Players should lose only 3 lp or get loss forgiveness for 4v5's

LadySai·Jan 2, 2015·44 votes·4,629 views

Why hasn't riot fixed this issue yet? Players deserve to either only lose 3 lp or have loss forgiveness when one of their team mates never connect. It's very obvious for rioters to see if you've played in a 4v5 because one player will only be level 1. This will be a huge improvement for the game because it's simply unfair for someone to lose 22lp when they initially had no chance of winning anyway. I understand that people will say "I'VE WON MANY 4V5'S! it's not that hard!!" however, the chances of winning a 4v5 is significantly lower than winning a straight up 5v5 and it's completely unfair nonetheless.

Riot, as a person who has played League of Legends since season 1, I've seen time and time again the shortcomings of not having this function, please consider making this change.

EDIT: this expection of only getting a loss in either 3 lp or have loss forgiveness would ONLY apply if it's clear that one player never connected which is shown by the fact that he/she is level 1 throughout the whole game. That way if someone left halfway through the game, you could see that he/she is a rager in that the person would not be level 1 because they already played some of the game through. This feature is ONLY for if a person NEVER connected o: this doesn't apply to ragers (because then maybe that could be abused D:).

EDIT: Check out this picture https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/v/t1.0-9/10898021_1019500394732930_4187733462328515615_n.jpg?oh=da6efab360bd0b450c291ab105f2c035&oe=552648D4&__gda__=1430426605_ac29aa8ffd5d07627108960dd17641c4 What do you guys think about this?

37 Comments

Moulin RougeJan 2, 20159 votes

Blah blah generic excuse that people would abuse this feature blah

JunkοJan 2, 20152 votes

blab blah generic explanation why blah

KamuJan 2, 20154 votes

It sucks but as Moulin just stated, easily abusable. Once someone said that there should be the option to kill someone IRL if they lose or troll during a LoL match by 4 people reporting them and a Riot Games assassin Zed taking their life or something like that.. wish they went with that.

RikariJan 2, 20153 votes

Riot would never implement this in that people would be able to abuse it( apparently thats bad enough to ignore guarantee a loss game[it really is] ) and that the lcs has a pause feature.

Zeke MaelstormJan 2, 20152 votes

A way to make this system not abusable would be to make the cost of leaving a ranked game really severe. For example; if you leave a ranked game once then it will instantly result in double LP lost for the game (Life happens once and awhile regardless of a players best efforts so this can't be to severe), second offence would result in demotion of a division, the third offence would result in demotion from a league, and then the fourth offence would result in a ban of duration X (X varies based on your number of bans and other factors). There would of course have to be a reset to this of course simply to prevent a player who left once in January to be punished (by being demoted) in August.

RikariJan 2, 20152 votes

THIS with the first leave for the month or so being normal, then LP loss being 2x(+10) 3rd being instant demotion (banned if you are bronze 5)

Ten60wAddisonJan 3, 20152 votes

I got "Firewalled" last week and it took 24LP's from me. I spent 30 min trying to get back in, trying everything in God's name to get back.

Lost next match and demoted. Trolled next 3 matches by 2 afk's and a seriously toxic player. 20+ games later I'm still 15 LP's away from a promo back where I was.

Of course, no forgiveness for me... blah blah blah generic, gee I'm sorry but I can't do anything speech from support.

Riot needs to completely retool and rethink ranked games. Period. End of story.

Keon KamoriJan 3, 20153 votes

The Mercy Rule is very needed and I feel would lower the general toxicity of the community. Nobody would get trapped playing a 4v5 for 20 minutes then struggle to get a surrender vote through. The Mercy Rule is already incentivised in ranked play since players would readily take the quick in and move on to the next game, especially when in promos.

FinibhireJan 2, 20152 votes

I have to agree, it would be very abusable. Play with a friend (or make one in game) and have your friend abandon the game if things aren't going well. Of course there might be ways to counteract that behavior but then players might come up with a way to counter the counter... The cycle goes on. I think the solution is better served in avoiding the situation where reliable players have to play with people that have connection issues.

Furthermore I dislike that the "leaver" loses LP. This is a blessing in disguise. Repeat offenders have their LP lowered artificially by abandoning games then the next time they actually play they play easier opponents. Basically it's a good way to Smurf if you don't do it enough to go to tribunal.

