4 v 1 Surrender Votes Should NOT BE Counted As a Loss

Troll Armada·Feb 5, 2016·2 votes·1,439 views

For the person who does not vote to surrender.

Seems like a contradiction.

Riot says ANY game can be carried, yet in this case, it can't because ~~your team~~ premade troll group outvotes you to surrender.

Therefore if you do not vote or vote no, then you should not be penalized for something you have no control over.

[slayer-jinx-catface]

Furthermore, since Riot WON'T ever do this, then an alternative would be to make surrender votes have to be unanimous in order to surrender.

24 Comments

Taco1518Feb 5, 20166 votes

Dude, no. If your team was surrendering in case you were actually winning, then that's trolling (Which is really rare to happen) and what the Report System is for. However, if you guys are losing, your teammates have the right to surrender if they think they're gonna lose.

Troll ArmadaFeb 5, 20161 votes

(Which is really rare to happen)

It's not that rare.

EribasFeb 5, 20166 votes

This sounds like needless whining. if a game goes to a 4-1 surrender than the other 80% of your team is probably glad its over. most people who pull the 'any game can be carried card' are normally saying it when the oddsare so small it just irritates everyone else

Troll ArmadaFeb 5, 20161 votes

most people who pull the 'any game can be carried card' are normally saying it when the oddsare so small it just irritates everyone else

um, no, this is Riot dogma, and I've seen plenty of Red's repeat this statement like they 100% mean what they are saying. So if this is going to be the stance they take, then they should at least be consistent.

EribasFeb 5, 20165 votes

im not saying it's wrong. In theory yes any game can be carried. However most games that people surrender are for a reason, and you whining really doesn't mean you shouldn't get a loss when you say no. It just sounds assanine

Troll ArmadaFeb 5, 20161 votes

In theory yes any game can be carried.

No, that is my point, this proves the theory is wrong, when you can have premade troll teams simply outvote you to surrender.

Perhaps this is not an issue in challenger, but it is bronze and silver.

EribasFeb 5, 20163 votes

Just because people vote to surrender doesn't make them a premade group of 4 trolls. Often it could be people are sick of the game or any other number of reasons. Could it in theory be turned? yes. Is it worth the frustration and effort often? Probably not. If you believe that you should get no penalty for a surrendered game just because you said no theres a good chance you deserve the loss of MMR and Lp

Troll ArmadaFeb 5, 20161 votes

you make lots of personal insults and declarative statements, but I can't find ONE actual argument in anything you write.

EribasFeb 5, 20162 votes

You clearly aren't looking hard enough lol. I really don't know how to say this any clearer. When one person is against a surrender it doesn't redeem them and remove the penalty for losing. Assuming it's all trolls and groups of premades just sounds childish. I'll set it in very simple words. 'This idea has a logic fallacy'
Ergo, just because you are dragging games out preaching how they can be turned, does not mean the other 4 players, premade OR NOT, have any desire to continue what is in their minds. A lost game, and likely no longer an enjoyable one.

FrankerXFeb 5, 20163 votes

and when your power goes off for no reason (whoops did i pull the plug) it shouldnt register you as leaving/afk. Kappa

Troll ArmadaFeb 5, 20161 votes

no, that's a different issue entirely, and basically your fault for not having an Uninterruptable Power Supply and Fiber connection.

whereas the surrender vote is ENTIRELY out of your control.

Dominick DestineFeb 5, 20162 votes

That's why it's called a vote.

Troll ArmadaFeb 5, 20162 votes

"a vote" does not mean 51%

There are many different types of votes and different types require different percentages, in this case it should 100% in order to surrender.

Dominick DestineFeb 5, 20161 votes

[{quoted}](name=Troll Armada,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=3BLUGBJA,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2016-02-05T04:32:24.438+0000)

"a vote" does not mean 51%

80% =/= 51%

And a successful popular vote would indeed be 50% + X where X is the smallest unit of value available.

Troll ArmadaFeb 5, 20161 votes

Here's the thing. YOU HAVE NO CONTROL OVER OTHERS AND YOU CANNOT "DO YOUR BEST" .... in this situation.

Why should you then be penalized for this? Surrender 'votes' should require unanimous consent.

