Riot, please stop allowing 2 people to control the time of the other 3 at a whim.

InsaneSamurai·1/4/2015, 7:01:17 AM·9 votes·1,405 views

3/2 surrender votes should be surrenders. The majority of the team said yes, and your newfound focus on punishing leavers means those two people are now trapping the other 3 in a game that the majority of the team does not want to be in anymore. Your system is causing more toxicity and unneeded stress when 3 players get trapped because a duo doesn't care what anyone wants.

76 Comments

BigIdea1/4/2015, 7:11:30 AM8 votes

many of my comeback wins wouldn't have happened if the 3/2 surrender was implemented. too many people give up too easily.

Nicktoons1/4/2015, 1:38:04 PM7 votes

Actually no, because I've been in matches where I was extremely fed, and people would surrender 3/2. If that was able to go through then I wouldn't have been able to win those matches.

What riot should do is If a player has died 10times and has not helped the team in anyway the game should just end instantly and be a loss forgiven for the whole losing team, except for the player at hand.

I'm really tired of seeing people die 20times, The game should just end.

SexyTaylorSwift1/4/2015, 11:21:25 PM4 votes

Judging by this thread, and the overall push for a change, I would say that the majority is fine with the current 4-1 system. Checkmate.

Eleshakai1/5/2015, 12:17:27 AM3 votes

{quoted}

3/2 surrender votes should be surrenders. The majority of the team said yes, and your newfound focus on punishing leavers means those two people are now trapping the other 3 in a game that the majority of the team does not want to be in anymore. Your system is causing more toxicity and unneeded stress when 3 players get trapped because a duo doesn't care what anyone wants.

My personal stance is that it should require a unanimous decision, but be available from the 10 minute mark.

I'd rather 'punish' 3 people by making them play the game(which is not a punishment since that's what you queued up to do in the first place) than ACTUALLY punish 2 people with a loss because 3 of their players didn't recognize that the game was far from over.

Stephenizgod1/4/2015, 10:00:07 PM3 votes

I use to think that too but after awhile my opinion changed. There are dozens of times where i wanted to surrender but 2 people didn't and it drove me crazy. There are also dozens of time where i wanted to surrender, but 2 people didn't and then they led us to victory.

Here is the other part of it, the enemy team may not want to stop playing. If they are having fun and the 2 people on your team are having fun then that's 7 people having fun and 3 not, majority of the people are having a good time. Maybe there should me a mercy vote with a 3/2 split (or a 2/2 in the case of an afk i guess) where the other team gets to decide whether to give mercy or keep playing. Personally though i think there should be at least 2-3 failed votes before the other team gets to mercy vote.

SexyTaylorSwift1/4/2015, 10:32:10 PM3 votes

Surrender should be 5-0. You are voting to intentionally lose the game. I don't want my game intentionally lost because you all decided to feed and now don't want to play anymore.

Ratbert1/4/2015, 10:21:16 PM1 votes

Wouldn't the better idea be to remove duos? I assume this is rankeds because you only talk about duos.