Boards›Gameplay

NEW VOTE FEATURE FOR CHAMPION SELECT PLEASE SUPPORT!!!

SlothLovesChunk··132 votes·9,690 views

Received a response from Riot Support suggesting I post this idea on the forums:

"Mojo Jojo Mojo Jojo (League of Legends Player Support) Oct 10 20:28

Greetings Pjones912310,

Thanks for contacting me. My name is Mojo Jojo and I'm glad to be of service to you. Honestly, I think your suggestion is really awesome. I know there are some players who are suffering from unfair losses of LP because of some offensive players in the league. It is true that dodging would be a better way to lose more LP because of feeders.

You know what? League would be better if this idea will be considered. Why not share this on our forums? I know a lot of summoners will back you up. Also, there are a lot of Rioters who constantly check out our forums for some helpful suggestions like this one. ^^

Thank you for sharing this with us. If you have any other concerns, please don't hesitate to contact us again.

Mojo Jojo Player Support Specialist"

I thought of an idea the other day to combat trolls and people refusing to communicate in the Champion select screen. I know currently you have it so that you can avoid a bad situation by dodging for 3 LP and a short "suspension", but I've had several situations where it happens multiple times in a row which penalizes summoners HARD with a severe LP loss and huge "suspension" just for trying to avoid a "guaranteed" loss.

My suggestion is to implement a voting option, the same as surrendering in-game, so that if Summoners get into a situation in champion select where they are being trolled or someone miss-clicks and a team ends up with 3 supports, etc. they can vote and if majority wins the game will be cancelled and the players re-queued.

There is really no negative side to this as it would still take 4/5 for the vote to pass. Please lets get some player and Riot backing on this to get this simple but extremely beneficial feature implemented to reduce the amount of negative experiences without someone being penalized!

COMBAT THE TROLLS, STOP PENALIZING LEGITIMATE PLAYERS WHO SIMPLY ARE TRYING TO AVOID A NEGATIVE GAMEPLAY EXPERIENCE! ^_^

EDIT

First of all, thank you all for viewing and/or commenting on this, your feedback (both negative and positive) is very much constructive and appreciated!!! Most of the complaints have been there being no consequence for using this vote to dodge. So, therefore I will add to this suggestion by asking Riot, if they look into this, to impose a >>5 minute queue ban<< after a successful vote but >>NO LOSS OF LP<< I think this addition would comfort most of the negativity and lessen the chance of this feature being abused

177 Comments

Lord OwlBear24 votes

I don't play a lot of ranked due to the amount of trolls I tend to encounter. I'm for anything that helps avoid people like that, and this seems like an easy non-invasive way to accomplish that. Well done.

Xenohaz19 votes

I like the idea and concept of this, but it seems very abusable.

Suppose Players "A" "B" "C" "D" and "E" are in the pick phase. "C" has locked in as jungler, but "A" goes on lolking (or an equivalent site) and sees that "C" is on a losing streak as jungler, or maybe just isn't quite as good as "A" would like a teammate to be. "A" informs the rest of the team of this, and they quickly vote to leave this champion select. "C" never had any intentions of trolling, but he/she has been booted from the group regardless, and must requeue and can only hope this doesn't happen again.

Maybe I'm just jaded and bitter, but considering how aggressively competitive many people are in ranked, I could imagine this happening a lot.

SlothLovesChunk9 votes

As i stated in my previous reply, that same exact scenario can happen now. This is the only point that people who are skeptical about this feature are making and it makes no sense. The only difference now is that a player would be penalized for dodging in that scenario. However you cannot convince me that 4 players would agree to dodge more frequently than dodging takes place now. And as I said before also, it's a feature than can be removed just as quick as it is added. If Riot finds that players are abusing this feature then they can remove or improve it, but overall it's very difficult to argue that this new feature would not be extremely beneficial (without using this same moot point repeatedly).

wolfax12 votes

You can't just call the point moot. It's a clearly abuseable function. You're saying that people won't try to abuse it for free dodges?

By your logic I can call your point moot because it consistently dodges the question of what to do about people abusing it.

Frostbutt8 votes

Positives outweigh the negatives :/ We shouldn't ditch every idea because someone will abuse it occasionally.

