If you were banned for intentionally feeding, please do show us the match history linked on your reform card.
But, if you're speaking strictly in hypotheticals here...
...and don't say that it does?
Just because you don't want to hear that there's more to the system for determining int-feeding punishments than just KDAs doesn't mean you can strictly demand not to hear it.
Outside of exceedingly rare cases, it's wholly unlikely you'd ever wind up with a score of 0/15/0 - much less your entire team.
And even in the cases that it does happen, it has to be determined that any of those 15 of those deaths were intentional. So, if the review finds that you had just been getting into bad fights, getting generally thrashed, and circumstances prevented you from getting assists (timeout before enemy Champion death, or the fight resulting in a full wipe on your team), it's sorely unlikely that you'll get punished for it.
...or that the majority of us just didn't want to play and were held hostage by one or two ass holes that kept voting no?
This statement has implications, so, lemme just lay this out:
If you don't want to play, but the match kept going due to failed Surrender Votes, then there are two things that could happen;
- You continue to play to the best of your abilities, playing from the back foot, defending base, and so on. This is allowed.
- You decide to commit to hastening the match's end, not actively trying to fight your opponents, and letting them kill you/take objectives you could have otherwise defended without opposition. This is not allowed.
And wait, what if we had 2 people AFK?
Two people being AFK doesn't change the expectation of behavior. If you intentionally feed to hasten a loss, you get punished for intentionally feeding.
Am I not supposed to die a lot in a 3v5 game?
Well, are you playing defensively? Focusing more on farming and poking instead of going for skirmishes and trades? Are you, in general, playing appropriately for being down two players?
If yes, then you're not likely to die often. If no...Then the 15 deaths would make sense.
Why does the banning system not take this into account...
There is a lot that goes into determining a punishment for intentional feeding/trolling. It may not take into account all of the wild, anecdotal factors that you can think of, but it still takes enough into account to largely avoid false-positive punishments.
