Surrendering at 30+ min not 20

superjohn57··12 votes·1,960 views

More often than not if things aren't going as well as you'd want there is always that one kid that wants to surrender at 20 minutes even if they haven't even burst through your inner ring. throughout the game it is always that 1 kid who instigated the /ff who performs the worst and continually performs poorly, they make no effort to try and win because in their head they know they have lost and the /ff function gives em that ability to make the loss become true.

so it makes players like me who adopt more of a Spartan mentality to league the "never surrender" part because anything could happen. baron throw crazy back-door, or just a regular throw on the enemies part, you just need to be patient and victory will be yours.

the ff function so early ruins this mentality people just continually poor out these surrender votes and drag the team down with their negativity and how we lost and how we are mentally challenged if we voted no (despite the real possibility for a come back)

so im asking your opinion would it make it better if we pushed the regular /ff from 20 minutes to something like 30-35 min where it is more or less evident if a steam role is happening. and perhaps add a function that detects afk's and stuff so you could /ff at 20 or even earlier.

28 Comments

ImHerVoice9 votes

yeah.. no thanks. Don't hold me hostage because you go 0/5 in lane and think you can win "late game" no one wants to play out a game getting RekSai 'd for 30+ minutes NO ONE. I am perfectly fine with losing 5-20 LP and trying again next game. I do not however have all day to wait out and be hostage to some feeders with a late game mind set.

SuperSourCat1 votes

yup espicially if they have a fed Teemo and their building item 3089 item 3041 item 3165 item 3116 item 3135 item 3128

superjohn571 votes

{quoted} yeah.. no thanks. Don't hold me hostage because you go 0/5 in lane and think you can win "late game" no one wants to play out a game getting RekSai 'd for 30+ minutes NO ONE. I am perfectly fine with losing 5-20 LP and trying again next game. I do not however have all day to wait out and be hostage to some feeders with a late game mind set.

except that its not even going 0/5 in lane its more like being mid game 15-18 with a nasus and tristana and a couple towers down. yet people dont realize the spikes and the comeback potential.

Ashes Arise7 votes

This is a horrible idea. I haven't used a single swear word since I moved to boards, but seriously.... fuck you and you idea. Being held hostage against one's will for 20 mins is already the biggest reason this game is so toxic. People don't want to leave because they don't think they can win. They want to leave because they don't want to play with their team mates anymore.

Android Cowboy2 votes

[{quoted}](name=Ashes Arise,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=A7H0fAgL,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2014-12-12T15:38:02.981+0000) This is a horrible idea. I haven't used a single swear word since I moved to boards, but seriously.... fuck you and you idea. Being held hostage against one's will for 20 mins is already the biggest reason this game is so toxic. People don't want to leave because they don't think they can win. They want to leave because they don't want to play with their team mates anymore.

^ THIS. 1000%, I hate the players that "never surrender", thus dragging me minto their mule-headed refusal to surrender. If 2 out of 5 want to quit, I'd rather not get sucked into your little comeback fantasy just because you think you got this. fuck. you. Sometimes it's best to let it go and get on with our freaking lives.

superjohn571 votes

You are not a hostage if you want to leave quit the game you will lose lp none the less just make it quicker for yourself eh...

Ashes Arise2 votes

If I just afk'd everytime I wanted to I'd be banned by now. No. Surrendering needs to be much easier. There should be no time limit and it should be majority rule.

superjohn571 votes

[{quoted}](name=Ashes Arise,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=A7H0fAgL,comment-id=000300010000,timestamp=2014-12-12T22:39:09.373+0000) If I just afk'd everytime I wanted to I'd be banned by now. No. Surrendering needs to be much easier. There should be no time limit and it should be majority rule.

surrendering needs to be much easier? my god... play an easier game if you think so. surrendering should be the very last option available when all else fails. not when it suits your fancy. league isnt supposed to be a steam role, it should be a struggle and a fight for survival to climb the ladder

Ashes Arise1 votes

Once again. It has absolutely nothing to do with winning or losing. It has to do with team mates. If I have a few assholes on my team, why the hell would I want to help them win? If the majority of the team is toxic, i don't want to play anymore regardless of how ahead or behind we are. I'm certainly not going to be "trying" anymore if I'm being held hostage in a game I don't no longer care about. Another scenario is afks. If there is an afk on either team, I don't want to waste my time in that game... at all. Oh and yes... there are times when losing is a good time to surrender. Not just because of being behind, but because of toxcity tilting the game past salvation.

warpenguin5556 votes

My idea for a surrender rework:

General Surrenders moved to 30 min

can surrender at 20 if all 5 agree/ there is an AFK

superjohn571 votes

pretty much summed up my paragraph lol

Drunk Rummate5 votes

absolutely.

i think it's extremely rare that a game is 'lost' by 20 minutes. people overreact because they lost lane and a lot of them miss the big picture (scaling and champion power spikes).

one thing i've noticed, even amongst my friends, is that when someone goes 0-2 or worse in lane, a lot of the time they lose their focus and motivation. it's part of that 'missing the bigger picture' thing i mentioned. i think it's unconscious, and i actually have to stop it from happening to myself sometimes. it's easy to lose out on the 'fun' of the game if you aren't winning, or at least tied in resources with your opponent.

back on topic yes, i absolutely think 30m surrender instead of 20 would be an improvement. i think it would help a bit with this mentality and hopefully you'd have fewer people asking for surrender votes 10 minutes into the game.