BowlingBallGrip4 votes

This ... It is an improvement to the heavily abused system. If it will cause for a greater percentage of "good" matches I'm all for it.

Genova Fearbane1 votes

Well the idea is that 4 players need to agree. A single player cannot dodge if he does not like his position or such and such.

SlothLovesChunk1 votes

They would still be able to dodge, however they would still incur the current penalties...This idea was in addition to the current system, not a replacement

HeeroTX2 votes

How about: Give the players a "reason for dodge" item ("none" being an available option) If 4/5 players cite Player C as the reason, player C is penalized/reported and all other players dodge "clean". If 4/5 players do NOT cite Player C, Player A (who called the vote) is penalized/reported.

This allows players to vote "out" a troll, but also allows them to avoid a game that a player would've "dodged" anyway. (since the dodger is still penalized) (if you want to discourage "abuse" from the dodger "helping friends", make the penalties for Player A even more harsh)

LeeDark4 votes

Would it happen? Yes. A lot? I don't think so. I don't find that people do that a lot in these games now.

The real point, though, is that you can propose the same scenario currently and say "A informs the rest of the team of this, and asks someone to dodge. If no one does, A dodges at the last second." Changing to the voting method doesn't help this, granted, but it doesn't make it worse. At the same time, changing to a voting method DOES help in cases where someone is claiming they are going to troll, or there is a lack of communication and someone misclicks so you end up with two supports and no adc. Everyone can just vote to dodge and nobody has to suffer a loss of LP and a time penalty there.

SlothLovesChunk3 votes

The whole point of this feature is to reward and improve the gameplay experience for HONEST players, which are the ones that Riot should be focused on anyways. In no way is it right for me to lose a series game, lose LP, have to wait (god forbid it happens twice within the same sitting so you lose even more LP and take an even greater time penalty), etc. just because someone is deciding to intentionally be a jerk.

Is this feature 100% perfect? no. But will it drastically improve the game experience? There isn't a doubt in my mind that it will, >>>ESPECIALLY<<< in the lower ELOs.

wolfax5 votes

You have no clue what would happen tough. You're saying it's for the honest players which is noble, but you're expecting everyone in the game to be noble. How do you plan to stop people from abusing the system to set up games in their favor?

It's going to happen and you can't just ignore it.

LeeDark2 votes

Because there is no abuse of that system that doesn't already exist NOW. Dodging already happens, for many of the same reasons. Would people vote to dodge a game that simply wasn't ideal for them? Yes, sometimes that would happen. I know that because it ALREADY HAPPENS NOW. The point is to stop punishing people for dodging when there is someone claiming they are going to troll, or someone starts flaming their team even in champ select. Those people do not deserve to lose LP and have to wait to play another game just because they did not wish to endure the toxicity of that player.

So which is worse? Punishing people for wanting to avoid toxicity, or not punishing people for avoiding a game that they simply think isn't ideal for them? I would say that punishing those who avoid toxicity makes less sense, but that is the status quo.

SmokingPuffin4 votes

Because there is no abuse of that system that doesn't already exist NOW.

The new wrinkle is penalty-free dodging if the team agrees. This is a big deal.

The last time I had penalty-free dodging (actually a 30 minute time ban, but no LP or elo loss) was late season 2. The result was that I often had to pick champions in 5 lobbies before I finally got to play a game.

LeeDark1 votes

I think you are exaggerating the problem. I've been around since beta and never experienced that. I rarely had to go through several lobbies because of dodges, but that still actually happens now, even if not as often. (And I don't know it isn't as often; it is merely my perception that it is.) You're claiming a much more certain knowledge of something that happened more than 2 years ago, and that makes me very wary of your argument.

Boil it down to the meat and bones, however, and you are supporting punishing people who want to avoid toxicity, just because you feel that punishing people who just want to avoid a suboptimal matchup is more important. Frankly, I think toxicity is a bigger issue in the game now, and I don't think people dodging to avoid bad matchups was ever a truly big issue.

