hostage taking

scazzman·Jul 30, 2016·6 votes·899 views

something needs to be done about trolls who will stall out a losing game, for the simple purpose of keeping people invested in a losing battle a few options i thought to eliminate this were

implement a "mercy rule"where if enough surrender votes have failed, the game can end with a 3/2 majority instead of 4/1 or people can afk and take LP loss. but not get leaverbustered
make it so a game automatically ends in a draw after a certain amount of time has passed and all parties gain "half a win" of LP/IP, which if riot's goal is to speed up gamplay, would be perfect. "obviously it would be a long time, like 70 minutes or something
add report options for "stalling/delay of game." which are both actual penalties in real sports

i personally think making matches end in a stalemate after minute 70 would be the best solution, as it's unabusable, and could even have the added benefit of players making "draw comps"

49 Comments

BigBellBruteJul 30, 20163 votes

I have the opposite problem. Too many people want to surrender at the first sign of trouble. There are plenty of things that can be accomplished even in a losing game. Think of a losing game as an opportunity without risk.

Try out that play you've had some difficulty executing. Practice using your mini map. Doing these types of things will make you better when it counts.

Also there are people that when someone is toxic then votes to surrender will vote no.

scazzmanJul 30, 20162 votes

{quoted}

I have the opposite problem. Too many people want to surrender at the first sign of trouble. There are plenty of things that can be accomplished even in a losing game. Think of a losing game as an opportunity without risk.

Try out that play you've had some difficulty executing. Practice using your mini map. Doing these types of things will make you better when it counts.

Also there are people that when someone is toxic then votes to surrender will vote no.

for some people, the longer a losing game draws out, the more stressed they become, and the more prone they are to retaliating to toxicity. so they surrender spam hoping that people get annoyed enough to just pass the f*cking vote, so they can get out of the game before they start flaming

DamagefoxJul 31, 20162 votes

I have also had matches where the score was like 6 v 27, It was a 4v5. And people refuse to surrender simply because "I would rather Lose than surrender" and yet the expect everyone else to play as hard as them when even leaving base will instantly get the player o1-shotted.

Or there are also the players who duo and simply vote no on surrender in order to "Punish thier team" Have a top laner who gets a bad matchup and jungle does nothing to help? Then jungle pairs up with another player and decides to "punish" the top laner themselves by not allowing a surrender vote to pass, and threatening to report anyone who doesnt play. why? all because they feel that it is THIER duty to "punish" the laner for playing poorly in the same way someone would rub a dogs nose in it when they pee on the carpet. "This is what you did! Now you are going to sit here and be punished for it!"

OleandervineJul 30, 20162 votes

Regardless of the semantics of what the OP has said and the disagreeing comments, I think we can all agree that there needs to be some safeguard against overly extensive games that may be deliberately drawn out to waste people's time.

Rio RisottoJul 30, 20161 votes

Option 1 allows premades to dominate the flow of the game even harder, option 2 can easily be abused, option 3 punished hyper carries way too hard.

scazzmanJul 30, 20161 votes

[{quoted}](name=Rio Risotto,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1XMHGOqT,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2016-07-30T07:58:20.672+0000)

Option 1 allows premades to dominate the flow of the game even harder, option 2 can easily be abused, option 3 punished hyper carries way too hard.

how could a match ending in a draw be abused?

Rio RisottoJul 30, 20162 votes

You get half the lp for win, right? So both teams can just stall until 70 if they are unsure who will win and dont want to lose lp. They still get lp and all they have to do is not play.

scazzmanJul 30, 20161 votes

[{quoted}](name=Rio Risotto,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1XMHGOqT,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2016-07-30T08:00:16.550+0000)

You get half the lp for win, right? So both teams can just stall until 70 if they are unsure who will win and dont want to lose lp. They still get lp and all they have to do is not play.

ok, so make it so both teams get IP, but LP just stays zero. fixed

Rio RisottoJul 30, 20162 votes

Then you are just punishing defencive teams and helping those who have boosted accounts. Oh also you are encouraging people to drag out games, if they surrender they lose LP, but if they just stall the game both teams have unchanged lp, so we are back at point 0 with people refusing to surrender.