UnformedPoet1 votes

I think a lot of this is less overreaction and more time management. Should I fight for another 30+ min and potentially win or just ff and start another game with another team that might yield a better outcome? You also have to include knowledge and skill at determining the odds of winning. Some less experienced people who always think the odds are evenly stacked while more experienced players may see that 15 0 Yasuo or Riven at 20 as a problem that would be nearly impossible to overcome with the resources your team is amassing. Sometimes you learn through fighting through a difficult situation and other times you learn from having a wide array of tests allowing more varied results.

Konidias5 votes

"we're only 5 towers and 4 dragons down... we haven't actually taken a tower yet and we're 2 and 25 but... WE GOT THIS. LET ME BUILD MY STACKS."

No.

There should be an option to forfeit with 3 votes if the surrender option comes up twice with the same 3 people voting. Obviously the majority of the team doesn't want to play the match, so free them from their prisons.

Alljoy4 votes

Truth be told, all this is going to do is create more afks.

Rainlein4 votes

On that subject, can we also increase the time one must wait between re-initiating surrender votes? It's extremely distracting when this ONE person insists on surrendering every minute when it's clear that none of the other teammates want to surrender yet.

el immagrente3 votes

I only really surrender if things seem hopeless, and I genuinely having a bad time.

Junkο3 votes

Sorry but i don't want to play with a 0/12 Yi and 0/6 Kha for 30 minutes, sure it was in my promos but there was no hope of winning

Jedam3 votes

do not agree with this this Spartan mentality you talk about is sometimes a pain in the ass, as much as the loser mentality is I asked many surrenders, when I know that the hope is so low than only an ennemy dc would save us, and the 'Spartans' in my team refusing to surrender leading, 99% of the time, to a shitty game and a time loss yes there is always hope to win, but winning is only part of the game, having fun is the other part. and when I'm being raped by the ennemy and my team refuse to surrender, I'm having a bad time. and surrender allows you to start a new game faster, a game that you have better odds to win and enjoy

Eawaf2 votes

What Ashes Arise said. People don't want to surrender because they can't win,

"They want to leave because they don't want to play with their team mates anymore."

1000 times this. I'm for making surrender 10 minutes a 4/5 vote, 20 min a 3/5 vote.

Gunpoint2 votes

Lower it to 10 minutes then it'll be fine. More games played means more IP

Blade of Justic1 votes

If we did that, we might as well not have a surrender function at all.

I don't play ranked (Where you're probably applying this idea at) but in Normals, I would prefer to not keep playing that game where we are down 6 towers with all of their's still up and that kill count is 14 to 35.

So, there are those whom would prefer the surrender time be at 15 or 10 (Me) and those whom would prefer it be at 30 or 35 (You).

As such, we get the compromise of 20.

All and all, I would not want to sit out a game that I, and possibly 3 other players, aren't having fun in.

Main Was Nerfed4 votes

10 minutes? I'll be fair here and say, yeah some games could be potentially over by that time....but WUT, why would you surrender with such a small amount of gold possible at that point? You can play defensively and easily come back from anything that might have happened in the first 10 minutes.

Idk why, it just angers me when I even see someone that says "FF at 20". I've come back from a lot of really bad games, and I've had enemies do the same. Its not over until its over... and I can assure you, in most games, 10 minutes isn't enough to know that.

Blade of Justic3 votes

[{quoted}](name=Main Was Nerfed,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=A7H0fAgL,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2014-12-12T14:55:46.567+0000) 10 minutes? I'll be fair here and say, yeah some games could be potentially over by that time....but WUT, why would you surrender with such a small amount of gold possible at that point? You can play defensively and easily come back from anything that might have happened in the first 10 minutes.

Idk why, it just angers me when I even see someone that says "FF at 20". I've come back from a lot of really bad games, and I've had enemies do the same. Its not over until its over... and I can assure you, in most games, 10 minutes isn't enough to know that.

I'll start off by saying that I'm not one of those "I lost lane with my score at 0/2/0, we should surrender" but if I've seen that all lanes are getting dominated and the jungler is either behind on farm or is getting bullied by the opposing jungler, I can tell it's pretty much over.

Heck, I've had games where my team destroyed the enemy nexus before 20 minutes.

Now, I'm not saying that we encourage surrendering at 10 minutes, but the option of it couldn't hurt.

With that being said, it will still require 4/5 people to say "This game is a goner" in order for a surrender to happen. If 4 of your team members gave up, why do you think they should be dragged through the mud in a game they don't want to play?

UnformedPoet1 votes

Go play Dota 2. I'l pass on the tree forts and keep my self respect in tact. Thank you.

FastAsHeck1 votes

i agree on early surrender if someone is afk, but otherwise the system is fine. You can't hold 4 others as hostages because you think you have a chance. this is a game, its about having fun, and i will have more fun if i go to another game instead of trying to win a game that is lost from 10 minutes in.

FastAsHeck3 votes

i believe that there should be no time limit to surrenders if all 5 agree on it, if nobody from the team wants to play then it is pointless.

More from [ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous