AFKs are a real issue Riot!

Vicarious117·Jun 8, 2015·7 votes·813 views

So I'm getting really sick and tired of being severely punished for losing games where I have an afk teammate... you know games you most the time can't win at all due to MISSING A TEAM MEMBER!

And yet even though a match ago I had 3 4v5 matches in a row I am still losing 20 freakin LP per loss regardless! Riot this is entirely unfair to the people who have to suffer through this nonsense, some of us more so then others.... like me who will almost daily get a 4v5 match or two, if not more, not even joking....

This has been a very serious issue for a very long time and I am completely dumbfounded as to why you haven't implemented something to help with this! I mean just look at these forums if you for some unknown reason can't think of any ways yourself and you'll see a massive amount of decent if not great suggestions as to how to help! JUST DO SOMETHING!!!! I'm tired of being so heavily punished on a daily basis for having to deal with this SHIT!

29 Comments

thezdude3Jun 8, 20152 votes

I was one for one in my series to become bronze 1 I had AFKs the next two games and lost them both. Then I had AFKs the next 6 of 8 games and brought me from almost being bronze 1 to the lower end of bronze 3. I think this is a concern that mainly affects lower elo players but it is still a big problem , please help.

AkesgerothJun 8, 20152 votes

This is an issue with bronze and Riot refusing to acknowledge that Elo hell (though LoL doesn't use the Elo system anymore) does exist. Riot needs to start handing out ranked permabans for trolls. Like, when a ban is handed out, check what the ban is for and if the person was actually trolling in ranked, either by leaving, AFKing, feeding on purpose, helping the enemy team or just troll picking, don't even give them a second chance. They want to troll, they don't belong in ranked.

Daedalus871Jun 8, 20151 votes

What do you define as elo hell? I got placed in Bronze 3 at the start of the season now I'm Gold 5. And I don't belong in Challenger or Diamond, I probably belong in Gold 3. So if you deserve to climb, you will.

AkesgerothJun 8, 20151 votes

"Elo hell" is the place where there is a much, much higher probability that you will be teamed up with trolls. That is bronze.

PiVoRxJun 8, 20151 votes

This is an issue in every league, i was in promos to D4, both with someone afking in my team and one regular game afker for 3 unique afkers in a row. Does this means i dont deserve D4? Fuck you riot.

Once in S4 i had a streak of 11!!! afkers in a row, my mmr got destroyed so hard that lp gain/lose ratio drop me to P3 from D5 and i couldnt do nothing about it.

Leaver Buster or whatever shit Riot will release to deal with afkrers will do nothing and will always do.

Silents429Jun 8, 20151 votes

Curious, 3 times in a row? What games were they and were they AFK's from start or did someone just DC.

AkesgerothJun 8, 20151 votes

If you've never played in Bronze, then I can understand why you don't think that's normal. Having made the mistake of playing early in the season and instantly being placed in Bronze despite being in upper gold while getting 25 LP a win last season, I had the opportunity to experience bronze. Let me copy/paste a post I made a few months ago:

The issue you're seeing right now stems from the absolutely terrible rehaul of the MMR system which caused a lot of gold and plat players to get put in low silver and bronze for God knows why. These are people used to being grouped with other players who are actually trying to win, people who know what they're doing, people who don't AFK or DC during ranked matches regularly, etc. Many of these people are also newcomers who had never known Elo hell and who, through misinformation, were taught that it doesn't exist.

Now they're experiencing it. Here's the deal: If you're a troll, you'll wind up in bronze. If you leave games, you'll wind up in bronze. If you DC or AFK often, you'll wind up in bronze. If you're the kind of person who picks champions you've never played before in ranked, you'll wind up in bronze. If you're the kind of person who pushes your opponent under his tower then whines at his jungler when he gets ganked, you'll wind up in bronze. If you're the kind of person who's AFK when the match starts until minions spawn, you'll wind up in bronze. If you're the kind of person who starts feeding on purpose or other similar behaviors when your team takes a last hit from you, you'll wind up in bronze. All the worst of the worst winds up in bronze, and these people can single handedly lose games for their whole team. Gold and plat players are not used to dealing with this bullshit.