scazzmanJul 30, 20161 votes

[{quoted}](name=Rio Risotto,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1XMHGOqT,comment-id=00000000000000000000,timestamp=2016-07-30T08:04:38.644+0000)

Then you are just punishing defencive teams and helping those who have boosted accounts. Oh also you are encouraging people to drag out games, if they surrender they lose LP, but if they just stall the game both teams have unchanged lp, so we are back at point 0 with people refusing to surrender.

but at least the people held hostage for 70 minutes get something out of it, it has the added benefit of encouraging players to play out a match as well. as they have the option to switch from trying to win, to forcing a stalemate

Rio RisottoJul 30, 20161 votes

Well, thats also true.

Magical PlayerJul 30, 20166 votes

{quoted}

but at least the people held hostage for 70 minutes get something out of it, it has the added benefit of encouraging players to play out a match as well. as they have the option to switch from trying to win, to forcing a stalemate

Nobody is held hostage if someone thinks a game is winable you play it out. If you disagree on that statement that is fine you have options If you choose to AFK then you should be punished as such This is a game nobody is pointing a gun to your head and telling you to play it All three of the options are not fair to the system 1- People can afk and not receive a leaver buster if x surrender votes fail. So because one person thinks a game is winable and you disagree with them, you will leave forcing a 4v5. So how does not punishing a player for blatantly leaving benefit the system? The reason is requires a 4/1 majority is a understanding of a process. "a majority vote should supercede" so if only 1 person votes does that person also get the only say in the matter, by not voting you are also making a statement. 2-Game ends in a draw...... if this went into effect games would stretch out to 70, and you would see more hostage games, simply knowing they won't win or lose lp by reaching x timer will force more people to force games to go beyond a point 3-Staling= banning You want riot to implement another automated system to punish players? Again back to your 1st rule(and my opinion of it) Punishing someone for thinking they can win. This doesn't make sense in a competitive game.

scazzmanJul 30, 20161 votes

[{quoted}](name=Magical Player,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1XMHGOqT,comment-id=0000000000000000000000000001,timestamp=2016-07-30T08:43:00.532+0000)

Nobody is held hostage if someone thinks a game is winable you play it out. If you disagree on that statement that is fine you have options If you choose to AFK then you should be punished as such

you just contradicted yourself. we're forced to stay in a shitfest, simply because of leaverbuster

DamagefoxJul 31, 20161 votes

There are players who still think the match is winnable JUST BECAUSE THEY SAY SO. They are so arrogant and full of themselves, the team could have lost all towers, naked nexus, score of 4v32 and The player would still vote no because "dont worry, I can carry, just wait"

And there are other players who intentionally vote no Purely to punish ONE player. They make the whole team suffer because ...top lane unintentionally fed. So they vote no on surrender "You fed the enemy, now you are going to sit here and deal with it. And I will report you if you dont play" They do this for little more than to "punish" a teammate as if thats THIER job.

and yeah often the enemy team is so fed and the ally team is so toxic that the match ISNT winnable. If you leave base, you get 1 shotted, if you idle, You get leaverbuster If you leave, you run the risk of getting banned.

Meanwhile player is intentionally voting no nd forcing you to play like its the world finals, while at the same time flaming you and telling you how you need to go drink bleach or something.

Magical PlayerJul 31, 20162 votes

{quoted}

There are players who still think the match is winnable JUST BECAUSE THEY SAY SO. They are so arrogant and full of themselves, the team could have lost all towers, naked nexus, score of 4v32 and The player would still vote no because "dont worry, I can carry, just wait"

And there are other players who intentionally vote no Purely to punish ONE player. They make the whole team suffer because ...top lane unintentionally fed. So they vote no on surrender "You fed the enemy, now you are going to sit here and deal with it. And I will report you if you dont play" They do this for little more than to "punish" a teammate as if thats THIER job.

and yeah often the enemy team is so fed and the ally team is so toxic that the match ISNT winnable. If you leave base, you get 1 shotted, if you idle, You get leaverbuster If you leave, you run the risk of getting banned.

