Changes to the surrender system

Kekker·12/2/2015, 3:36:14 PM·1 votes·842 views

So I just read a discussion about how the surrender system doesn't work positively, and even more negatively. Then I thought it might be better if Rito changed the system and made it so, the entire team has to vote unaminous. Only when all 5 team members vote yes, the game will be surrenderd. Of course when there is someone AFK, it will be all 4 team members.

The reason I want this system, is because I have too many games which are surrenderd when we still could have won easily. Teams always have a way to come back into the game, there is always a chance of winning, even when it looks so desperate. But when one feeder convinces the others to surrender, one person gets the worse end of it. People just need the motivation to fight for that win, especially when things seem most dark. This new surrender system could help them.

2 Comments

ProbeoftheAnus12/2/2015, 4:31:01 PM2 votes

I would say that the surrender option is toxic in and on itself. What do you see more often in the situation where a player or players want to surrender and the vote fails? Does the yes-surrender camp more often say "well, the team believes that we can still win, let's figure out a comeback strategy together", or do they say "fucking teammates wasting our time in a lost game, guess I'll fuck around for another 3 minutes until we can vote again?" The surrender system gives the illusion of majority rules or whatever, but the fact is if 1 or 2 people have given up on your team, you might as well all give up.

realDRdeal12/2/2015, 4:55:26 PM2 votes

I actually just commented on another surrender related post. I think that rather than changing the number of votes or moving the time at which surrender becomes an option, surrender should be condition locked. So rather than being able to surrender at 20 minutes, surrender should only become available when certain conditions are met such as having 1 or more dc/afks AND being down a certain amount of team gold or objectives (gold/objective amount scales with number of dcs). This way teams would have to keep fighting in those games where they are behind but not screwed, but would still be able to surrender if conditions were so bad that the game was in fact a foregone conclusion. Thoughts?