Boards›Gameplay

Lower surrender time to 15 minutes

magic pole··15 votes·1,230 views

Let's be real here. Some games cannot be won. I don't care if you're Faker, if your bot lane goes 0-10 by 7 minutes it's gonna be impossible to come back and win against players who have some semblance of how to end games.

Many games feel lost (and are lost) by 10 minutes--sometimes even earlier. Towers are just too weak to do much against a snowballed team and in losing games I regularly get dove by multiple members while their lane counterparts on my team are pushed back under one of our towers.

Games are shorter as intended, so make the surrender vote available sooner. I've had too many "sit in base and wait for enemy to take inhibs and nexus. Venture out of base and die" games. You get to watch the inevitable unfold for 10 minutes as you sit there unable to retaliate. But you're almost coerced into attempting something due to fear of your account being banned, if it is only to get dove and killed yet again.

I've been on both sides of this. Even in games where I feel I outplayed my opponent and gained a nice lead for my team/lane, often opponents just /ff at 20 minutes. I've had several games recently where opponents just straight up afk'd after 2 deaths in lane. While I rather dislike this behavior, due to the increased snowball mechanics of the game, I honestly don't blame them for feeling hopeless.

TL:DR: Let us /ff at 15 minutes now that games are on average shorter. This should also help reduce toxicity from game-to-game for some players.

9 Comments

Lazypeon1006 votes

People already want to surrender way too early. There are games where people call for FF at 5 minutes in.

I'm sorry, a game might not always have a good start but I don't think the ff timer should be lowered. I don't want to encourage players to surrender even sooner than they already do. The game is more snowbally, but it isn't to the point where things sre utterly hopeless if you're a kill or two behind. A lot of players don't exactly understand this and just call for FF. It's so frustrating for me in ranked because I join those games to win, and sadly I often have to listen to (usually one person) someone rage til we FF.

magic pole1 votes

that's why I'm only saying for it to be lowered to 15 minutes, not 10 or 5.

I rarely surrender and never do in ranked. Ive had many seemingly impossible comeback wins. But there are games that you simply cannot come back and win. Forcing people to sit there as they get slaughtered does nothing but frustrate.

Forcing an unwinnable game to be an extra 5 minutes longer doesn't teach someone that they can come back from early setbacks. Like you said, these people will rage anyway and be a detriment to your team. Some people rage way too hard to be able to be carried. Better to leave them and move on sooner in these cases, lest their rage infect you too

Lazypeon1004 votes

Lowering the FF timer encourages their bad behavior though. And I truly do not believe a large enough amount of games warrant a lower surrender time. I think in a majority of games, people assume it is over before twenty where it really isn't. I don't want my team to instantly FF at 15, where if they waited another minute or two we could group, get objectives, catch someone, egc. People make so many mistakes within a 5 minute period that I think this would overall be a negative effect as it discourages come backs and encourages players to give up sooner than they already do.

Mysticman894 votes

The number of 'unwinnable' games I've won after constantly declining surrender votes is kind of silly as is, since people are notoriously bad at determining game states, especially at lower elos. Even at a gold level people tend to be pretty bad at recognizing scalings (can people stop trying to surrender games with a nasus on the team...eventually he'll one shot anyone and everything) and/or actually using advantages to end games, and it's entirely too common for games to drag out until everyone is full build rendering the early advantage(s) moot, and/or death timers to get long enough that the game is determined by a single lategame teamfight.

Playing from behind is also a skill that exists that many people should probably be looking to improve upon, since even if theres a stupidly fed opponent, they can't be everywhere at once so grabbing a few cs here and here and maybe getting the odd bit of poke out on a weaker champ (or even waiting for a weaker champ to do something foolish since they're cocky due to the fed teammate) can let people get back into the game. Many people just give up when they fall behind though, and start doing yolo nexus runs or even just try to play the same as they would in an evenly matched lane, and then they get punished for it and fall further behind.

I'm not sure what elo players are generally capable of pushing advantages and not throwing, but I don't think people should be able to surrender earlier (if at all) until that point. And once you are at that point, then it should only be a matter of minutes from the point when defeat is truly inevitable and the actual defeat, so surrendering doesn't actually save much time.

magic pole1 votes

yeah you're talking about winnable games.

I'm talking about unwinnable games. The games where your nexus is destroyed pre 20-min or in the 20-22 minutes window.

With the recent S6 changes, these types of games are relatively common

Mysticman894 votes

If your nexus is destroyed than it's too late to surrender anyway. Up until that point, the majority of games are winnable if everyone actually focused on trying to stall out the game rather than tilting or afking. Chances might be slim sure depending on how bad the situation is, but it's usually not as hopeless as people are prone to thinking.