Meanwhile player is intentionally voting no nd forcing you to play like its the world finals, while at the same time flaming you and telling you how you need to go drink bleach or something.

If they're flaming comments like the ones you posted above, then they can be banned for it. It's considered verbal abuse/harrassment But if they're saying no, and stating they think we can win. That is not a punishable offence 4v32 , hyper unrealistic game I think, but the team with 4 could be super ahead gold still and is just screwing around giving kills to the point the enemy team is 28 kills ahead. Kills=/= win The only death that matters is sitting behind 5 towers in any lane 1 inhib. Destroying that is the only way to truly win kills= gold = items= damage=/= skill

DamagefoxJul 31, 20161 votes

Actually it happened. Had a Tryndamere, Zed, and Yi. Yi went yolo solo the whole match, never left top lane, never said anything Zed Quit out of the match near the start so for 90% of the match it was 5v4. And Even when the score was 6 v 27, Tryndamere kept voting No on surrender with yi. He never once ganked bot lane so naturally our bot lane enemy got fed. But Yi voted no saying "I would rather Lose than surrender" and threatened to report people who didnt try. We couldnt even leave the base without getting instantly 1-shotted (As if they would actually give us a chance to mount a comeback) but every single time, Tryndamere voted no. even saying "I know we lost but I'm Not gonna surrender"

scazzmanJul 31, 20161 votes

[{quoted}](name=Magical Player,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1XMHGOqT,comment-id=0000000000000000000000000001000000000000,timestamp=2016-07-31T09:16:27.888+0000)

If they're flaming comments like the ones you posted above, then they can be banned for it. It's considered verbal abuse/harrassment But if they're saying no, and stating they think we can win. That is not a punishable offence 4v32 , hyper unrealistic game I think, but the team with 4 could be super ahead gold still and is just screwing around giving kills to the point the enemy team is 28 kills ahead. Kills=/= win The only death that matters is sitting behind 5 towers in any lane 1 inhib. Destroying that is the only way to truly win kills= gold = items= damage=/= skill

the reality however, is they dont "think we can win" at all. they are deliberately prolonging the game. just to keep people trapped there

Magical PlayerJul 31, 20162 votes

{quoted}

you just contradicted yourself. we're forced to stay in a shitfest, simply because of leaverbuster

No you're not forced into anything If someone on your team believes the game is win able and you disagree with them. That is fine You have 3 choices Stay and play and see what happens Stay and flame and see what happens probably reported Afk/leave and get reported

Simply saying your staying because leaver buster would punish you for leaving. Just means you shouldn't be playing a game like this. I can't think of many games that are on PC that don't punish players for throwing a fit and quitting a game 1/2 into it. Go to console play cod, quit join whenever nobody cares. If that what you want to do is have the ability to leave a losing game without being punished for it This is a game where your goal is to win, now that being said not every game is winable but does that give you the right to afk/rage quit because you happened to get "unlucky" No, you signed the tos just like the rest of us, you will abide by the rules or accept the punishment.

Leaverbuster- the reason you're salted this much is my guess you were punished for it or banned for it In which case you deserve either. i've been there it sucks did I blame the system? No, i accepted what i did and moved on. Please reference me any material you think can contradict my statements above, by all means we shall continue this civil discussion over the leaver buster policy.

Sorry for the late reply, was taking care of a sick pup

scazzmanJul 31, 20162 votes

[{quoted}](name=Magical Player,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1XMHGOqT,comment-id=000000000000000000000000000100000001,timestamp=2016-07-31T09:12:42.109+0000)

No you're not forced into anything If someone on your team believes the game is win able and you disagree with them. That is fine You have 3 choices Stay and play and see what happens Stay and flame and see what happens probably reported Afk/leave and get reported

Simply saying your staying because leaver buster would punish you for leaving. Just means you shouldn't be playing a game like this. I can't think of many games that are on PC that don't punish players for throwing a fit and quitting a game 1/2 into it. Go to console play cod, quit join whenever nobody cares. If that what you want to do is have the ability to leave a losing game without being punished for it This is a game where your goal is to win, now that being said not every game is winable but does that give you the right to afk/rage quit because you happened to get "unlucky" No, you signed the tos just like the rest of us, you will abide by the rules or accept the punishment.

