[suggestion] surrender vote should disappear after 2 people vote no

redfeenix·Jul 15, 2016·271 votes·4,726 views

Hey,

I don't really see the point of keeping the surrender vote active even though 2 people voted no. Can we make it disappear when it fails, so it doesn't clog up my screen?

Is there any benefit of keeping the vote up until all players vote? Thanks

Another idea from the comments is for the surrender box to dissapear after you've voted. The results will be available in the chat, and the box wont be blocking your screen if you voted already. Great idea !

Edit: thanks so much for the support ! Lets try to get a Rioter to notice maybe they can implement it in game =D

86 Comments

FebosJul 15, 201639 votes

There's a benefit about letting the surrender window open even after 2 people already voted "no". You can see how many members of your team want, or don't want, to surrender. If after the second "NO" vote it closed, then you wouldn't know how many players in your team really want to surrender. You could be the only one to want the surrender (20% of the team); it could be 2 players (40%); or it could be 3 (60%). There's a reason why it doesn't close right after the second "NO" vote and what I said might just be that reason.

However, I don't think we need the surrender window to be open a full minute after the second "no". Instead of a 2 minute surrender window it could be only 1 minute and be reduced to 30 seconds after the 2nd "no". It's painful to see that window sitting there while the 5th member doesn't vote either "yes" or "no" for no reason; I already know that we won't surrender - yet.

redfeenixJul 15, 20165 votes

You know what I think that's a totally valid compromise. Good thinking About shortening the time it stays up.

kile147Jul 15, 201610 votes

Heck why don't they have it automatically minimize after you vote already?

Surrender window pops up. You vote. Surrender window disappears. After two minutes, summary window pops up shows results (2-3 or whatever). Window closes, game continues or ends.

I like being able to base my decision based on my teammates, but if I've already voted I don't need real time updates on what they think. Just give me the summary when they've made up their minds.

redfeenixJul 17, 20162 votes

Thats a swell idea.

FlahertyJul 15, 20163 votes

But when the vote is finished it says it in the chat "Surrender Vote Failed 2-3" or something like that so we already know how many people wanted to surrender

4th Chiming LambJul 15, 20164 votes

Not if they don't even get to vote. It could say "Surrender Vote Failed 1-2" in some cases here.

Velzard of KozJul 15, 20163 votes

So the window would disappear only to those who have voted If at the same time two voted NO.

Gov SixFeb 19, 20171 votes

The surrender vote can fail 2-1. If there are three guys and one votes against surrender, you're trapped in that game. It happened to me when a three-man group rage quit and one stayed in the game to taunt me and my duo partner. He kept us in the game until the enemy team ended it. http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/help-support/7Uw7jrRX-surrender-failed-1-to-2-in-favor-of-surrendering

breakordoom444Jul 16, 20161 votes

it marks it in chat on who dident and who voted yes

FebosJul 16, 20162 votes

{quoted}

it marks it in chat on who dident and who voted yes

I think you missed the point. What the OP is saying is that the surrender vote should close as soon as there's a 2nd "no" vote. Imagine this:

Player 1 wants to surrender.
Player 2 and 3 vote "No"
The surrender window closes because there's already two "no" votes.
Player 4 and 5 didn't vote "Yes" or "No" because it wouldn't make a difference to the decision.

Do you understand now what I said? This is what the OP was suggesting. There's a reason why it doesn't close automatically, even tough the "decision" is already made. It gives everyone a chance to vote yes or no, regardless of the outcome.

What I suggested is that the time window that we have, to vote either yes or no, should be shorter; especially when there's already two "no" votes.

breakordoom444Jul 27, 20161 votes

ok thx for telling me how it acully works

EndlessSorcererJul 16, 20164 votes

I'd prefer they remove it after the player has voted.

I've already weighed in on the decision and I'll see the results in chat afterwards.

I don't need it clogging up the screen in the meantime.

redfeenixJul 16, 20161 votes

Oh this is great ! I'l edit my OP to reflect this

EndlessSorcererJul 16, 20163 votes

I'm always happy to help make something more convenient for myself.

Truly, I'm such a giver.

SchoenbergJul 16, 20161 votes

{quoted}

I'd prefer they remove it after the player has voted.

I've already weighed in on the decision and I'll see the results in chat afterwards.

I don't need it clogging up the screen in the meantime.

It takes up the whole screen... -.-

SwiftKitten88Jul 15, 20163 votes

i voted "no"

because i hit the wrong button XD

redfeenixJul 17, 20161 votes

godamnit. yer butchering the integrity of the statistics !

dim2aJul 15, 20162 votes

I think it's a great idea, and if it took a little bit of time to disappear (so someone who wanted to make a statement by voting yes/no, as another poster has mentioned still could), even better! I think 10 seconds after the 2nd no vote is plenty of time though, I don't see a big reason for it to linger longer than that.

Xenos11111Jul 16, 20162 votes

Make it stay for the people who haven't voted yet but disappear for the people who voted already.

Señor WeazelJul 16, 20162 votes

Logged in just to upvote this. I always say that in the game chat too when 2 vote no and no one else has voted. "Whats the point of the vote staying up if 2 already voted no? is there a way to make it go away" but i don't usually get a response -_-

redfeenixJul 16, 20161 votes

Cheers thanks for your support :)

GigaPubeJul 16, 20162 votes

talking about surrender votes and not having it be about how your 4 kill team wont surrender to the obviously indestructible 20 kill enemies that then screw around for 20-30 more minutes in all quadrants of the jungle while we're barely staving off supers from all 3 angles before they finally decide they've had their fun and got enough IP/LP to finish us off and comment with gg ez, as if we already didnt know. but yeah i dont wanna see that tiny little box in the corner for a few more seconds, i hope riot do something about that over forcing their loyal, honorable players to continue obviously lost games for 20-30 minutes more than they should while slowly losing their sanity and tolerance for the game and the community. no wonder they're losing so much players....

