Ok then, what about a NO CONTEST RULE for DCs?

Occams Raiser·May 26, 2015·150 votes·5,767 views

If one person fails to connect the remaining teammates get a vote of NO CONTEST at the 10 minute mark. This can't really be abused and it cuts the wasted time in half or more. NO ONE gains or loses LP or MMR so there is no inflation. The one player that DCed is dealt with accordingly. The only down side to this would be for those people that think it's ok to win a 5 on 4, and we know what we think of those people. @#$% them! The other abuse may be one guy that thought he was going to get smashed so he leaves at select. Well are there people that want to win because of a troll. Well @#$% you too. I thought you came for sport!

WIN WIN?

We can work on AFKers after this is implemented. First things first.

EDIT: Only the four remaining members get to vote.

166 Comments

ErockandrollMay 26, 20157 votes

you know, I'm pretty sure they were working on something like that, until the behavioral team blocked them, thinking, "this will give people every reason to be toxic" because they will get a free pass if they force the guy on tilt to afk to escape the toxicity.

Seriously, theirs no right answer. Except continue to punish the DCers when the come up.

Occams RaiserMay 26, 201544 votes

This isn't for afks. NC NEVER CONNECTED

AkesgerothMay 26, 20158 votes

Bullshit. DotA 2 has that and it works just fine.

Zenthon PrimeMay 26, 20156 votes

I really hate the Dota 2 card, but this is complete truth. I've spent a few hundred hours in Dota and have never once seen this sort of idiocy pop up, just the normal raging (albiet a bit more often than in LoL).

AkesgerothMay 26, 20153 votes

It's not even a "card". They claim those systems don't work, yet we have a perfect example of a very popular game where those systems work perfectly.

Zair UmbrasMay 27, 20153 votes

We have on example of one game that shares the same base genre. One. Single. Game. Other MOBAs do not have the feature. The original DOTA did not, HotS does not, Smite does not, HoN doesn't, this game doesn't, and a number of tower defense games of the similar style like Super Monday Night Combat do not have the feature to call it draw. I'll also inform you that of all of them, only HotS has an actual DC-help feature where the person is controlled via AI, which can be controlled with various pings...

So... if you think DotA2 can do no wrong and their way is perfect when every other game ever doesn't have the same option or even think it's a valid fix, then you should probably go back to that very same game. :3

N30NP4NDAMay 27, 20151 votes

To be honest...

DotA is better in every way except one. Popularity. In League of Legends there is a guide for literally everything. there are countless youtubers and streamers to watch, there are patch by patch updates guides for every champion. and there are lower queue times.

In DotA? There are no youtubers, there are no guides, there is nothing. Even though the game has everything that a league player wishes they had ability to leave 4v5's, integrated mic system, better ping system, real death recap, more interesting items, a better community in general, better music, Being on steam which has tons of benifits...

sry rambling

Zair UmbrasMay 27, 20152 votes

DotA is less popular for many reasons. One of the biggest issues is the community. People say League is toxic... When you first start off in DotA nowadays, you run into the same people you do in League, but it's worse because you have no idea what you're doing due to the lack of everything, which means these people are even worse because there is an excuse for why that person sucks while in League, we have a guide for everything from viable odd picks like Blukong and trollicious picks like AP Draven.

Biggest issue though is that you can't use DotA2 as an example for anything. They've grown a lot, but their max amount of players on at once is 1.2mil. League averages 26mil. Not maxes at 26mil, no, AVERAGES. A lot more players and a lot more casuals and a lot more people that like to abuse systems.

I mean, think about it. In DotA, you can pretty much bully the shit out of your teammate who's doing poorly until they ragequit, then pop the vote for a draw, and GG, you didn't lose anything but time. Considering League already has a toxicity problem with people trolling until people ragequit, this would pretty much encourage people TO do such. Seriously. We can say there's an ignore feature all day long, but when some one is heated from losing and now they've got their teammates being dicks, the last thing they usually do is hit the ignore. They almost always exit out of League and say 'Screw it!'. That's not what we need. It really isn't.

TH ExarthiousMay 27, 20151 votes

League will become very unpopular for one reason. The toxic population. My household alone has had five people quit, with me hanging by a thread. I'm waiting out to see if they truly begin to punish the toxic players. If this doesn't happen soon, I'm gone too.

Defend it all you want, and the game will be a ghost town.

Zair UmbrasMay 27, 20151 votes

Games never die because of their communities whether its toxic or not, they die to a new game coming out and even then it's not guaranteed.~

TH ExarthiousMay 29, 20151 votes

That isn't entirely true. I've been gaming since EQ1 Alpha, and have played every PvP oriented game sense. I've witnessed entire gaming communities leave a game over toxicity. This game has another issue, gaining new players that do not have friends who play. Level up a new account and see the issues for yourself.