SmokingPuffin4 votes

I think you are exaggerating the problem. I've been around since beta and never experienced that. I rarely had to go through several lobbies because of dodges, but that still actually happens now, even if not as often. (And I don't know it isn't as often; it is merely my perception that it is.) You're claiming a much more certain knowledge of something that happened more than 2 years ago, and that makes me very wary of your argument.

My perception is that the problem basically disappeared in about 2 weeks of the LP system existing. In my personal experience, it went from "most lobbies don't finish" in December to "every once in a while someone dodges" by February. There was a transition period where trolls initially didn't believe people would stick in games, and once they got the message that troll picks wouldn't work the troll rate plummeted.

At the time, strategic dodging was a near universal complaint among high elo players, and it was fairly common as a point of discussion even in low elo. Here's a couple threads from back then; there are plenty more where these came from: Yegg talking about why they tried a time penalty system Kiddington talking about ways to improve on the time penalty system Lyte talking about the results

This was not a small deal. Riot was trying to fix it for years before they got something that works well enough that we rarely talk about it now.

Boil it down to the meat and bones, however, and you are supporting punishing people who want to avoid toxicity, just because you feel that punishing people who just want to avoid a suboptimal matchup is more important. Frankly, I think toxicity is a bigger issue in the game now, and I don't think people dodging to avoid bad matchups was ever a truly big issue.

While I applaud the idea of reducing the negative effects of toxicity, I don't expect this to actually have that effect.

I believe making it easier to dodge trolls makes more trolls exist. It certainly worked like that the last two times Riot tried a new idea to mitigate pick and ban toxicity.

SlothLovesChunk13 votes

Some of the little amount of negative feedback I've received has been about players concerned about people using this feature to dodge scenarios where a team is overpowering their own so they don't want to play the match. This is the case as the game is already. If my opponents have a ridiculously OP team, I can dodge if I so choose, granted I take the LP and time penalty. The feature I am suggesting is purely meant to IMPROVE upon what's already implemented as a way to allow honest players to avoid trolls without penalty. For example, if you're in series and no one else will dodge; why should you have to take a loss in your series just because another player is spamming chat saying they're going to intentionally feed because they didn't get the lane they wanted.

Keep the current system, and add this to it is all I am suggesting. If it doesn't work out and causes more problems than it helps, then simply remove it from the game just like any other feature. But I highly doubt this addition wouldn't result in an extreme increase in positive gameplay experiences.

wolfax12 votes

At least the current system punishes you for not wanting to face that team. This is literally just a free reset button so your team can game the system. I have a feeling a lot of games are going to have votes initiated because "X is so op, just dodge", or "other team took my main, so we should dodge".

How do you plan to punish people for doing those kinds of things, or are those types of behaviors supposed to be allowed?

SmokingPuffin6 votes

If my opponents have a ridiculously OP team, I can dodge if I so choose, granted I take the LP and time penalty.

In diamond 1, a win is like 5 LP tops. Taking a guaranteed 3 LP hit in order to avoid a 40/60 game isn't rational, so people play on even if they've been outpicked.

The problem with your proposal is that you've eliminated the penalty. Taking a guaranteed 0 LP hit to avoid a 40/60 game will happen constantly.

llamasx6 votes

"I didn't get X lane so I'm going to say I'm going to troll, and now I will get to queue up again and do the same thing until I get my role."

While this happens currently and someone else dodges taking the blow, with the new system I wouldn't be surprised if more people opted to threaten to troll to get their lane.

There needs to be some sort of penalty, perhaps only for doing this multiple times in a row to prevent someone wanting to play 1 role from doing this repeatedly without any repercussions.

edit: not saying this shouldn't be tried at all, but just trying to bring up points of potential abuse to think about first

SlothLovesChunk2 votes

You literally proved my point with this lol. This system would allow those other 4 people to dodge that match without being penalized. I'm not really sure what you meant by this....The person saying they are going to troll because they didn't get their role isn't getting penalized now, so why should another player take a penalty for doing something good?

llamasx5 votes

You literally proved my point with this lol. This system would allow those other 4 people to dodge that match without being penalized. I'm not really sure what you meant by this....The person saying they are going to troll because they didn't get their role isn't getting penalized now, so why should another player take a penalty for doing something good?