Leaverbuster- the reason you're salted this much is my guess you were punished for it or banned for it In which case you deserve either. i've been there it sucks did I blame the system? No, i accepted what i did and moved on. Please reference me any material you think can contradict my statements above, by all means we shall continue this civil discussion over the leaver buster policy.

Sorry for the late reply, was taking care of a sick pup

that's essentially being forced, please dont patronize me.

XerShadeJul 31, 20161 votes

Yes, you are FORCED. By the terms and conditions of this game you MUST play it until the nexus explodes. End of story, good bye, the end.

That does NOT give you the right to disrupt the game by popping an extremely annoying window up infront of everyone every three minutes because you want to go in the corner of the fountain and give up. If the team votes NO it means NO and if you disrupt peoples games you WILL BE REPORTED.

scazzmanJul 31, 20161 votes

and if all im doing is spamming surrenders, that report will mean absolutely nothing. and your reports will gradually mean less and less the more you report me and people like me.

neeener neener neeeeeeeeener

Magical PlayerAug 2, 20161 votes

{quoted}

that's essentially being forced, please dont patronize me.

You want me not to patronize you. Fine, suggest something that is reasonable towards rank experience. Each of your options would hurt all ranked games. For the shear fact of How lp works. All you want is for there to be an option to quit a game when you think its unwinable and then not be punished for doing so. a 70 min game, that is not being held hostage. That is a damn good game.

Please explain how you would adjust the entire lp system to allow for an option to willing quit a game. In such a manner that continues to promote not leaving games carelessly.

If you leave or dc from a game, even if its the worst game of your life. All you did was force your views onto somebody else. you made a 5v5 a 4v5 and thus a harder to win(most likly a loss)

A mercy rule: let me be clear this is by far the most sincere way to look at it.Only since it still respects the wishes of the majority of the team. It'd still be abused by premades. Dynamic queue allows for this to be abused. So it's still not doing anything to resolve the problem. it just changes the problem from being forced into games to being forced out of games.

Sure just make everything a 1/2 value solves that, ohh wait so now instead of consistent gains and consistent loses. I have to contend with 1/2 value games on top of normal losses. That would ruin ranked.

Make another way for riot to punish players for what, stalling. We had that option "unsportsmanlike conduct" guess what happened to that it was abused and removed much like unskilled player. Either it will become a meaningless option or removed.

just a suggestion to resolve this problem, only play games with people that think like you. So when you think its time to ff you don't run into the wall of 4 others who disagree with you.

If you would spend more than 5 secs on your reply this time. Due to the effort Im putting forth to explain my thought. I'd like you to at least show me you can explain yours to some degree.

scazzmanAug 2, 20161 votes

im actually usually one of the last people to surrender, my point is a common form of greifing is to troll a game into an unwinnable state, and pretend to "try' just enough to prolong the game, and prevent anyone from leaving

Magical PlayerAug 2, 20161 votes

{quoted}

im actually usually one of the last people to surrender, my point is a common form of greifing is to troll a game into an unwinnable state, and pretend to "try' just enough to prolong the game, and prevent anyone from leaving

a common form of greifing is to troll? that right there. is something else

scazzmanJul 30, 20162 votes

[{quoted}](name=Magical Player,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1XMHGOqT,comment-id=0000000000000000000000000001,timestamp=2016-07-30T08:43:00.532+0000)

3-Staling= banning You want riot to implement another automated system to punish players? Again back to your 1st rule(and my opinion of it) Punishing someone for thinking they can win. This doesn't make sense in a competitive game.

learn to spell for one. and two. people wouldnt be punished unless it was a clear cut case of griefing

Rio RisottoJul 30, 20161 votes

And to be fair, there is a better solution although it just reverses the situation and hurts late game characters, but just reducing the lp loss if you surrender could help your problem.