Zair UmbrasMay 29, 20151 votes

I've been gaming since EQ release and even EQ has not died. Damn thing has 18 expansions now I believe.

I can also give WoW as a prime example. They've got one of the worst communities and have since Cata was released. WotLK had a lot of asses, but Cata REALLY brought it out, yet the only reason they lost subs was because of how poor Pandaland was designed at the start, yet it still sits at about 8mil subscribers.

As for leveling up a new account, I don't have to level a new account to know the issues. I've invited my own friends to try League and even when I first started back when Diana was released, there was toxicity issues. A good majority of these issues are caused by the fact that it's a FtP game. When any game becomes popular and free, it tends to attract the worst kinds of people, usually ones who don't even speak the proper English.

During my own first level up was a huge issue with Latin Americans. Nowadays I usually see people speaking in Asian languages. I've yet to see anyone speaking in English writing versions of Asian languages do anything but bitch just like back in the day, anyone who spoke Spanish at champ select usually ended up cussing the entire game when some one would die, when they would die, when they were losing, or the game simply wasn't going perfect.

Honestly, it won't be the death of a game to have a toxic community until a new game comes into play for people to jump at. With HotS coming in and already having eSports teams and having college goers do 'Dorm Matches', it wouldn't surprise me if the overflow of toxicity dies down to invade another game. That's usually how it goes. Toxic players move from game to game, blaming the communities for their own failures. Smite is already growing in toxicity and before it was a 'idgaf' kinda game like League was when it first came out.~

TH ExarthiousMay 29, 20151 votes

There is a huge difference in making multi-millions, to making less than a million a year. You're correct that nothing truly dies out entirely with a few exceptions; "Age of Conan" which had one of the worse player base to date, and; "Warhammer" which had its share of toxicity, but suffered other issues too.

The gaming market is HUGE, and companies will need to understand that. You pointed out WoW, and its toxicity. Blizzard went from reporting 1.5 billion in 2007 to making less than 300 million in 2014.

Riot will suffer the same issues, and if they don't get a grasp on it now it could destroy eSports forever, and we all like eSports don't we? This is where fans need to be critical, so that we can expand on an already large market.

T RexHasTinyArmsMay 26, 20152 votes

However if it is limited to counting a do that occurs pre 1 min then there is no incentive to do this since it is unlikely that you even get into a level 1 team fight that fast let alone lose it hard and have time to rage at someone to drive them off. The only way that your suggestion works is if you don't restrict it to players that never connect or dc in the first minute or two. If you do that it removes the problem, plus you don't even waste much time on the game if you are the 5 man side.

TheJinxedOneMay 30, 20151 votes

u can proc this vote at 4 minutes if one player on your team is still level 1 perhaps??

Sozan5May 26, 20157 votes

Why 10 minutes?

The game should be automatically paused for about a minute or two if someone didn't connect (or disconnected before 15 second mark). If he doesn't connect till then - the game is cancelled and the guy who didn't connect suffers a dodge penalty (so -3/10 LP or a single loss if in promotion). If he does connect, the game is played normally.

I am actually puzzled why it's not in game yet.

Occams RaiserMay 26, 20154 votes

I am fine with that. They are able to pause the game in championships. I went with 10 minutes because if you say 5 there is always a group of knuckle heads that say they can comeback from a 5 minute deficit.

Troy242621May 26, 20156 votes

Riot'll probably say something along the lines of "Could be abused with duo queue," but I don't see that happening. if they could consistently win 4v5, they wouldn't need the safety net, and that AFKing account will be banned REALLY quickly.

Or perhaps "They might re-connect," but at 10 minutes they'll be so behind it's still not a fair match.

There are no logical reasons to disagree with this proposal.

Occams RaiserMay 26, 20154 votes

There has already been debates on Duo queue. The partner always receives the punishment too. That is an old concern. Thanks though.

T RexHasTinyArmsMay 26, 20151 votes

Could be moved up to 5 min. If you don't connect for a full 5 minutes you probably aren't going to or will be so far behind it won't matter.

Occams RaiserMay 26, 20152 votes

I also like 5 minutes but so may people seem to think you can come back from 5 minutes that I get a lot of push back on early ideas.

T RexHasTinyArmsMay 26, 20152 votes

I wouldn't even suggest voting. Maybe it is bc I played a lot of poker and think in terms of expected value, but you will lose enough games that are 4v5 the whole game that it won't be made up for by come backs. Also most DCs happen later in the game so they wouldn't be affected by this. I don't like the idea of DC games being removed bc it sucks to play 15, 20, or even 30 minutes and be told it doesn't count for anything (which is the only way it would make sense to do), but losing 5 minutes to remove all games that are complete 4v5s doesn't seem that bad. You lose 5 min when you're on the winning side which isn't a huge waste, and when you're on the losing side you save 20 min that has maybe a 30% chance to win in my experience. That is such a big payoff from the four side I think it's worth the 5 min you give up from the 5 man side.