I'm saying more people will do this because they feel less bad about it as there is no one getting penalized, on top of the fact that right now you're banking on someone dodging so saying you're going to troll isn't a guarantee that you'll get your role. It's a 50/50 toss up of losing the game, or getting someone to dodge. With the new system without a penalty, everyone will agree to the vote so it's essentially risk free threatening.

The person who previously said "mid or feed," but still ended up filling when someone took their position will now have no qualms about insta locking a 2nd mid champ to make their team vote. The last pick who really doesn't want to support but would have done it anyways if forced to, will have no qualms about locking katarina and making their team vote.

SlothLovesChunk2 votes

you can insta-lock now to basically force someone on your team to dodge, therefore penalizing a person trying to save the rest of the players. Please explain why an honest player should be penalized for that? and what if 3 people are in series and the other just dodged a queue to avoid a similar situation recently. Should one of those players get royally screwed too?

Flemman6 votes

You live in utopia if you think it will not be use to dodge match even with no troll on the team.

Lp loss for dodge are there for a good reason, free dodge is plain stupid. (cause even not troll poeple will use it, rank player act like they play their live everytime :p)

In your argumentation, you only see the case were you are in the bad comp team, if you look for the other side, this system just punish a team for being clever than the other in champ select. You must play with the pick you chose.

For your idea to be viable, you must give a big downside to it (like no possibility of doing it 2 times in a raw and/or double lp loss if you have vote yes to it and be defeat the next match)

On another aspect to improve soloq experience, I think giving a ban for each player instead of 3 for the first pick will be more healthy, it will decrease the impact of bad ban phase if the first pick is a troll or just didn't have the same "bad matchup" as you

I Eat Thyroids5 votes

At first seemed like a good idea, but after I read through the comments I changed my mind. It is far too abuseable (avoid op/counter teams, remove any non-FOTM champs, fake trolling to get your lane/champion/ideal situation, etc. etc.) and will definitely encourage people to behave worse instead of better. That said, I can see a combo between this and the old system. Like, maybe this type of "dodging" incurs smaller penalties/penalties after more uses rather than usual dodging. perhaps this type of dodge always has the 3 LP loss and wait time instead of the punishment that comes with dodging, or maybe the punishments only come after 1-2 successive or recent uses. It shouldn't be "free" though, I think that would hurt more than help. It's probably not applicable to higher elos either.

SlothLovesChunk2 votes

if you read the comments you would have seen that i said this would be in addition to, not replace, the current system. And for the 93532 time, this feature is meant to combat negative situations without penalizing players. yes, it can be abused, just like the current system, and no it would not hurt more than help. Not a single person has explained how it would hurt, they just keep saying "well people might abuse it". Okay? well i would rather have a system in place that is abused and cuts my trolled games in half or more than to stick with the current system of "if you're in series or literally just dodged to avoid a troll, you're screwed for doing absolutely nothing other than trying to have a positive game experience...unless someone bails you out and takes the penalties"

I Eat Thyroids2 votes

I already saw that it would be "in addition to". me and the other critics just think there is a higher probability of mass abuse than honest use, and think that the integrity of the ranked system would be jeopardized by a free "get-out-of-nonideal-situation" card. Because this would be free, it would encourage lots of people who normally would just suck up their bad luck when say, the other team picks a champ to counter them or someone bans their main, to be think "nah, I think I'll try to hit the big reset button instead, it's not like I'll lose anything". The current system can be abused, but not much before it starts to really hurt, your system would never hurt so there is no real incentive for NOT abusing it. I think it's kind of sill that you think nobody tried to explain how it's been abused, because I've read (and now provided) plenty of specific and thought out abuse cases that would be plenty enticing, even for normally honest players. There's not a guarantee that it will hurt more than it helps, nor is there a guarantee that the opposite will happen, it's just a probability thing. I think that the higher probability lies with the abuse case, while you clearly don't.

SlothLovesChunk2 votes

The only way anyone will know is when it is actually implemented. But I still maintain that I'd rather have this addition abused than to have to get penalized for someone else being an ass.