I've had a game recently where the score was 7-30 at one point with all our inhibs down, and we'd only gotten a single tower. Someone was taunting in our base and ended up getting killed, and then we managed to win the following 5v4 and fend off the supers, and then win another teamfight, and then chip away at their towers until we eventually won the game. 3 of my teammates were voting yes to surrender pretty much since the 20 minutes mark, but it goes to show how pretty much anything is recoverable.

People seem to be extra cocky in S6 when they get a lead, which makes people do stupid things and then they get bitten by the S6 death timers. It basically comes down to they'll either promptly end (in which case surrendering doesn't benefit you much since it'll be over soon anyway), or they won't end and you have a chance of winning (in which case you shouldn't be surrendering).

Naramiel3 votes

There have been "allow surrender earlier" posts since forever, and I've always been against the idea... but I have to admit that if Riot sticks to its season 6 idea that "all games should be decided in the first 12 minutes", it's hard to say that it shouldn't be allowed. You still only need 2 people to say no, after all.

Iqqi1 votes

{quoted}

There have been "allow surrender earlier" posts since forever, and I've always been against the idea... but I have to admit that if Riot sticks to its season 6 idea that "all games should be decided in the first 12 minutes", it's hard to say that it shouldn't be allowed. You still only need 2 people to say no, after all.

It still takes a super majority for the surrender to go through. With those kinds of odds there is absolutely no reason why a surrender timer should exist in the first place. This has nothing to do with "you can always come back". If 4 out of 5 people agree to surrender, it doesn't matter if a comeback is possible or not. 4 people on the team have given up.

In addition to that snowballing has drastically increased in season 6. In Riots failed attempts to shorted the length of games all they have done is reduce the time point at which games are often decided. For the most part, I would assume in all divisions except the upper 15%, games are decided in the first 10-15 minutes and one team almost always has some sort of advantage coming out of lane phase.

Again the surrender timer has nothing to do with "a comeback is possible". It is about 4 out of 5 people agreeing that they do not want to continue with this match. That they are the ones in the game and they have decided that the tiny % chance of a victory does not warrant their time commitment for the next 15-20min while they turtle and the other team dances around slowly growing their lead for the eventual victory.

On the other hand a 15min surrender timer and a 20min surrender timer is so insignificant. Sure there are still faceroll games were your team is down 14 - 1 in 15 minutes and you have to wait 5 min to surrender. But ultimately in these scenarios the 2 people responsible for 90% of those deaths are butt hurt that they got destroyed in lane so badly and they refuse to surrender in a false attempt to try to make themselves feel better by making everyone "suffer".

If surrender timers are going to exist at all, it doesn't matter if the shave 5 min. On the other hand it is a very easy programming change and when you also consider the fact that Riot has been attempting to lower the average length of games, that they would make this change if they really were serious about lowering game length. Not that they have been successful at any capacity.

DangerWithin1 votes

I'd say let's make it "Surrender at 10 minutes". The reason for this is because games should be kept going ONLY IF PEOPLE INDEED STILL WANNA GO FOR A COMEBACK... otherwise it's just masochistic for the rest who don't wanna play anymore. Seriously, I understand the "we can still do it" mentality, and even I still have matches where I feel like I don't wanna surrender, but... let's be real.. those don't happen that often, and lowering surrender time will help a lot.

And to all those who think this is not a good idea... People don't have to be forced to stick around for a game they don't wanna play anymore.

(Now I seriously feel like others have said similar things before. Note: I didn't read all the comments on this topic, sry about that)

But seriously. I'd say we should leave it at 10, because in the end, people should be allowed to decide if they wanna keep going with a match that had a bad start, not be forced into it. Besides, it's enough to have 2 people who either say NO or don't choose in order to continue after the surrender time has been reached, so the minimum surrender time seems pretty irrelevant in the big picture (to my possibly-mild-ignorant opinion at least).

More from Gameplay

3 Refunds per season, upvote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay764 comments
7,167
votes
3 Refunds per season, upvote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay156 comments
3,510
votes
UPVOTE FOR URF
Gameplay606 comments
2,440
votes
Yes plz.
Gameplay456 comments
1,721
votes
3 Refunds per season, up vote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay114 comments
1,716
votes
When is ANYONE at riot going to address the awful new player experience?
Gameplay634 comments
1,383
votes

More by magic pole

Hexdrinker needs a serious nerf
Gameplay143 comments
140
votes
How to Fix Dynamic Queue
Gameplay31 comments
85
votes
Fiddlesticks needs compensation
Gameplay75 comments
82
votes
When you get your ADC fed as support
Memes & Games29 comments
62
votes
What do "OP" champions have in common?
Gameplay131 comments
55
votes
Buff inner and inhib turrets.
Gameplay28 comments
47
votes