I'd be okay with it if I played only with people that had connection issues on par with me (I figure about 0.5% of the time) but this is not the case. I figure 1 out of 3 games I'll be playing with or against a team that has 4 players.

RaptameiJan 2, 20152 votes

{quoted}

I have to agree, it would be very abusable. Play with a friend (or make one in game) and have your friend abandon the game if things aren't going well.

Your premade partner doesn't get his LP loss reduced. OBVIOUSLY.

JunkοJan 2, 20151 votes

Implying anybody that plays this game doesn't have at least 1 level 30 smurf account. I mean i have fucking 5.

FinibhireJan 2, 20151 votes

Yeah there are quite a few people with smurf accounts. I don't have a full solution to that problem but there's no reason why we should make it easier to artificially lower your LP. The easiest way I can think of is just abandoning champion select (especially in a series).

LadySaiJan 2, 20151 votes

No, my line of logic is more along the lines of this expection of only getting a loss in either 3 lp or have loss forgiveness would ONLY apply if it's clear that one player never connected which is shown by the fact that he/she is level 1 throughout the whole game. That way if someone left halfway through the game, you could see that he/she is a rager in that the person would not be level 1 because they already played some of the game through. This feature is ONLY for if a person NEVER connected o: this doesn't apply to ragers (because then yes, that could be abused).

ll badboy llJan 2, 20152 votes

the best way to solve this should be getting banned if u get 4 reports from urteamates as leaving game that shoud be a good solution for all this afkers now is just like a new style going afk god dammit i get afkers on my team atleast twiced a day

blacknerdtakuJan 2, 20153 votes

DEFINITELY NOT:

the biggest problem with the current leavebuster is how hard it comes down on peoople who never AFK often at all...

and what if more client bugs start to happen? what if your internet cuts out? what if it's a genuine emergency ?

"you got banned because of one game where life didnt look great"

It's this kind of nonsense, this kind of mindless agression towards players that makes the current leave-buster system ass-cheeks...Attacking players indiscriminately for a single game is not a good idea, at all.

I Main SwainJan 2, 20152 votes

more to the point, why cant you kick players from champ select if you have a 3 of 5 majority vote, and why don't you have a few free dodges for ranked when you're in your series? tired of getting full teams of ragers, instalocks, etc, and having to either waste 45 min of my life or dodge and lose my series.

KonidiasJan 2, 20152 votes

{quoted}

more to the point, why cant you kick players from champ select if you have a 3 of 5 majority vote, and why don't you have a few free dodges for ranked when you're in your series? tired of getting full teams of ragers, instalocks, etc, and having to either waste 45 min of my life or dodge and lose my series.

Because it stifles creativity and creates a system that makes it extremely difficult to get a match started. I main a champ that is not popular with the current meta... so that would mean I basically don't get to play this game... because giving people the option, they are going to want me to play only the most OP meta champs.

I don't like the idea that other people can dictate what I get to play like that.

You don't get free dodges because even 1 free dodge would give you a chance to cherry pick your team for the best chance of winning.

The way the system is set up now is to prevent cherry picking.

All of these ideas would basically make the game unplayable... I really don't think people give these ideas much thought before posting them. Could you imagine? A game where people could exploit to not lose LP and also where they could majority vote kick people in champ select? Good luck ever getting into a match, and even when you finally get in that dream cherry picked match that you've been waiting for, winning or losing doesn't matter because LP has no value anymore since people can exploit the system to lose no/minimal LP.

I Main SwainJan 2, 20151 votes

imo a game like that would be an absolute dream because A) it would massively discourage people from raging and being general douches because they would never get into a game and B) I would much rather spend 10 minutes trying to get into a game than waste 40 minutes in a game with people who rage and are likely to lose due to lack of teamwork, etc.

yes, it is exploitable, but there are ways you could work around it. honestly, I doubt you would almost ever get kicked for doing something nonmeta unless youre doing something absolutely retarded like adc vlad. most of the time it would be because A) you are being a douche or B) because you refuse to cooperate in any way (ex: refusing to go anywhere but the role you want)

MorvrannisJan 3, 20151 votes

I disagree that it would discourage people from raging - they would just do it later on. (AKA, "You got EXACTLY the right role! Why do you suck so bad!" and that kind of crap.)