Crisvector4 votes

I dont know if someone said this before, but there are TONS of duos who like to troll ranked matches. If it takes 4/5 votes, two trolls just need to duo and troll the game the same they would do alone.

CupcakeTrap3 votes

At the very least, all the members of the team that votes to exit the match should have some kind of time-delay on getting into the next match that ramps up with each use. Otherwise, you'll have a cost-free re-roll anytime the other team looks meaningfully stronger than yours. And remember: the other team would get to vote, too. This would push matches closer to the 50/50 line, perhaps, but at the cost of significantly greater time to get into a match.

Is that really a good tradeoff? Right now, I feel like less than one percent of my matches have a deliberate troll in Champ Select. I guess in those cases, yes, I would want a system to allow a no-cost dodge. But this solution occupies a bigger space than the problem it addresses: there's nothing in the system that says it's available only when someone trolls. I think the "this matchup sucks, let's reroll" situation (and the inverse, where your team has a great comp and the other team wimps out) would occur much more frequently than Champ Select trolling.

Snowleaf3 votes

This makes the situation worse.

Pick and Ban phase are a part of the game. Those decisions matter and this change means completely destroys it. I've been in many games where the pick and bans didnt go well. Where people thought it was going to be really hard to win but because no one wanted to lose LP for dodging we played the game anyway and ended up winning. This change means those games never happen. If you give people an easy out they will take it.

Someone doesnt like a champ you picked. Take the easy way out and vote to dodge despite the fact you might play that champ really well.

You create trolls this way. One player can hold your game hostage in both ways. As it is now they can try to force someone to dodge. With your change a vote or they will lose on purpose. The difference is now most of the time the troll is all talk. When it comes down to it and the bluff is called they are forced to play cause they dont really want to lose. With this change the troll gets thier way every single time because they know people will just cave in and do the vote.

Dragmosh3 votes

Yes, this solution would enable you to prevent games where someone claims to be trolling in champ select, but at what cost. This solution takes out a huge part of the strategy of the game. countering enemies, building a synergetic team composition, and banning champions. The enemy got that tristana? Vote cancel the game. The enemy picked a ranged top laner against my tank top laner? Vote cancel. We have a udyr jungle? Cancel.

Another thing, a true troll, knowing the game will be canceled if he reveals himself too early, will bide his time until you're snared in his trap, and won't start trolling until the game actually stops. So this solution only prevents fake trolls, people who pretend to troll because they didn't get the position they got, or don't like someone's recent match history, so they troll hoping another teammate will dodge.

You argue that this feature already exists in queue dodging, but queue dodging isn't a feature, it's an exploit. In an ideal game, the game would be considered started when the queue starts, and anyone leaving after that should get a leave with the game continuing. Unfortunately, due to an inconsistent/buggy platform, alongside how annoying it would be to play out a 4v5 you knew started in champ select, riot can't penalize dodgers as hard as leavers.

In summary, you're solution legitimizes an exploit, removes a major part of the strategy meta game, and doesn't actually save you from troll games. I'd much rather have a free dodge every 10 games or so than this.

SlothLovesChunk1 votes

Actually Riot themselves said the reason the initial dodge is only 3 LP and a short time suspension is so that players can dodge a potentially toxic situation. And obviously you didn't read my edit, and if you did you're out of your mind if you think players would want to sit around for 5 minutes multiple times in a row to constantly dodge.

Also an in-game feature is not an exploit nor do either of them remove strategy. And to say this wouldn't save you from troll games is kind of eye opening....

KzooCrasher4 votes

We all read you post and the more I see of your responses the less I can take you seriously most of your responses that I have read completely dismiss the people who disagree with you. Many people keep saying it will encourage trolling it is very similar to what didn't work in season two. This will cause very real problems and ignoring those and taking a just compliment it and see what happens is a very very bad position for any new feature.

SlothLovesChunk1 votes

I haven't dismissed anything, I bring up a counterpoint to what they say. Am I not allowed to disagree with the negative points being made? I am fully aware of how season two was, and I made an edit to my post IN RESPONSE TO the majority of the negative feedback points. AND I thanked everyone for their constructive feedback, both negative and positive.

All you're seeing is me giving an argument back to an argument, it's called a discussion.