WunThousandOursJul 16, 20162 votes

I don't see why not. Although I'm still willing to debate if a 3-2 vote should qualify as a surrender as well.

RobertsmashJul 16, 20162 votes

Just the other day I had a game where I started a surrender vote and two people voted no, one other person voted yes, and there was one hold-out. Our Veigar then dc'd before the vote ended, and the hold-out voted yes. The vote actually passed, despite it being 3-2, because one of the "no's", Veigar, went afk.

This case, to me, seems like a pretty good reason to keep the vote up.

BatchBustsMetaJul 16, 20162 votes

Yeah I always yank it off my screen so I can't see it. That stupid thing tilts me.

JRobin31Jul 17, 20161 votes

Yes, it would be best if we didn't have to see this annoying pop-up on our screens at all. Maybe there are players that like the pop-up, but players like me don't want to see this pop-up ever.

redfeenixAug 1, 20162 votes

Just have an option in settings to deal with this. People have different preferences , and there is no right choice for all players.

VasilisGreenJul 15, 20161 votes

imo, if 3 out of 5 vote yes, it should go forth and give a surrender. 3 out of 5 is the majority, isn't it?

WumbearJul 15, 20161 votes

What.

VasilisGreenJul 15, 20161 votes

what was it that you didn't understand? 3 out of 5 is the majority... A surrender vote with 3 Yes vs 2 No it should end in a surrender. It's really simple

QuortJul 15, 20162 votes

Because you worded it wrong. You said "If 3 out of 5 vote no, it should go forth and give a surrender." What that says is if 3 people vote not to surrender, then the team surrenders anyway which is stupid.

Anyway I disagree. Four votes to surrender is fine.

ShifuneJul 16, 20161 votes

Surrender vote should go through if 3 people vote yes and the other 2 people don't vote at all.

redfeenixJul 16, 20163 votes

3/5 is the majority but not the vast majority. Are you one of thse that likes to surrender? Personally I enjoy fighting till the end

ShifuneJul 16, 20161 votes

{quoted}

3/5 is the majority but not the vast majority. Are you one of thse that likes to surrender? Personally I enjoy fighting till the end

It isn't a matter of liking to surrender, it's facing reality. In some games, there is a point in which you know for a fact that you have already lost. You see it in every elo, even master/challenger. Something will happen and then one team will just "open mid" because they know they lost already and would rather move on to the next game instead of wasting 30 more minutes trying to stall out a losing game. That is because stalling out losing games is simply inefficient. In the time it takes to stall out losing games, you could have easily made more LP by surrendering and playing more games in the long run.

But that isn't what my post was about. I was simply stating that if 3 people vote yes to surrender and the other 2 people can't even bother to press no, the vote should go through. If they vote no, I have no problem with the vote not going through.

redfeenixJul 16, 20161 votes

Ohhhh so you're saying if its 3-0 click yes , they should surrender. Also if its 4-1. Makes sense.

Ap Mid BurstJul 16, 20161 votes

you should be able to surrender with 3 people

BambooJul 16, 20161 votes

To be honost I dont see the point using surrender at all. So many times I'm in a game where people just give up the second they think they dont have a change of winning. And many times (when the pathetic surrender attempt fails) we win anyway.

I wonder why people bother joining a game if they give up that easy. Out of principle I never surrender so if it was up to me, I would just remove the surrender option from the game :)

Best regards,

Bamboo

ZhireJul 17, 20161 votes

I have a similar principle but sometimes, the game just seem so hopeless and even being optimistic won't change it. Mostly, the surrender option is a game play consideration because not every player has the time in the day to waste on a hopeless match.

BambooJul 23, 20161 votes

I understand your argument since my sparetime is extremely limited due to my company and family. But when I decide to spend an hour or more (mostly latenight hehe), I 'reserved' the time to play a game. And even if I lose that game, I still want to play untill the end. I can Always learn from my mistakes and it is also out of courtesy for my and even the opposite teammembers.

redfeenixAug 1, 20161 votes

Fair enough and I share the same viewpoint.

However there are some games which I want to get out of ASAP. IE, toxic/feeding teammates, 12/0 assassins that insta kill etc, or I just need to leave IRL.

If I'm having an unenjoyable experience playing that game, I should have the right to get out of it.

BambooSep 21, 20161 votes

I must admit, your arguments are quite understandable as well, unfortuantly... As I too run into the frustrated toxic and trolling teamm8's a lot. Actually there should be like a banlist add-on as in the old Dota times, where we can choose not to encounter again, or at least be warned about, certain players. The mute and report options are there, but not quite sufficient I think.

JRobin31Jul 17, 20161 votes

The best solution is to allow players an option in the game settings to not have the pop-up appear at all. This would minimize the appearance of this annoying pop-up (also auto voting "NO" as an option would be nice too).

Lestat S46Jul 17, 20161 votes

Same line as the que for a game staring over when someone declines. Whats the point in everyone sitting there waiting for the bar to go all the way across when someone said No when you know your not getting in to a game this time.

redfeenixJul 17, 20162 votes

Holy shit never even thought about that. If 1 person declines why do we have to get 'stuck' in that accept game screen. Good call.

redfeenixAug 4, 20161 votes

Bump

redfeenixAug 6, 20161 votes

Bump

redfeenixSep 22, 20161 votes

bump for visibility