And, while nobody has statistics to back it up, I am willing to bet matches would take FAR longer than 10 minutes to create. For a sort-of example, look at Team Builder. When I build a team, I will accept anybody who fills the roles I need. However, I've had TB go as long as 30 minutes because, "I don't want to play with XXX champ in XXX position." Then, drop. Non-meta picks mean people don't join (which, IMO, is the whole point of Team Builder. Just try stuff out!)

TLDR: People are selfish and self-centered by nature, and, as such, these problems will always exist. All you can do is remove avenues for it showing itself while still allowing a game to be played.

I Main SwainJan 3, 20151 votes

that's why you would have a small number of available dodges/kicks, dictated by time, # of matches, or maybe even conduct/honors. that way people CAN be stupid and use their free dodge because they don't like a team, but they would be wasting a precious small supply on something as ridiculous as condemning a non-op-meta pick

I Main SwainJan 2, 20152 votes

I like the way dota does it where (as I am told) when someone afk's their items are all sold and their gold is then distributed throughout the remaining members of the team, AND on top of that they have a ragers q for people with excessive reports which is different, but a similar idea could be implemented. I also fully support the idea of halving ip, lp, and/or xp gained for those reported excessively from ALL matches, win or loss for x amount of time

theDeblinJan 3, 20152 votes

Alternately, for every reported AFK that's also picked up by the quitter-smasher dealie, re-distribute 10%*(number of inactive players quit-smasher finds) of the lost points from each other player to the reported player instead. So if 3 people AFK out, the remaining people lose basically nothing, if it's a 4v5 they get 10% off and the AFKer takes a bigger hit, etc.

AnarqiaJan 3, 20152 votes

mega bump

JasiwelJan 3, 20152 votes

OR Riot could develop a better Leaver detection system that enables Loss Forgiven when someone actually, truly disconnects for reasons beyond his control.

StrawberryAlpacaJan 2, 20151 votes

This would be a vast improvement most of the time. Losing tons of LP to bad streaks of 4v5s is easily the least fun thing in the game. Unfortunately it cannot be implemented. People could use it with duo queue to easily boost one account. Even if that was blocked by having the other duo queue member lose lp as well it would greatly decrease the integrity of matchmaking in general. Also at higher ratings where simultaneous queueing gives you a really good chance of getting in the same game you could still do the boosting. The good news is that it will even out in the long run... actually if you never dc you will get 5 5v4s for every 4 4v5s. Unfortunately the long run can often be hundreds of games required to offset those bad luck 4v5 streaks.

The TL;DR is that people are going to be jerks and just drop out of some ranked games cause they really don't care about other people who they don't know and that there is no way to fix this.

Aurelius MaximusJan 2, 20151 votes

if you don't ever leave you shouldn't care since you have 4 chances of getting a leaver but 5 chances of facing one a game and in the end leavers will gain you more lp than they will lose you

AMYS GRAVEJan 2, 20151 votes

with 27 million players daily and a 4/9 chance of having an afk on your team in games where there is an afk, then at any given time approx 1-2 million people who have never left a game are on streaks of 5 leavers on their team with none on the other team, and one poor bastard has had 17 afks on his team with none on the other team. you can not say to an individual that they will gain more than they will lose you can only say the the group of people who never leave is gaining more than losing.

LordOfTheLeagueJan 2, 20151 votes

Even if Riot could detect that the player disconnected before the game start, it would be probably easy to reproduce a disconnection (turn off your internet) and then abuse this if you don't like your or the enemy team composition.

Unless they can assure what is the source of the disconnection, it's not going to happen.

Get RekkktJan 3, 20151 votes

same reason stuff like this still exists

http://apollo-na-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com/1415919537904/MATCHMAKING.PNG

its called work, and riot is allergic to it

The TrentJan 3, 20151 votes

BTW TL;DR but I've seen posts like this so I know what ur talking about. This would be abused as in every 4v5 would be shown mercy even if the afk didn't really affect the game.