10 min in is also long enough that better players will be able to judge if they have a chance 4v5 and refuse a surrender if they want a shot at not losing LP, but short enough that if you're getting stomped you're really thankful to be able to bail, lose the LP and go on to the next game.

Angry MonsterMay 26, 20156 votes

Nope.avi

The reasons why this is not done has been stated by riot and no one has come up with a REASONABLE counter argument. Can be abused by duos, boosters, team mates BMing on someones case they do not like comp, or straight up agreement in lobby to disband the game this way.

Then you would have to worry about people not agreeing with the vote. The never surrender personalities or people that just want to see you thow a fit and do not care about their MMR.

Lastly this effects the enemy that showed up and was playing the game. By removing your penalty you are lowering their rewards. At most they are going to get half LP and in worse case Riot will give out no LP.

Also what is connected? Is it loading screen moving the champ? 1 millisecond of information in transition to loading screen?

Deal with these issues reasonably and riot may listen. But i doubt you can.

T RexHasTinyArmsMay 26, 20152 votes

Read my other posts on here, I think they provide reasonable counter arguments to most of these issues, but basically wiping any game that has a DC within the first minute who stays DC for 4-5 minutes is pretty safe because you don't have enough info to abuse it by dodging games you think you'll lose (maybe 1 in 1000 cases you have such a bad min 1 or min 2 that you would rather not risk playing it, but that is rare), and by the time someone is doing poorly, it isn't valuable to rage at them because if they DC past 1 or 2 minutes depending on system, you don't get protection and still lose normal LP.

Angry MonsterMay 26, 20151 votes

Also what is connected? Is it loading screen? moving the champ? 1 millisecond of information in transition to loading screen?

You do not define this, WHICH IS IMPORTANT since your basing your ideas off of.

I see that you want to take the full LP loss and move on, which from past threads this is why they want the system in place, to stop the LP loss. So i am not sure where this goes with the that side of the crowd. I totally get the idea of just wanting to get into the next game. Hell i can totally agree with it. Not sure about the automatic thing though.

My points are more directed at the people who want LP loss mitigation though.

Occams RaiserMay 26, 20152 votes

Some people don't care about LP loss and some people just don't want to waste time. I am of the latter. I don't give a shit about LP loss if I could get another game in 5 minutes. It is all about numbers any way. I don't know any one that doesn't have damn there 1000 games that isn't high Tier.

Angry MonsterMay 26, 20151 votes

A lot of my complaints for the idea in general were under the assumption that LP mitigation was the goal.

you say

NO ONE gains or loses LP or MMR so there is no inflation

this right from your original post. It shows that you are trying to prevent it. Now you are saying that it is not your goal. Please make up your mind.

Occams RaiserMay 26, 20152 votes

Neither side loses. nothing is awarded. It is a wash. Terminated.

Angry MonsterMay 26, 20152 votes

congrats that is the meaning of mitigation. Which i have a problem with. And you can not address the problems around.

Occams RaiserMay 26, 20151 votes

If there was a system with mitigation I would take it. If there was a system to stop early without mitigation I would take it.

Angry MonsterMay 26, 20151 votes

you are talking both sides of a conversation making talking with almost impossible. at least stick with what you say in the orginal post.

Occams RaiserMay 26, 20152 votes

I an idea man comes up with a lot of ideas. In reality I only want my time saved. There is a camp that wants LP saved, on that wants early surrender for 4 on 5, and one that free leaving regardless of LP. I keep telling you these arguments I pose are not about me personally.

Angry MonsterMay 26, 20152 votes

I an idea man comes up with a lot of ideas.

biggest cop out i have ever read. An idea man is someone who things of something completely and does it. You are not an idea man. You are a whiner, you found a problem that you have no intention of really trying to fix. You are waiting one someone else to do it for you.

If you were an idea man you would of taken every ounce of criticism and said is this legit? Yes or NO. Then you would of spent time trying to fix your idea and make it work even better. That is what an idea man does.

ApolloclipticMay 26, 20155 votes

nothing to add, just upvote and move on :)

ßlrdMay 27, 20154 votes

i like bread to chicken

T RexHasTinyArmsMay 26, 20152 votes

If it's a player who never connects you could move it up to 5 minutes and remove the vote. Losing 5 minutes because the entire game is 4v5 isn't a big deal, but 10 minutes is half the game if it's a stomp. If you play half the game it sucks to give up the game counting, so I'd say move it up to 5, since if someone never connects then 5 minutes in is long enough they can fix a client crash and log back in or any other stupid errors that might cause them not to log in (I once came in a few minutes late bc I was playing w/ cable tether on my lap top bc wi fi was being shitty, and my bull dog ran by and yanked it out lol).