At least maybe now some people will stop pretending Elo hell doesn't exist.

Silents429Jun 8, 20151 votes

Elo hell does and doesn't exist.

It exists in the sense its like anything else psychological, it DOES impact the way you think towards everything. You'd be surprised how samey the different elos actually are in comparison to overall skill and troll rate, Watching stonewall008 stream or play games at his high elo you can find jackass players on many occasions.

It doesn't exist for the same reason above, it just becomes something for people to blame for losing rather then being an actual thing. Last season when I gave even the slightest about ranked I went from Bronze 3 to 1 in an afternoon, Had some wins and losses (Mostly wins) but never got the impression an Elo Hell existed.

AkesgerothJun 8, 20151 votes

You'd be surprised how samey the different elos actually are in comparison to overall skill and troll rate,

Having played in bronze, silver, gold and platinum, I can say this is outright wrong. You do get trolls in gold and platinum. Their frequency is much, much lower than in silver and especially bronze.

Silents429Jun 8, 20151 votes

The difference is minimal, the attitudes are different.

If bronze players weren't constantly told how shitty they are and how bad there elo is you would see a lot less complaining about being "stuck" in bronze, and a lot happier players doing well.

Silver players are told generally the same thing but in less frequency. Hence why a silver hell doesn't exist.

Gold and above you are told how great you are and people are generally happier and more confident in what they are doing, No one utters the phrase "gold players are terrible" with others in wide agreement but do the same for bronze players you get the entire field in agreement.

Actual skill level really isn't much different. Higher you get the more refined your gameplay skill might get and obviously higher experience but pit two teams of people from bronze to gold who are confident and it will still be a level playing field.

Vicarious117Jun 9, 20151 votes

The first game our Katarina got fed, quit for like 10 mins cause he was just that arrogant, literally said "gonna go take a smoke break," then the enemy team caught up for obvious reason, and when he came back blamed us for sucking and we lost minutes later. He had a duo Q partner who kept refusing to surrender and our supp was the "NEVER GIVE UP" type, so there was no escaping.

The second one our Nunu didn't connect for about 5 mins, thus falling severely behind, then dc'd twice afterwards for a couple minutes each. Basically we had no way of getting any map control cause the enemy Skarner was the "never farm always gank" type, which was perfect for a 4v5 match....

Finally we had a Ryze who was afk for 8ish mins, comes back and lets everyone know he's never played Ryze before, not even the old Ryze and was trying him out for the first time in ranked (I checked his account on lolnexus, he wasn't joking....), he then goes 1/10/2 for the next 15 mins alone since we ff'd at 25 mins. Not only this, but in fact me and my duoQ partner were pulling the game back, letting Cho just sit top, freezing the lane and farming Ryze cause most the time the enemy team is just as stupid as my teammates, however our mid Diana then also dc'd for a bit over 5 mins cause her computer died or something like that, basically hammering that final nail into the coffin of our 4v5 defeat.

So yeah, 3 in a row, different circumstances each time, almost none of them winnable due to the completely shitty and unfair situations I was forced into. Lost 20 LP for every single one of those games. Hard carried the two before that, only got 15-16 LP for those two games......... this game seriously hates me, how can I seriously be this unlucky?

Silents429Jun 9, 20151 votes

I mean like match history wise. A link perhaps?

Vicarious117Jun 9, 20151 votes

Just look at my general match history. And btw after that one loss that wasn't a 4v5, I just had ANOTHER 4v5!

So I had those 3 in a row, one that wasn't, and then ANOTHER! And I lost 20 LP per each game.... that's my luck for you.....

Silents429Jun 9, 20151 votes

I am not going to search your match history through each individual game when you can simply link the 3 games.

Daedalus871Jun 8, 20151 votes

I've done the math. The chances that you get more afks than the enemy team over 100 games is abysmal.

Keep playing and it will even out eventually.

AkesgerothJun 8, 20151 votes

Uh, no. They're 4 to 5. That's not abysmal.

