,comment-id=000d0000000000000000,timestamp=2018-06-18T15:35:31.026+0000)

Except for the fact that a best of 3 scenario is still drastically favored for the losing team because even though the winning team only need a to win 1 more you are realistically giving two more chances to the losing team that they shouldn't have had in the first place.

In my opinion they did have a chance. You're handing them this chance back. But our opinions are different.

IAintDarius4 votes

[{quoted}](name=Snowman Arc,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7IM9AJdu,comment-id=,timestamp=2018-06-17T23:46:18.350+0000)

Now, to me, that's unacceptable. For one, how the fuck do you decide to just terminate a match and hand over a victory like that? Remaking the game isn't the best solution, but I can't just accept you just handed over a victory like that.

There was literally one other option which you just stated isn't the best solution. What the fuck do you want?

TheMinionLeader1 votes

{quoted}

There was literally one other option which you just stated isn't the best solution. What the fuck do you want?

The option they chose encourages players to quit if they feel the game is lost, I can't agree more with OPs post.

IAintDarius3 votes

There was no other option.

You guys are bitching over the dumbest shit.

More from Gameplay

More by Snowman Arc