Boards›Gameplay

A change to surrender votes.

AnomalousChimera·10/1/2014, 7:30:32 PM·1 votes·666 views

I am tired of matches that are drawn out for far longer than they should be. I believe that a player's accuracy in his/her surrender votes should increase the weight of his/her vote and that the weighting should be directly proportional to accuracy. And I believe that this system should gauge accuracy on surrender votes that occur before the 30 minute mark (for Summoner's Rift. This should vary based on the map) because being able to see that a match is unwinnable at a 1X minute mark (or even before the 10 minute mark and proactively suggesting that a surrender vote should be called at the 20 minute mark) or 2X minute mark requires better judgement than during later points in the match. The system should only use the first surrender vote in a match to heavily reward making good calls.

So let's say 2 players have played 100 games and lost all of them, each of them accurately voting to surrender in 1 of those games (first surrender vote before the 30 minute mark in each case). 2 other players have also played and lost 100 games and have never voted to surrender. One player has also played 100 games and accurately voted to surrender in 98 of them. These 5 are then paired together in match. The last player's weight in the vote should be 49 times that of the first two, and the other two should get a weight of zero. In this scenario, that last player singlehandedly brings it up to the guaranteed minimum 70% supermajority, effectively ending the match without even needing for the other votes to be cast. Weighting should be relative to the person with the lowest nonzero accuracy rating or the person with the highest accuracy rating. Ignore how bad these 5 are as players and focus on their ability to judge how badly they are losing.

What are the upsides to this? This could reduce the amount of dodges and the occurrence of leaving mid-match (ragequitting) because the average duration of matches would decrease. Trolls trying to punish people by not voting to surrender will be penalized by having the weight of their votes decrease, effectively discouraging troll votes.

What does the community think of this?

12 Comments

redniwediS10/1/2014, 7:54:41 PM5 votes

So instead of "troll votes" keeping a game from ending you will have "troll votes" that force a surrender when one is not desired? My suggestion is to play with friends, that way if a game is lost you can simply surrender on your own without adding a new type of "troll vote".

Deep Terror Nami10/1/2014, 7:50:47 PM4 votes

So the people that vote to surrender a lot, and throw their matches when the team won't surrender get more weight in their vote to be better than the people that never give up. Ya good idea.

ValyrianBlade10/1/2014, 7:57:18 PM2 votes

This is really unfair. You can vote to surrender then single handedly make your decision "accurate" by sucking for the remainder of the game. perhaps the attitude that you think you'll lose causes the loss more than the "factors" that you're evaluating to say you should surrender.

I understand that there are definitely Games where you're very confident you'll lose and it's not worth your time to play the game out if you only have a 2% chance of winning (and there is ALWAYS a chance your opponent will have a DC or will throw by getting aced at Baron or something, or a teammate pulls off a backdoor, etc...). Just because it isn't worth your time doesn't mean you don't have a teammate who's 2-2 in their promo and desperately wants to win and deserves the full effort of his team to try to pull it off.

In fact, have you paid attention to how often you want to surrender early when you're in promos versus when you're not?

And finally, not voting to surrender doesn't mean you think you're team has > 50% chance to win, it means voting that your team has a chance to win beyond the entire enemy team DC'ing simultaneously. Yes there are Games where you're so far behind it's no longer fun, but in general you have a chance to make a comeback and your teammates deserve your best effort to do so.

AnomalousChimera10/1/2014, 7:43:39 PM1 votes

If anyone is wondering about the poll options, it's because of the text limit that I went with yes and no instead of in favor and against.

Deathless81C10/1/2014, 9:21:44 PM1 votes

I hate the current system. I've lost track of the number of time two trolls basically held 2 or 3 other players hostage for close to an hour because of the BS.

Deathless81C10/1/2014, 10:05:37 PM1 votes

Name and Shame. Two intentional feeders/trolls- summoners names. A chinese and Deathdestroyed24. Check their recent game if you don't believe me.

Trueponielove10/2/2014, 6:09:57 AM1 votes

Personally I wish that 3 vs 2 would count as a surrender ._. it pisses me off. If 3 out of 5 people want to surrender it's the majority and if that many people have given up the match is over anyway, yet because of the system requring at least 4 out of the 5 to surrender, not only do games very often carry on long past there expatriation date but you can get a pissed off duo que who will on purpose drag it out just to annoy there teammates even further.