Alright Riot, you need to work on your terrible surrender system.

Kuronii Lumiira·Jul 25, 2015·4 votes·856 views

A 3/2 majority vote yes is a majority vote for a surrender, and should not be a fail. That means most of the team wants to end the game, and should not be trapped by two people (likely a duo) who are trolling.

A 3/1 majority vote yes is a majority vote for a surrender when someone is AFK. And yet, that's a failed positive surrender. Are you going to tell me that because one stupid person thinks a lost game can be won, they can trap three other people in a game? That's a terrible system. No one person should have the power to determine if others stay in a game or not.

Change it.

11 Comments

EffectFXJul 25, 20153 votes

No.

DedriusJul 25, 20152 votes

No way too many people to try surrender way to early as it is.

Kuronii LumiiraJul 25, 20151 votes

{quoted}

No way too many people to try surrender way to early as it is.

[{quoted}](name=Wiggle Dat Butt,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=zqKy6UAe,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2015-07-25T00:11:07.984+0000)

Absolutely not, there are already so many games lost by surrendering early that this would probably bring it up to a 50 percentile.

But that's the majority's prerogative. In almost every voting system, it's "majority goes", with the leader to break a tie. Since this is an odd-numbered voting, with no clear leader, "majority rules" should be the default rule system, with the higher number always beating out the lower number.

Two-Thirds, Three-Fourths, and Unanimous votes are all reserved for established groups. These conglomerate teams that are put together for matchmaking are not established, and should not be held to the whims of the minority.

DedriusJul 25, 20151 votes

If it was in ranked 5s or something where you know your teammates attitudes and playstyles I would understand, but not in soloqueue where a majority of people snap at the slightest sign of hardship and spam "GG jungler died in the first 3 minutes" and spam surrender votes from 20+ mins.

Wiggle Dat ButtJul 25, 20152 votes

Absolutely not, there are already so many games lost by surrendering early that this would probably bring it up to a 50 percentile.

III DNA IIIJul 25, 20151 votes

The thing I don't like about the surrender system is when we have a 3v5..... mid is getting free farm cause OUR mid is afk all game, and our jungle never connected.... our support had to move to mid, so adc got recket......

The problem is that it was an obvious loss but we HAD TO DEAL WITH IT FOR A WHOLE 20 MIN BEFORE WE COULD SURRENDER..... There needs to be a way around that, it's all kinds of wrong.

KeyboardPotatoesJul 25, 20151 votes

disagree with op. I've won waaaay too many games that had 3/2 surrender votes. 4/1 is a good system.

Kuronii LumiiraJul 25, 20151 votes

{quoted}

disagree with op. I've won waaaay too many games that had 3/2 surrender votes. 4/1 is a good system.

And what about 3/1 majority with an AFK? That's considered a fail surrender vote. Should that one person be given the power to trap other players in what they consider a losing game?