JubbinautFeb 5, 20161 votes

[{quoted}](name=Troll Armada,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=3BLUGBJA,comment-id=,timestamp=2016-02-05T01:26:01.759+0000)

For the person who does not vote to surrender.

Seems like a contradiction.

As far as I can tell, there are basically three valid states for a game in any particular player's match history: Victory, Defeat, and Loss Prevented.

The last can be dismissed due to function - it is used exclusively when there are connection problems on Riot's end, and that's not connected to the situation you describe.

So the question is, did the game end in a victory for the player in question? If the answer is yes, then the gamestate is Victory. If the answer is no, then the only valid gamestate remaining is Defeat.

Riot says ANY game can be carried, yet in this case, it can't because your team premade troll group outvotes you to surrender.

I've seen far more Rioters state the opposite. Even if they were, they're not wrong, depending on where you're measuring from. If you're measuring from the fait accompli of defeat, then obviously that already-finished game cannot be carried.

The better question, I think, is why did the rest of your team decide not to try?

Troll ArmadaFeb 5, 20161 votes

I don't understand your analysis, it's really neither here nor there, Basically what has happened in this game is that the game was aborted and you weren't given a chance. It's only fair that you be given another game where everyone wants to win, not just feed and surrender.

JubbinautFeb 5, 20161 votes

[{quoted}](name=Troll Armada,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=3BLUGBJA,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2016-02-05T04:31:30.321+0000)

I don't understand your analysis, it's really neither here nor there, Basically what has happened in this game is that the game was aborted and you weren't given a chance.

Seems to me like you had at least 20 minutes of a chance to convince your teammates that the game was worth playing before they were even given the opportunity to force the game to end.

I don't see why failure to do so should qualify you to be considered victorious in a match where you fail to destroy the enemy nexus.

It's only fair that you be given another game where everyone wants to win, not just feed and surrender.

I agree. But I don't understand how the actions of your teammates from that match prevent you from re-entering the queue.

KaisadiIIaFeb 5, 20161 votes

It compensates with those times when the enemy team surrenders 4/1. The one voting no could have carried as good as you and, on average, you'll lose the same number of games you'll win due to 4/1 surrenders.

The UnbangableFeb 5, 20161 votes

If there's a game where the score is 2-25 (I had this happen before) yeah let's keep it real, we lost, time to surrender, play another game and perform better. I do not like people who waste my time and say we can win this.. like, no, we can't.

Moreover, considering the reality of a democracy is 51% of the votes get their decision fulfilled, that would mean 3 people vote yes and its over. Riot made it 4 votes and its over. That's fair. It should count as a loss, because you would have lost anyways, that's why the vote started in the first place.

Troll ArmadaFeb 5, 20161 votes

no, that's an extreme case and not what i'm talking about.

"democracy" has nothing to do with anything. League isn't a democracy, and even if it was, not all votes in a democracy are simple majority rules.

decided to surrender is a 'nuclear' option and should require unanimous consent.

The UnbangableFeb 5, 20162 votes

[{quoted}](name=Troll Armada,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=3BLUGBJA,comment-id=00060000,timestamp=2016-02-05T04:30:17.771+0000)

no, that's an extreme case and not what i'm talking about.

"democracy" has nothing to do with anything. League isn't a democracy, and even if it was, not all votes in a democracy are simple majority rules.

decided to surrender is a 'nuclear' option and should require unanimous consent.

But like I said, some people do not know when a loss is coming, and end up wasting unnecessary time. So if you have that one "I'll never let go!" teammate, then a unanimous vote will be hard to achieve, and therefore wasting a resource that will never ever come back, for the 4 other players. Time.

Troll ArmadaFeb 5, 20161 votes

I realize that as a booster, you are under a lot of pressure to churn out those games, but other people are here to play, and that should trump the concerns of those who have quotas to fill.

The UnbangableFeb 5, 20161 votes

[{quoted}](name=Troll Armada,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=3BLUGBJA,comment-id=0006000000000000,timestamp=2016-02-05T04:36:35.112+0000)

I realize that as a booster, you are under a lot of pressure to churn out those games, but other people are here to play, and that should trump the concerns of those who have quotas to fill.

No, I get it. Sometimes surrendering is not the option since there is a chance of coming back right, but MOST of the time, the game is lost, but someone on your team does not realize that. And it will be a waste of time trying to win a game that will inevitably be lost.