Boards›[ARCHIVED] Miscellaneous

Situational surrender time

Drunk Old Man·1/11/2014, 3:26:41 AM·12 votes·737 views

Well, the other night my internet decided to be a troll while me and my girl were playing a normals game. It cut off around 8 minutes in, and didn't come back up for over an hour. The problem? Only 8 minutes into a game, my team lost two members. And, unfortunately, it was mid and jungle.

My point? In situations where teams are not evenly numbered before 20 minutes, the losing team should be able to start a surrender vote. My team doing those 12 more minutes where they're likely sure that they won't win seems to me a bit unfair. While I wasn't able to be there to see what they said about it, they likely thought we left on purpose and wanted to end the game instead of sit forever waiting for the other team to win. (We probably got reported, too. But, that's not the point.)

Anyway, what are your (the community's) thoughts on this? Do you agree that if players leave for an extended period of time before 20 minutes, the team should be able to /ff early?

11 Comments

MackleDoge1/11/2014, 4:04:13 AM2 votes

I think this particular instance has some merit to causing a change. I'm not sure I'd agree with having it implemented until it was proven to be effective at resolving the problem without becoming abusable (or at least easily abused) and that it didn't encourage bullying of people to leave or encourage early leaving on purpose just to get this sort of surrender situation.

bacontacoman1/11/2014, 4:23:30 AM1 votes

I agree that there may be some merit to allowing handicapped teams to leave early, and I also agree that it would have to be a system smart enough to be hard to abuse. Maybe try only applying an early surrender to teams with people disconnected at the start of the games for some amount of time? Good post! I like this idea.

Rhyto1/11/2014, 5:59:14 PM1 votes

I've had thoughts about this and it does sound like a good idea as it would at least allow players to move on the another match instead of feeling even more stressed with a losing match they have little chance of winning.

TC5TrickOrTreat1/12/2014, 1:21:22 AM1 votes

I personally like the idea of decreasing surrender time... If my team is getting ABSOLUTELY stomped I hate having to wait.. It feels like the walk of shame (figure of speech of course)

Gondlink1/12/2014, 9:32:17 PM1 votes

i like the idea because 3 times in a row my team had 4 people that were on a skype call and surrenderd at the same time so we surrendered the game and if the surrender time was shorter we woulda surrendered earlier and i wouldnt have to be sad that i lost a bunch of ip i coulda got

EvilTreeSpock1/13/2014, 2:05:42 AM1 votes

I like surrendering being at 20, because unless the game is a absolute total stomp, the mid game hasn't really gotten going and that is when you can determine if your team can win after teamfights. In cases like this where there is an extended disconnect before 20 minutes, I think it would be good to have an early surrender option. Maybe 8 minutes of time with a d/c will allow a team to surrender early.

Gay Rainbow1/13/2014, 6:12:08 PM1 votes

Making it so that it only can apply to games with disconnects before the game is actually reaches say 1:50, because people tend to have weird errors/bug splat/ trying to dodge mabye/ whatever happended they try to reconnect alot in that 1:50 instance, but say they dont enter the game before 1:50 its give the team an option at 10 minutes to say surrender, the constricts would be a player must be in the center of the fountain with 1000 armor without even entering the game once, this would also allow riot to sort through games better, because the tribunal would know this is a 10 minute surrender, and if was due to something like a pre-lobby fight over roles, they could easily tell, the fact this should be implented, even in abused form, this would be a much needed relief to those frustrating waste of time games, that only negatively influence are league experience.