Daedalus871Jun 8, 20152 votes

I've assumed that the "official" 1% of people are trolls. The chance that your team gets more trolls than the enemy in 15+ out of 100 games is roughly 8 in a million.

I also did the math assuming 30% of people are trolls. The chance that your team gets more trolls than the enemy team in 50+ out of 100 games, also roughly 8 in a million.

AkesgerothJun 8, 20151 votes

I... I don't think you know how math works.

Daedalus871Jun 8, 20151 votes

As a math major, I'm confident in my abilities to math.

But if you think I'm wrong, then do the math correctly, show that I am wrong, and I will concede defeat.

Remember to show your work.

AkesgerothJun 8, 20151 votes

You're a math major and you think the kind of math saying the odds of getting heads more often than tail after 100 tosses are astronomically low makes sense? I'm on my phone right now, but I'll humor you. Assuming that the subject is not a troll himself and that all other players have the same chance to be a troll, then there are 5 potential trolls on the enemy team and 4 potential trolls on his. This means that there is a 4/9 chance that there will be a troll on his team and a 5/9 chance that there will be a troll on the enemy team.

Over 100 matches, this means that the chances of him having trolls on his team more often than on his opponent's team are <4/9, or <44.444...%. This also essentially means that 44.444...% of people have trolls on their team more often than on the enemy team.

QED

Daedalus871Jun 8, 20151 votes

Okay, so you don't know how to math.

Math from another thread:

{quoted}

Why do you only consider the cases when there is one troll in the game? What if both teams get trolls. OP also complains about afkers and otherwise bad players (after this point all, trolls/ragers/afkers/otherwise undesirable players are referred to as trolls).

So with that in mind, here is some math.

Assumptions:

30% of people are trolls.

OP never trolls.

Matching making gives trolls randomly and independently.

All trolls are created equally.

OP can have between 0 and 4 trolls on his team, the percent of that happening is: 0 trolls: 24% 1: 41% 2: 26% 3: 8% 4: 1%

Enemy team can have between 0 and 5 trolls. The percent of that happening is: 0 trolls: 17% 1: 36% 2: 31% 3: 13% 4: 3% 5: 0.24%, calling it 1%.

So now let's look at the games where OP's team has more trolls than the enemy. When OP's team has: 0 trolls, the enemy team has 0% chance of getting less trolls. 1 troll, the enemy team has a 17% chance of getting less trolls. 2: 53% 3: 84% 4: 97% chance of getting less trolls than OP's team.

So now we need to weight this to find out what is the total chance of OP's team getting more trolls than the enemy team: 0 trolls: (24%x0%) = 0%. In 0% of OP's total games, he will have 0 trolls while the enemy team has less. 1 troll: (41%x17%) = 7%. In 7% of OP's total games, he will have 1 troll, while the enemy team has less. 2: 14% 3: 7% 4: 1%

Now if we take the sum, we get the percentage of games where the enemy has less trolls than the OP, 29%. Thus OP's team has a 71% chance of having the same or less trolls/ragers/feeders/etc than the enemy team. Now using this, we go to a binomial calculator and we define success (X) as the enemy team having less trolls than OPs, which has a 0.29 probability, set the trials to 100, and we want to what probability that the enemy team gets 50 or more games where they have less trolls than the OP P(X >= 50).

Thus we get that over the course of 100 games, that OP has a 0.000798% chance the enemy team getting 50 or more games with less trolls than OP.

AkesgerothJun 8, 20152 votes

That whole thing is a mess of stupid bullshit and gambler's fallacy. What we're talking about here are the odds of him having a troll on his team VS the odds of a troll being on the other team.

Assumptions:

30% of people are trolls.

This has no bearing whatsoever on anything. We are not calculating the odds of him having a troll on his team, we are calculating the odds of him having the odds on his team VS the odds of a troll being present on the enemy team. In a coin toss, the odds of a heads or a tails are equal, both 50%. Throw a one hundred sided die though and the odds of getting 1 or 100, though both 1%, are still equal. So, the odds of the presence of a troll in a game have no bearing whatsoever in the calculation.

