Number of Surrender Votes

HelpOrIFeed·Jan 16, 2018·2 votes·399 views

Lower the number of votes required to surrender. Two should be enough, but I'll settle for three. Requiring four is just absurd. I don't understand why you would want to hold a player in a game that they don't want to play. Whether the game is winnable or not is irrelevant. The game is always winnable, even if the score is 100-0. The issue is that some people are not having fun, so why create a toxic environment where they are forced to play a game they don't want to? I'm sure they wanted to play when they joined, but they don't anymore, so let them out of the game for god's sake. Do you like fueling rage? Do you like people crying to report each other after every game? Let people out! Jesus Christ.

13 Comments

DU BaymaxJan 16, 20187 votes

if you dont enjoy playing the game just because you're losing you dont have the right to end the fun someone else on your team might be having.

HelpOrIFeedJan 16, 20181 votes

{quoted}

if you dont enjoy playing the game just because you're losing you dont have the right to end the fun someone else on your team might be having.

please show me where does it say "BECAUSE YOU ARE LOSING". please show me this. I think it exists only in your mind. Nothing to do with this post. learn to read.

Kai GuyJan 16, 20181 votes

You did not say that. However, do you really think a majority of players would enjoy or benefit from a minority of their team who can easily be duoing on smurfs/alts to troll would appreciate or desire to lose gamse that they where ahead and winning to a 2 man FF? If the answer is no, your being a jerk to panda for no real reason just because you did not say something verbatim.

DU BaymaxJan 16, 20181 votes

aww thanks for saying it so I didnt have to. Even though I'm going to anyway.

Yeah, basically my point still stands regardless of if the reason he wants to surrender is that they are losing or not.

Hajime HinataJan 16, 20186 votes

Require 2 votes to surrender, huh? Yeah.. Let's just have troll duos use throwaway accounts to make 3 other people lose intentionally every game until the accounts are finally banned. :^)

AthenaXIJan 16, 20184 votes

Hopefully they will never implement this, there were plenty of times I was the one trying to surrender since games was becoming pretty hard to win, but thanks to the 2 players that didn't vote, or voted no, we ended up winning.. after like 10-15mins from trying to surrender..

HelpOrIFeedJan 16, 20181 votes

{quoted}

Hopefully they will never implement this, there were plenty of times I was the one trying to surrender since games was becoming pretty hard to win, but thanks to the 2 players that didn't vote, or voted no, we ended up winning.. after like 10-15mins from trying to surrender..

again, has NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER YOU CAN WIN OR NOT.

AzadetheJan 16, 20181 votes

Not going to happen nor should it.

Having "stressless fun" is a nonexisting ideal that simply can't and never will exist.

I would estimate 2/3 of the population of this game would use this function any game - EVERY game - if given the chance.

How do you expect people to ever climb if they lose 2/3 or better of their games..... not because they played poorly, or because they couldn't win the game, but because a toxic duo didn't care, claimed the game a defeat at level 1, trolled, and resulted in surrender after surrender? How do you honestly think this game would survive if no games every complete, and there are no comebacks?

Also, no offense..... Surrenders aren't fun either. Comebacks are. Why should your spot instance of dissatisfaction weigh more than the overwhelming depression and rage surrenders cost.

Your suggestion is not sportsmanlike, or even a solution to not having fun.

HelpOrIFeedJan 16, 20181 votes

{quoted}

Not going to happen nor should it.

Having "stressless fun" is a nonexisting ideal that simply can't and never will exist.

I would estimate 2/3 of the population of this game would use this function any game - EVERY game - if given the chance.

How do you expect people to ever climb if they lose 2/3 or better of their games..... not because they played poorly, or because they couldn't win the game, but because a toxic duo didn't care, claimed the game a defeat at level 1, trolled, and resulted in surrender after surrender? How do you honestly think this game would survive if no games every complete, and there are no comebacks?

Also, no offense..... Surrenders aren't fun either. Comebacks are. Why should your spot instance of dissatisfaction weigh more than the overwhelming depression and rage surrenders cost.

Your suggestion is not sportsmanlike, or even a solution to not having fun.

All arguments here are based on "whether you can win"

Learn to read people. You can ALWAYS win. Has nothing to do with why you should surrender.

AzadetheJan 16, 20181 votes

Semantics. A team could go AFK and give you a game, but in reality some games you just know are going to be a loss, and I'm not someone who EVER votes yes on a surrender - If the other team has an on point Alistar or Sejuani and you can never reach the squishies in a team fight, and your team refuses to rush Grievous wounds or Armor penetration, you pretty much know that's going to be a loss, especially if the entire game consists of one permanent team fight rather than attempts to go back and farm and defend.

If your team chases 90% of the time, oblivious to their base and gives 1 opponent the opportunity to 3 minute casual push without making a single attempt to stop them (and you as an individual can't stop them because you're like a Nami vs a Nasus), you pretty much know it's over.

No. When I speak of comebacks, i'm talking about the viable ones.

If a team truly wants to lose, your base is going to collapse anyways. That's why I don't ever click Yes. If a comeback is possible.... resistance will occur at your base and you begin 4-5 man killing the other team into ace after ace. Eventually the game gets to a point where you can just muscle a mid push after inhibitors are up and end in one push, making all the other team's effort worthless.

That's more or less what I specialize in: Never giving up, playing Supports and Junglers who can affect those comebacks. I create that resistance.

datfatguyJan 16, 20181 votes

So you're saying that if less than half the team votes yes, it should become a surrender? No.

HereComeSexyTimeJan 16, 20181 votes

The minority should never be able to force a surrender.

Kai GuyJan 16, 20181 votes

4 does a good job of reducing the impact duos have on FF vote wins. A system that behave differently for if there is a duo or not I'm ok with but never a minority. 3 for all randoms, 4 for duo games.

The toxicity will be worse for 2 man votes, the rage will be worse, and reports will go up.