My opinion is the best option would be a 5 minute "they haven't connected game gets wiped automatically" option, and at 10 minutes if there is a DC who has been gone longer than 2 minutes give us an early surrender option so we don't have to waste a full 20 (that way when someone rage quits bc they got crushed in lane it doesn't get voided, which it shouldn't because you were more likely to lose that game even if they didn't DC).

Occams RaiserMay 26, 20153 votes

I agree but if the game is a wash at 5 minutes there isnt any need to think beyond that is there. It would automatically blow both nexuses, nexusees, nexi..... And call it a draw or "boom" NO CONTEST.

T RexHasTinyArmsMay 26, 20151 votes

Yeah, but there are a lot of cases where someone connects does poorly and quits at 5 or 7 min and getting to surrender early and save 8-10 min of losing would be nice too. However, if they DC that far into the game you should still lose LP to get out, just not get banned for giving up or punish your team making them fight 3v5 for that 8-10 min.

Occams RaiserMay 26, 20152 votes

I would like early surrender to be handled separately from this issue. When you put them together people start conflating, making false equivocations, and blowing the abuse whistle. Lets bang out no contest then handle early leaving later.

CindikleMay 26, 20152 votes

[{quoted}](name=Occams Raiser,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=JhflUtjz,comment-id=,timestamp=2015-05-26T17:32:06.366+0000)

If one person fails to connect the remaining people get a vote of NO CONTEST at the 10 minute mark. This can't really be abused and it cuts the wasted time in half or more. NO ONE gains or loses LP or MMR so there is no inflation. The one player that DCed is dealt with accordingly. The only down side to this would be for those people that think it's ok to win a 5 on 4, and we know what we think of those people. @#$% them! The other abuse may be one guy that thought he was going to get smashed so he leaves at select. Well are there people that want to win because of a troll. Well @#$% you too. I thought you came for sport!

WIN WIN?

We can work on AFKers after this is implemented. First things first.

Poor idea.

This is easily abused when your team is losing. If you don't care about the punishment, are playing a troll account or say you're with a friend or two that can cycle through this. So very easily abused.

And not only that, but current the problem is usually just for one team that has to deal with this. This makes it a problem for both sides. Currently an AFK ruins one team. Now their ruin the game for both. Not saying the other team deserves the win. But you're widening the punishment by making the game a waste of 9 players time instead of 4. And who's to say the other side wont have an AFK of their own.

The best system I can think of is one where someone else takes the champion over. Use the mastery system to find someone who is at a similar skill level(although it's not really an accurate view of that, but can be used none the less). This player will gain 2x IP for a win, 1.5x IP for a loss. Cannot lose LP, but can gain it for a win(if game is ranked). Players that are on Lyte's naughty list will not get picked. A team can choose to vote out said player once, but will be stuck with the second player.

While this would probably be very hard to implement since they would have to find a way to find players for that champion that will pick a good match. It leaves very little chance of abuse. Trolls are not as common as the forums will have you believe. If you get one, that's what the vote out is for. If you get a 2nd. Your luck is horrible.

Occams RaiserMay 26, 20157 votes

I am not going to entertain this cause I wrote the post effectively enough for you to know I am not talking about ingame afk.

CindikleMay 26, 20155 votes

Guess I skimmed a bit too quick.

If a player failed to connect and still hasn't connected before the jungle spawns the game should honestly just restart.

That early game can decide so much.

Often that player is having a problem with a bug and cannot connect anyway. The game restarting would help fix this usually. Sadly this still takes up time from champ select. But I don't think 10minutes is needed to decide a DC isn't coming back.

Occams RaiserMay 26, 20153 votes

I agree with this.

RootworthMay 26, 20152 votes

Easily abused.

Occams RaiserMay 26, 201510 votes

Tell me how, cause I don't think you read it.

rtbf209142555May 27, 20153 votes

I might of misread it, but I too believe it can be abused. The reason is that if your team just gets demolished in the first ten minutes someone just arks then you just vote on it and get it. I think the better system would be if someone is afk for like 3-5 minutes.

Sona PingMay 27, 20159 votes

You misread it; his post lacks some clarity, granted.

What he was writing is that the "No Contest" vote would be for those games when the server never makes a connection to the player and the champion is never able to leave the fountain.

rtbf209142555May 27, 20152 votes

Well then that is a fantastic idea

Mister LiteralMay 26, 20151 votes

I don't see an issue of being qualified to end game early because of a no show. I main Soraka supp and when adcs never connect, It becomes a slow and painful loss. There are plenty of teams who purposely keep the game going by avoiding to take objectives and completely manipulate this situation.

Occams RaiserMay 26, 20152 votes

I hate them the most.