OP can have between 0 and 4 trolls on his team, the percent of that happening is:

Stop right there. This entire section is worthless math. Again, we are not calculating the odds of the presence of a troll, but the odds of the presence of a troll on his team VS the opposing team. With 4 possible trolls on his team VS 5 on the enemy team, it's 4/9 for a troll on his team and 5/9 for the opposing team. If you calculated the odds correctly, you would come to the same conclusion. But instead you shoved in the worthless "odds of a troll being present" statistic, which is worthless.

Now if we take the sum, we get the percentage of games where the enemy has less trolls than the OP, 29%. Thus OP's team has a 71% chance of having the same or less trolls/ragers/feeders/etc than the enemy team. Now using this, we go to a binomial calculator and we define success (X) as the enemy team having less trolls than OPs, which has a 0.29 probability, set the trials to 100, and we want to what probability that the enemy team gets 50 or more games where they have less trolls than the OP P(X >= 50).

Not only is his result wrong because he used the wrong odds, but he doesn't know how binomial calculators work. First of all, if you enter his value, which is 0.29, the result you get is 0.000312%, not 0.000798%. The odds we want aren't >=50, but >50. Second of all, the way a binomial calculator works is by comparing the cumulative odds of success. As an example, the odds of a coin toss are always 50/50, but the odds of getting an equal number of heads and tails over a number of trials is not actually 50/50, but gets closer to the value as more trials are made.

Don't understand yet? All right. Go enter 0.5 on the calculator value, with 51% success rate. Start by typing 51 successes for 100 trials. Now, try 510 successes for 1000 trials. 5100 successes for 10000 trials. 51000 successes with 100000 trials. Notice how the odds keep dropping and dropping and dropping. This is because the odds of deviating from the norm go down as the number of trials go up. In turn, this does not affect the odds of the event happening, which is 50 fucking percent. What the calculator is calculating is not the odds of him getting a troll, but the odds that he'll deviate from these odds.

tldr: You don't understand math.

R110Jun 8, 20152 votes

You guys are argueing over 2 different things. You talk about the odds of him having the odds on his team VS the odds of a troll being present on the enemy team. Daedalus871 says that over a the course of 100 games the chance you have to receive more trolls in your team than on the enemy team is 1 in 8 million.

Daedalus871Jun 8, 20151 votes

So much stupid.

{quoted}

That whole thing is a mess of stupid bullshit and gambler's fallacy. What we're talking about here are the odds of him having a troll on his team VS the odds of a troll being on the other team.

No, we are not talking about the odds that he has a troll on his team versus the enemy team, we are talking about the odds that he has more trolls than the enemy team. It's a subtle, but important difference. After all, why does it matter if OP has a troll on his team if the enemy also has a troll(s)?

This has no bearing whatsoever on anything. We are not calculating the odds of him having a troll on his team, we are calculating the odds of him having the odds on his team VS the odds of a troll being present on the enemy team. In a coin toss, the odds of a heads or a tails are equal, both 50%. Throw a one hundred sided die though and the odds of getting 1 or 100, though both 1%, are still equal. So, the odds of the presence of a troll in a game have no bearing whatsoever in the calculation.

Yes it does. If no one is a troll, then the game is pure skill. If everyone is a troll, then Op's team always has less trolls and should always win. The percentage of players that are trolls directly effects this. And again, we shouldn't care about one very specific situation (1 troll games). Instead we should care about the big picture, IE the chance that OPs team gets more trolls than the enemy team. In order to calculate that, we need to first determine the chance that OP gets multiple trolls and the chance that the enemy team gets trolls. From there we get the percent chance in an individual game that the enemy team gets less trolls than the OP's team.

Stop right there. This entire section is worthless math. Again, we are not calculating the odds of the presence of a troll, but the odds of the presence of a troll on his team VS the opposing team. With 4 possible trolls on his team VS 5 on the enemy team, it's 4/9 for a troll on his team and 5/9 for the opposing team. If you calculated the odds correctly, you would come to the same conclusion. But instead you shoved in the worthless "odds of a troll being present" statistic, which is worthless.