No one, including myself, can say for sure if this feature will be abused or not, or help more than it would hurt. It's not possible to make that assumption, and on top of that I agreed that it would be abused just like any other system and that the good would more likely outweigh the possible bad in the end. However, to say something that has never been tried before will DEFINITELY this or DEFINITELY is completely silly.

Disagreeing and defending my idea is not dismissing. Most of the people saying it's not good are basing the argument off assumptions and another feature that wasn't the same thing, in any way, and failed. I'm basing my argument off of the current state of the game and how this feature would improve the game experience for the minority group of HONEST players out there.

KzooCrasher3 votes

Your the one making the assumptions that the community will magically change their approach to this system. The people who disagree with you are the ones giving you exact instances where a system that doesn't give a rankings punishment was HEAVILY abused. All the actual evidence about player behavior says this is a bad idea. But if you have something beyond your personal faith that the community won't use this to abuse the elo system just like it has in the past I'd love to hear that.

SlothLovesChunk1 votes

You clearly didn't read my edit or my last post, or most of my responses of me saying that this can and would be abused by some but not the majority. I would like to see the evidence please, I've been playing since season 1 and I'm still confused as to where this physical and real evidence of this feature's 100% failure is.

Aside from that you're telling me what I'm thinking which I always find interesting. I don't believe I ever said anything about the community changing their approach to this system. That doesn't even make any sense. The community is more than 145 comments and 3k views for one, and two neither of us represent the community as a whole. And as it appears in this thread, this feature has had more of a positive community approach than negative, which is a good initial sign that a feature like this or similar to it would be a positive step for the game.

I'm sorry but when someone puts words in my mouth I consider them to have 0 credibility from that point on, so this is the last I will respond to you.

Flemman2 votes

Well, you said this

I'm basing my argument off of the current state of the game and how this feature would improve the game experience for the minority group of HONEST players out there.

so you kind of agree the majority of the player are not honest but you still want to give them a tool to abuse the system with less loss than the actual one.

Again, you live in perfect world if you thin the majority act will not outclass the honest minority act (and if by chance you are 5 honest in a team, there is still a big chance it will not be the case the other side)

KzooCrasher3 votes

I didn't put a single word in your mouth. I read every post in this thread then put your words that you wrote in one post to show you how little sense you make luckily you seem confused by your own points which means you aren't even consistent. I won't repost all the actual evidence that others have posted it's in your thread just look for the responses to you that you ignored. I noticed most the good well thought out and evidence driven posts you ignored because they show exactly why this is bad.

Foxymillion2 votes

you getting mad bro?

KzooCrasher2 votes

lol no Riot woudn't let a system into ranked that makes it more toxic. I was just at work and didn't have anything better to do than post on the forums.

Drukyul2 votes

If it automatically requeues everyone, you're just going to end up with the exact same players on the exact same teams most of the time.

Riot could theoretically throw in some code here and there to make that less likely, but I don't really have a lot of faith in their ability to do so.

SlothLovesChunk1 votes

What do you think happens now when someone dodges? you get requeued with the same players, sometimes on the same team, sometimes on the other team. Right now if 9/10 players in a game stayed in the queue after a dodge, those same 9 players would be put into the same game, plus one new one, sometimes on the same team, sometimes you get mixed, but it's the same people. The reason you sometimes get an entirely new team is because a lot of times when someone dodges some of the players exit the queue and start a new one to avoid their champion being banned because they had already picked, etc.

Drukyul3 votes

What do you think happens now when someone dodges?

At least the dodger is gone.

LeeDark2 votes

The one who dodges usually isn't the problem player. The one that caused him to dodge is.

Further, I don't think this vote should put people back at the front of the queue. It can put the other team back at the front, but the team that voted should move to the back of the line.

SmokingPuffin2 votes

EDIT

First of all, thank you all for viewing and/or commenting on this, your feedback (both negative and positive) is very much constructive and appreciated!!! Most of the complaints have been there being no consequence for using this vote to dodge. So, therefore I will add to this suggestion by asking Riot, if they look into this, to impose a >>5 minute queue ban<< after a successful vote but >>NO LOSS OF LP<< I think this addition would comfort most of the negativity and lessen the chance of this feature being abused

I'm afraid I have bad news. The 30 minute time ban at the end of season 2 proved to be hopelessly ineffective at preventing dodge chicken. High elo players absolutely wouldn't blink an eye at your 5 minute proposal.

