Boards›Gameplay

LeaverBuster enforcement will make this game unpopular

Divinemind·12/17/2014, 4:16:08 PM·2 votes·1,112 views

You can't punish people and expect them to correct their behavior. They will only avoid the punishment and thus avoid playing the game altogether. When players leave teams are punished. When players are punished they also leave.

You need a surrogate system based on vote. When a team unanimously votes one player to be replaced they are replaced. I would start with just AFKer's but there could be a whole number of reasons to replace a character from assisting the enemy to verbal abuse.

You wouldn't need a ridiculous Tribunal, no tried and true ineffective LeaverBuster. Just a surrogate system.

What you do, when you have a system of punishment is assume that people are criminals for their stove catching fire, having surprise visitors, or even trying to have some fun while their kids are napping. With my surrogate system. All you do is reward players who opt into joining games in progress with a small IP boost, and maybe a free something or other at the end of the year for good behavior.

When you are dealing with kids, living with their parents you will inevitably have people who victimize each other for various reasons. For me, I've been banned once, because I've played games expecting to take an hour that have run for close to 2 a lot of times. I've also experienced a leaver in almost every one of my Silver 3 promo series. Please stop playing God. Stop pretending to be the police. You are a game company. Make the game fun. Make a fun way to deal with leavers that doesn't detract from the spirit of the game.

11 Comments

ravenswolfy12/17/2014, 4:29:49 PM3 votes

Its not a bad idea since there are a lot of events that can force a player to afk or leave a game. As you mentioned like family emergencies, or the needing to attend other responsibilities that arise up while playing. I would like a vote system to kick afks/leavers/toxic players from a game and get a substitute to hop in and pick up the game. However how would this affect ranked play? How would we prevent a premade of 4 from kicking the odd man out during a game? There's a lot of complications with a system like that. Its better to almost give a lesser penalty for losing games if that team has an afker/leaver and no rewards for that player if his/her team wins.

LeaverBuster is terribly flawed and after having to agree to its terms one time, I can't see myself playing 40+min ranked games or normals without worrying if I need to afk during the game to do something. Only sticking with dominion/aram :/

Sailor Mint12/17/2014, 5:14:11 PM2 votes

If you can't guarantee that you can commit in blocks of at least an hour, MOBAs are not the genre for you.

Drunk Rummate12/17/2014, 5:03:17 PM2 votes

so what you're saying is that people who chronically AFK and get punished will stop playing because of Leaverbuster?

awesome, I can't wait.

Eawaf12/17/2014, 4:59:40 PM1 votes

All they need to do is rewrite the code for the game, that's basically what your saying, might as well make LoL 2 imo.

The leaver buster system is the closest to a cut and dry system of punishment there is. If you leave or disconnect you get punished. The end.

There is no automated system that exists that can take into account Intent. And with 27 million daily players (as of Jan 2014) Rito does not have(or want to have) the resources to cover this many games.

From what i see this system is the easiest most cost efficient way for them. They have shown that they do not care about how many false positives there are.

Your house is on fire? Your daughter has been kidnapped by terrorists? The rapture? Rito does not care. And i'm glad they don't. They have enough trouble dealing with toxic players. This system works best imo for Afk's.

Eawaf12/17/2014, 5:27:02 PM1 votes

@RavensWolfy I disagree wholeheartedly. Every reason you listed i think is a reason to get flagged by the Leaverbuster system. Riot does not ban you for having these things happen to you once, its habitually getting flagged that gets you banned.

If all these things happened to you. One after another, then you are either extremely unlucky, or this game is just not for you. I'm happy with the way the system is working.

There is no automated system that exists that can take into account intent. And with 27 million daily players(as of January 2014) Rito does not have the rescources to cover that many individually. They have enough trouble handling toxic players.

Afk's and disconnects are the easiest things to monitor or police when the criteria is simple. Did the player disconnect or afk. Put a time limit on the afk and boom, all done, nice and easy.

Rito does not care about false positives when it comes to this system imo. And i'm glad they don't.

Laughing Fish12/17/2014, 4:21:01 PM1 votes

Rito pls

Eawaf12/17/2014, 5:52:01 PM1 votes

@RavensWolfy That's just it. Rito has put in place a system that is a simple as you can get. There is a criteria in place for afk's. There is a criteria in place for disconnects. That's all you need/all you can have with the automated system in place.

It does not matter whether or not WHY people leave or afk. All that matters is that the action has occurred. And the reaction is the punishment put in place by the system.

It does not matter to Rito or the automated system why, all the matters to them is the results. The result being a 4v5 scenario and 9 others suffering. That's all that matters to them, and i think that's all that should matter to them.

You can find special exceptions all you want, every system is flawed in some way. However, the goal of this was to create an automated system for dealing out punishment for afk's and leavers.

Imo the criteria used was simple.

Create a simple system that can handle a mass quantity of cases with as little human interaction as possible. The system has to be simple and efficient. And i think it's running very well.

Mindspeaker12/17/2014, 4:55:22 PM1 votes

Personally i disagree i think leaverbuster will make the game more popular . If you can't commit to a game you should not join the que.

ValyrianBlade12/17/2014, 4:57:52 PM1 votes

I think the probably eventually becomes players trying to use the system to get a replacement player who is better than someone on their team.

For example a person is cs' ing really badly, let's kick him before he falls too far behind and get a decent replacement. Or someone dies a couple times in game and isn't great defensively so they get tower dove and keep dying. Yes they suck but they aren't feeding intentionally. So you kick them hoping for a better defensive player to take their place.

Also, assuming this is available in ranked, how does it work? Let's say X is the worst player on his team and it's overall a close game and then your team gets an ace and pushes to end. The teammates don't like X so they kick him - does X not get a win, does he get a loss or does nothing happen, what if he's in a promo? Does the replacement player get a win for doing nothing? Do replacement players that join Games that are really far behind get a loss when they lose? What if someone legitimately DCs and reconnects after 2 minutes, do you kick the replacement and let them back in?

There are too many problems with this.

I think when it comes to league, what we need is an overhaul on player behavior. Get rid of players who rage quit - it still sucks when someone DCs or needs to leave due to a real emergency, but it's fairly obvious that the guy who's 0-4 in Lane and quits immediately after a death is rage quitting. Even moreso when you look at their match history and every one of their leaves is when they have a bad KDA - they never leave with a good KDA. Rage quitters are the biggest problem with this game (these are often the same players who rage on teammates for sucking) and should be permanently banned once the behavior shows up consistently. The next steps will be to get rid of players with severe trolling, etc.. It's really quite obvious when someone is trolling as opposed to just sucking.

If leavers were the only problem and it was limited to only when people had real emergencies, or real connection issues, the occurrence rate would be sufficiently low that no one would care much. The problem players are those who leave because they don't like how the game is going and those who behave poorly intentionally, and really these players aren't worth "reforming" they should just be eliminated entirely.

Finally, surprise visitors are fine - in general I think people who don't at least call you first are being rude but I mean that's their fault and not the players. Babies napping though? Seriously, if no one else is home to deal with them - babies wake up from naps, it's what they do. Playing in that case is irresponsible. There's a huge difference between your stove Catching Fire (in assuming it's in the oven for hours rather than in a pot on the burner for 30 min) and your baby waking up or something like that. If something happens less than 2-3 times a year, then sure maybe you can try to play. If something happens even every month, don't value your 4 teammates time and effort so little to put them at risk. Babies wake up from naps EVERY NAP, so really if your significant other isn't there to deal with it you probably shouldn't be starting a game of league...