Again for the first time, you never had any statistics class. The relevant question is does OP get more trolls than the enemy team? And the answer is no. That is what the "worthless math" shows. But instead you want to focus on one troll games, which provides a meaningless snapshot. Not only is that snapshot meaningless, but you don't even do anything with that snapshot that resembles meaning. Essentially, you are saying that the coin will land on heads 4/9 (again, next to meaningless) of the time. You are looking at a single flip, while I am looking at 100 flips.

Not only is his result wrong because he used the wrong odds, but he doesn't know how binomial calculators work. First of all, if you enter his value, which is 0.29, the result you get is 0.000312%, not 0.000798%. The odds we want aren't >=50, but >50. Second of all, the way a binomial calculator works is by comparing the cumulative odds of success. As an example, the odds of a coin toss are always 50/50, but the odds of getting an equal number of heads and tails over a number of trials is not actually 50/50, but gets closer to the value as more trials are made.

I do know how a binomial calculator works. I made a claim that 50 or more games so I used the results relevant to 50 or more game IE >= 50.

Don't understand yet? All right. Go enter 0.5 on the calculator value, with 51% success rate. Start by typing 51 successes for 100 trials. Now, try 510 successes for 1000 trials. 5100 successes for 10000 trials. 51000 successes with 100000 trials. Notice how the odds keep dropping and dropping and dropping. This is because the odds of deviating from the norm go down as the number of trials go up. In turn, this does not affect the odds of the event happening, which is 50 fucking percent. What the calculator is calculating is not the odds of him getting a troll, but the odds that he'll deviate from these odds.

You don't even know how a binormial distribution works or what it does. If you have ever had a statistics class, I want you to go to your teacher, and tell them they failed you.

tldr: You don't understand math.

TLDR: You think you understand math, but you don't

KazaashiJun 8, 20152 votes

{quoted}

You're a math major and you think the kind of math saying the odds of getting heads more often than tail after 100 tosses are astronomically low? I'm on my phone right now, but I'll humor you. Assuming that the subject is not a troll himself and that all other players have the same chance to be a troll, then there are 5 potential trolls on the enemy team and 4 potential trolls on his. This means that there is a 4/9 chance that there will be a troll on his team and a 5/9 chance that there will be a troll on the enemy team.

Over 100 matches, this means that the chances of him having trolls on his team more often than on his opponent's team are <4/9, or <44.444...%. This also essentially means that 44.444...% of people have trolls on their team more often than on the enemy team.

QED

Nope, nope, nope and more nope. It means that you have a 44% chance of having an "undesirable player" on your team and a 55% chance of one on the other team. Since not every game has an "undesirable player" on it you cannot say that 44% of people only have them on their team.

Stop worrying about things you cannot control and just focus on improving your own play. AFK's balance themselves out overtime.

AkesgerothJun 8, 20151 votes

What we're talking about here are the odds of him having a troll on his team VS the odds of a troll being on the other team. This is exactly what those odds are.

KazaashiJun 8, 20151 votes

{quoted}

What we're talking about here are the odds of him having a troll on his team VS the odds of a troll being on the other team. This is exactly what those odds are.

Right, but you cannot jump to the conclusion that 44% of players have more "undesirables" on their team than the other. That is not how math works.

AkesgerothJun 8, 20151 votes

Actually, it is. 44% is the odds of a troll being on a team which is guaranteed to have at least one player who is not a troll. This means that in 100 games played by 100 different such players where a troll is present on either team, 44 will have a troll on their team and 56 will see a troll on the other team. Now, you could include the "but what about the odds that there are more than one troll?" but if the odds of a player being a troll remains constant, then it's still 44% for the guaranteed non-troll VS 56% on his opponent's team.

KoldheartedjspJun 9, 20151 votes

last night i had a corki who dc'd after the game started because i picked lee sin mid. Proceeded to dominate for the first 15-20 minutes of the game until the loss of a player started to really catch up.