I have a couple bigger picture thoughts about this.

First, there's a fundamental disconnect between the world you want to make more comfortable for average players and the super serious, competitive world of high elo. The kinds of penalties that make you go "hmm, that seems sufficient" are nowhere close to strong enough to make high elo care. This is the big reason why the -3 LP penalty works -- -X LP is significantly stronger in diamond 1 than it is in silver 3.

Second, the fundamental problem with all of these dodge chicken games is that we're always talking about how to reduce the pain of dodging for the player who's reacting to the troll. I think the better place to look for really improving live for average League players is finding better ways to punish the troll. We have to break out of this cycle of the dodger getting a light punishment while the troll skips off scot free.

SlothLovesChunk1 votes

What you're kind of suggesting is something along the lines of a reporting system in the champ select, which I would be all for so that the pre-game trolls eventually get what's coming to them. Although I would disagree with your conclusion about high elo players, as I don't feel they would want to sit for 5 minutes at a time just to get a good matchup for little LP, matter of fact I agree with the player who posted saying that high elo players would ignore this feature more than not. But it's something that would need to be implemented first in order to really know which way it would lean

SmokingPuffin2 votes

What you're kind of suggesting is something along the lines of a reporting system in the champ select, which I would be all for so that the pre-game trolls eventually get what's coming to them.

Do want. It's an easy thing to do with quite limited abuse cases relative to your proposal.

Although I would disagree with your conclusion about high elo players, as I don't feel they would want to sit for 5 minutes at a time just to get a good matchup for little LP

This is not a hypothetical thing. We have historical evidence that high elo players will absolutely and overwhelmingly prefer a 30 minute time penalty over a 40/60 game. There are probably hundreds of red posts on this topic in 2011 and 2012, feel free to google dodge chicken to find out how big a problem this was.

KzooCrasher2 votes

If your goal is to increase toxicity in lobbies then this feature will do just that. Ex Player A picks Hecarim mid (which can work) player D says oh were not playing meta picks and goes Wukong ADC. Group says OK player D is troll vote disband.... that is a very real scenario. It happened a lot in S2 people would intentionally troll if they didn't like their groups and essentially force others to dodge. And for the people that say you can should be able to dodge unwinnable games I'll tell you a secret believing unwinnable games exist is what makes you lose those games. Twice in the last few weeks I've won 4vs5s. Ive won with trolls I've won with feeders. And I've never felt the need to dodge a single game. Something around 500 games I haven't dodged one so why make it easier to dodge I think make the penalties more steep that way people are less inclined to troll and when they do just report them.

scaleblue2 votes

Many issues with this

  • The large number of lolking users would vote to cancel, and would harras "noobs" every time they get one.

  • Some players who troll would be likely too not troll( or use chat) in the game lobby.

  • Other trolls who dont care, would be more likely too troll, and tell you "Then just send a match cancel"

  • Players would purposely lock in terrible picks, too force a match cancel. (I would force a match cancel if I got noobs)

  • Majority of games would be canceled instead of being played.

  • Trolls would lock anything they want, until they got a match where their team didnt cancel.

  • Higher ranked games (That have fewer players too pick from) would be canceled repeatedly as players would become known too others as "bad"

  • People who had been in multiple canceled games would end up voting no, because they "just wanna get into a game".

How this could be improved.

  • Canceling past 4 picks is only possible with a 5/5 vote.

  • Votes would end with 2 option question 1. Offensive player(s) 2. Mistake. Option 1 will not force you too Queue with the same players. Option 2 is normal match making.

  • Offensive players can be marked, if they receive 8 marks they are Ranked Q banned for 30 mins. (you can mark players if you voted for option 1)( players that get 8 marks will be reviewed by Tribunal OR Riot.)

Every player is only allotted 1 cancel per 10 games.( recharges once per day)

All in all this technique is very flawed, and even with the few changes I mentioned this would still have many issues.

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