XerShadeJul 30, 20161 votes

Play the game or uninstall. You want to leave before your team surrenders, wins, or loses then leave. Quite honestly I report surrender spammers because you are practically announcing that you do not care about winning and that IS against the rules.

archerno1Jul 30, 20163 votes

{quoted}

Play the game or uninstall. You want to leave before your team surrenders, wins, or loses then leave. Quite honestly I report surrender spammers because you are practically announcing that you do not care about winning and that IS against the rules.

No its not. Alot of people dont care about winning/losing. They just wanna have fun and do best they can.

XerShadeJul 30, 20161 votes

Except that I never said that. The surrender spammers are clearly not trying to do their best or have fun.

archerno1Jul 30, 20163 votes

{quoted}

Except that I never said that. The surrender spammers are clearly not trying to do their best or have fun.

Well if they arent having fun in game anymore, they start surrender vote.

XerShadeJul 30, 20161 votes

Then they can either wait it out like decent human beings and not throw a tantrum like a two year old, or they can leave prematurely and get punished. Acting out because other players want to play still is AGAINST THE RULES, and yes spamming /ff is toxic as it ruins team morale, blocks the screen, and is generally annoying.

scazzmanJul 30, 20162 votes

{quoted}

Play the game or uninstall. You want to leave before your team surrenders, wins, or loses then leave. Quite honestly I report surrender spammers because you are practically announcing that you do not care about winning and that IS against the rules.

spamming surrender is NOT against the rules. there's a reason it's only available every 3 minutes

XerShadeJul 31, 20161 votes

You are not only disrupting gameplay but practially saying "PLEASE LET ME LEAVE I DONT WANT TO PLAY" both of which are NOT ALLOWED.

VivaLaKittenJul 31, 20161 votes

fun > winning

XerShadeJul 31, 20161 votes

Surrender Spam = Fun Ruined

scazzmanJul 31, 20162 votes

drawing out a losing game just to troll people. also = fun ruined

SmokedAlmondsJul 31, 20163 votes

How would you determine the difference between someone drawing out the game to troll you and someone who just simply doesn't want to surrender?

XerShadeJul 31, 20161 votes

You don't. However I KNOW whiny quitters are toxic. Proven fact. But apparently the OP thinks anyone who presses NO when there is even a 1% chance for victory is a troll.

scazzmanJul 31, 20161 votes

usually you can tell the difference, because when the vote fails, and the 2 guys who said " i voted yes are accounted for, and one of the guys who voted no has a multiple tear build and the other has the same club tag as them. something's up

SmokedAlmondsJul 31, 20161 votes

If the guy is doing something like buying multiple tiers then he's already doing something punishable and there is no reason to create some sub category for this. Clubs don't really add anything meaningful to the equation.

I feel like this is going to affect people who just don't want to surrender far more than anyone voting no to troll.

scazzmanJul 31, 20161 votes

which is why i think option 1 or 2 would be better, i dont necessarily care about nosurrender trolls being punished, so much as compensation for having to deal with the unfun experience of people stalling out a game just to be a dick

SmokedAlmondsJul 31, 20161 votes

No thanks to both.

I don't see this doing anything other than causing all the people who give up easily a reason to both spam surrender at 20 to get that counter going and try to convince others to do the same.
absolutely not. Long games are often some of the best games.

I have a hard time believing this is something that happens with anything approaching the regularity that would warrant any specific attention.

If you think they are trolling then report them for unsportsmanlike and detail exactly what they did. Trolling is about intent not any specific action. A list of 500 sub categories of trolling wouldn't do any good. It would just be a list of ways to troll people and the absence of things on the list will either make people think that is allowed or let trolls know that w/e other method they have hasn't been discovered yet.

Almost all your suggestions have the same 2 things in common. 1) they already fall under unsportsmanlike. 2) There is no real way to determine if they were actually trolling.

scazzmanJul 31, 20161 votes

the other option just make it a majority vote.

scazzmanJul 31, 20161 votes

and you think anyone who ever started a surrender vote deserves to be reported. why don't you petition to riot to have the vote removed, and see how quickly they laugh at you

VivaLaKittenJul 31, 20161 votes

why is this getting so many downvotes?

scazzmanJul 31, 20162 votes