AFK forgivness?

NightLightz101·Nov 19, 2017·2 votes·474 views

We all have those games where a teammate unexpectedly goes AFK during a ranked match your blood boils and toxicity rises as you try to do your best without them but you still lose the match (and your lp) this tends to happen in lower elos, but they make up the majority of the players in lol making games toxic and teammates salty. To combat this it would be a neat idea to implement AFK forgiveness (AFKF) this idea is pretty simple AFKers lose lp, while there team loses no lp, the enemy team on the other hand will gain lp since there time was wasted and they shouldn't be punished due to an enemy AFKer. This can help lower elos climb and create a less toxic environment for the entire community.

13 Comments

ZetsüNov 19, 20171 votes

Duo-boosting just got a whole lot faster.

TaeseukNov 19, 20171 votes

It would just be abused by those in Premades teams, oh this game isn't going our way one of us afk so the other keeps their points. Then next time the other way around.

RK N0vaNov 19, 20171 votes

One possible solution I can think of to remedy this would be a simple deterrent: Anyone queued with the player who goes afk does not receive any compensation; they are in the same boat as the afk player.

TaeseukNov 19, 20171 votes

That system is already in place it's called remake however what you're proposing would be just as unfair to the person queuing with then as they would have out work into playing the game just like any other teammate on the afkers side, id be pretty annoyed if somebody i was in queue with went afk we kept playing as a 4 man and then everybody else has their lp saved but I don't, it would actually cause more people to afk if they did that kind of system.

RK N0vaNov 19, 20171 votes

You're proving my point, it is supposed to be a deterrent; a solution to the "but it will be abused by premades!". People are not going to queue up with people who frequently rage-quit, or suffer from internet connectivity issues. Friends that do queue together are generally more understanding and forgiving of unforeseen circumstances (I would hope so, or that really would make for unpleasant bonding).

It makes no sense to claim that it would cause more players to go afk, given that it changes nothing except for the random players who are being compensated due to circumstances beyond their control; it's a net positive.

It is a simple solution to a simple problem: Solo players don't like being stuck in games that turn into 4v5, 8 minutes into a game past the remake window. So don't enable LP loss when it's 4v5,_ "But then it gets abused by premades", so don't enable LP loss prevention to the afk player and their premade , "But that would make me afk more"_

The issue has been narrowed down to "my friend is afk, and I feel cheated because other people got compensated, and I did not".

How often does this person go afk? Is it so frequent that you get upset at everyone else keeping their LP while you continue to tank game-after-game because your partner keeps going afk?

Let's be logical here - it's stopping the randoms from getting dragged down by negative game-play behavior.

TaeseukNov 19, 20171 votes

So okay for example I que with my friend, they afk 5 minutes in we can't remake, I still play the game as I normally would regardless of the fact that my friend went afk the game ends and the other three players get their lp protected I don't despite the fact that I played as much and as hard ad they did because I qued with the person so I just spent x amount of time trying to help as much as I can just to lose lp anyway and have the rest of the team have theirs protected for me personally I wouldn't care because I don't get annoyed easily but the regular playerbaae would then end up tilted because they wasted their time only to be struck with the lp lose anyway which means they're more likely to say "I'm going afk until the game ends because there really is no point in me trying when I'm going to lp anyway. "

Yes the current system makes both parties lose lp but they don't have to play through the game first, it means that the person that didn't go afk can. Just requeue and earn the lp back right away.

Granted those that que and abuse the system in question wouldn't care themselves sure and in those circumstances yeah it protects the other teammates but in circumstance where people don't always afk and have a one time deal, they have to leave for x reason. Computer/internet issues that will become and issue.

I know people going afk is frustrating for players I really do having faced it myself but in a game that wants to promote teamwork having people play through the game and get and have some get "punished" while others don't will do the exact opposite at least in my opinion from what I've seen from how players behave.

RK N0vaNov 19, 20171 votes

"...but the regular playerbase would then end up tilted because they wasted their time only to be struck with the lp lose anyway..."

Making an awfully big assumption here. Statistically speaking, we need to look at how often the people queued up in a party get mad at their friend who went afk; how often does it happen? To get upset that you're losing LP while everyone else keeps theirs, has to acknowledge the previous issue: The premade keeps leaving. At this point, it's not worth queuing with someone who is known to get tilted and leave frequently.

You are prioritizing 'LP loss' over friendship, which is rather shitty from a morally judgemental perspective (subjectively speaking).

Right now players are punished because one person does not want to be a team player (they leave). This idea puts a stop to that. Getting upset because you don't get compensation as a result of queuing with someone who quit, is like getting upset that you were arrested for hanging out with a criminal in the process of crime. The logical thing to do is not queue up with someone who is going to keep quitting.

NightLightz101Nov 19, 20171 votes

[{quoted}](name=RK N0va,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=ZZLB3vdu,comment-id=000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-11-19T17:31:20.623+0000)

"...but the regular playerbase would then end up tilted because they wasted their time only to be struck with the lp lose anyway..."

Making an awfully big assumption here. Statistically speaking, we need to look at how often the people queued up in a party get mad at their friend who went afk; how often does it happen? To get upset that you're losing LP while everyone else keeps theirs, has to acknowledge the previous issue: The premade keeps leaving. At this point, it's not worth queuing with someone who is known to get tilted and leave frequently.

You are prioritizing 'LP loss' over friendship, which is rather shitty from a morally judgemental perspective (subjectively speaking).

Right now players are punished because one person does not want to be a team player (they leave). This idea puts a stop to that. Getting upset because you don't get compensation as a result of queuing with someone who quit, is like getting upset that you were arrested for hanging out with a criminal in the process of crime. The logical thing to do is not queue up with someone who is going to keep quitting.

So making this system entirely solo due orientated would solve that issue?

RK N0vaNov 19, 20171 votes

I'm not sure what you mean by "solo due oriented"; are you referring to solo-queue?

I'm under the impression/ assumption most of the complaints come from solo-queue about randoms leaving the match and dragging everyone down as a result. You can try you hardest and play the best game possible, but it means nothing if that one random decides to leave the game.

https://www.leagueofgraphs.com/rankings/afk-stats

I do not know how accurate this website is, but I'm basing the argument off the stats I can find. Only 1.5% more players in North America are afk in games than the flex-queue counterpart. So it would likely be beneficial to apply the LP loss prevention to both fronts.

I do think this would quell a lot of temper in the community.

NightLightz101Nov 24, 20171 votes

[{quoted}](name=RK N0va,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=ZZLB3vdu,comment-id=00010000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-11-19T22:56:48.523+0000)

I'm not sure what you mean by "solo due oriented"; are you referring to solo-queue?

I'm under the impression/ assumption most of the complaints come from solo-queue about randoms leaving the match and dragging everyone down as a result. You can try you hardest and play the best game possible, but it means nothing if that one random decides to leave the game.

https://www.leagueofgraphs.com/rankings/afk-stats

I do not know how accurate this website is, but I'm basing the argument off the stats I can find. Only 1.5% more players in North America are afk in games than the flex-queue counterpart. So it would likely be beneficial to apply the LP loss prevention to both fronts.

I do think this would quell a lot of temper in the community.

yes I meant solo que

NightLightz101Nov 19, 20171 votes

How can we make this system (AFKF) full proof? Suggestions would be nice 👍 I was thinking maybe players with a pregame wait time shouldn't be allowed to duo with others this can solve most the problem Also giving pregame timers after your first afk not the second would make this a sturdier system