Honestly, this is bullshit. 3/2 surrender votes should be accepted when the game has been going on for way too long. Obviously the majority wants to go but the minority says no and forces them to continue. Please just let this be an acceptable vote at some point in the game.
Love Dramatic2 votesIdk man, I can't stop thinking about toxic duos who throw lol, but hey, I would personally like that at like 35 minutes tho
MagicFlyingLlama1 votesSurrender should not even exist at all.
It is to exit a game with trolls, feeders or AFK, not ditch a game you dont like at 20m so you can retry.
Well over half the games i see surrendered could have been won if people had no surrender option and made an effort instead of crying.
Summonah123691 votesI meant more like at a 40 minute mark or something. To the point where its been going on for way longer than it should be.
SEKAI1 votesQuoting myself from somewhere else:
[...] the reason why the point of Yes is 4 people and not 3 is because the team only has 5 people, which let's be honest, the opinion of 3 people vs 2 isn't that big of a difference, and it is the same reason why we wouldn't put too much credit on the voting integrity of a choice made by 3 people where the outcome is 2 vs 1 (though it may be a slightly different story if the total number of the voters are even, but that's not the case here).
Not to mention, voting integrity aside, Riot also intends that games are supposed to be won by destroying nexuses. The voting is supposed to only pass when the game is unwinnable and there to cut unnecessary time wasting, which to that end Riot believes that if 4 out of 5 people believe the game is unwinnable, then it probably is really unwinnable. Hence the vote's passing benchmark is set at 4.