Meanie40Jan 3, 20151 votes

My solution: First leave is normal LP loss, second leave you "absorb" everyone else on your team's losses (should be an instant demotion in almost every case as you would lose 90+ LP), but third I would do the same LP loss plus put a ranked restriction on the player for 10% of the LP loss that they incurred this way, rounded up (meaning if you lost 90 LP this way, you would need to win 9 games in normal draft before being able to play ranked again). In all cases, if you are in a promotion series, it ends (with your LP calculated with the losses above).

I personally would only put the period of time a leave stays for this purpose at 10-14 days.

SulkingRaccoonJan 4, 20151 votes

I'm going to disagree with you on using this system. Here's why:

Mathematically speaking, if you, as a player, never disconnected from a game, each game would have 9 people that have a chance of never connecting. Five out of nine times one player never disconnects, the enemy team will have 4 people. Your team will be in a 4v5 only four out of nine times. So, if you always connect as normal, you will play more 5v4s than 4v5s. This, in my opinion, makes the "mercy rule," "Loss Forgiven," and other compensations for 4v5s unnecessary.

But, what I said above is usually more applicable to teammates who rage-quit or AFK at base. If we assume that every player has an equal chance of never joining the game, and the compensation applies only to the losing four that connected, your mercy system is statistically fair and does eventually even itself out. It's in equilibrium.

However, the current system, while far (very, very, very far) from perfect, is in equilibrium too. Without any compensation, you will lose the same amount of lp in a 4v5 loss that you gain from a 5v4 win. And, presumably, you would have the same number of 4v5s as 5v4s. Additionally, the MMR system ensures that you will eventually move back to your correct division if you're displaced by a long unlikely string of 5v4 wins or 4v5 losses.

With or without the mercy rule you proposed, the league system is balanced (in mathematical equilibrium). A mercy rule appears to be a good implementation - after all, it does make people feel better about losing unfair games.

But, I'm going to have to consult the old cliche: "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." As far as the numbers are concerned, the mercy rule is an unnecessary addition to the current league system, and, with complicated ranking systems, I'm convinced that simpler is better. The implementation of anything that is not completely necessary just opens up a new window for bugs, confusion, loopholes, or abuse.

So, while a compensation system appears to be a good idea, it is unnecessary for a working, fair, ranking system and so, not healthy for one.

SulkingRaccoon

Also, damn, Leona. 2/6/21, she carried that 4v5! :)

MPendragonJan 4, 20151 votes

I think it's a fantastic idea, except people would be climing the ladder faster than they normally are because the odd team is granted forgiveness, this would offset the balance.

ShadowFaunaJan 8, 20151 votes

Great idea but the asshole Riot NA staff and fucking sponsored proffesionals like the system how it is so they can manipulate free LP out of bronze 5 players who literally have none left to lose anyway, this is quicker easier for them than having to earn their LP through even match making, why the fuck am I matched against gold morgana in ranked if I am bronze five and my whole team is too, clearly people like that are being given free LP without having to actually earn it in there own skill level or rank, this is were riot breeds its own toxcicitiy and will lose all there humble casual players to dota 2

Mac9891Feb 24, 20151 votes

absolutely it makes no sense to penalize someone -20lp because some jack off left after his first death. I'm looking at you top poppy

Garlic ButterSep 15, 20151 votes

The problem if this was implimented is that the people that WON while 2v5 or 3v5 would "deserve" signifcantly MORE points than if hey had a full team of 5.

Usually someone that DCs is a godsend in disguse since it means they are not consuming resources or feeding enemy players gold while lagging. Obviously in ranked you should be playing champions (regardless of role/lane) that you can 1v2-3/solo lane on and warding your jungle if jungle dcs (and consuming the jungle after a few wave clears, not to mention stealing red/blue if ur mid top or bot regardless.). Statistically speaking 1 or 2 less champions in a match on your side is IN YOUR FAVOR as your team will be gold bloated very early while the enemy team will be starved and desperate as they are having to share CS and at most can claim 900 gold off your team (while you can claim 1500 or so off theirs, especially for bot lane). This has consistently been the case for me. Though in modes like ARAM or domnion that are focused on team fights and cooperative play (rather than SRs "pve" style play) it is quite crippling (ive only won a 3v5 once in dominion and only because our champs grossly over powered their picks).

Ranked 3s i could see this being important if you have 2 dcs.... But I've still won a few 1v3s due to enemy team greed/rushing to win before reconnects, on squishy built mages no less.