Boards›Player Behavior

How LeaverBuster Handles AFKs Who Return: and Thoughts on How to Change It

sKz Aaron D·3/13/2018, 3:06:35 PM·3 votes·371 views

TL;DR Playing a ranked game. PC crashed, but I was able to reboot and reconnect to the game in about 6 minutes, we had a team fight and a couple of skirmishes afterwards and we won off of those fights. Post-game lobby comes up and I'm informed, "You are ineligible to earn loot due to leaving or AFK behaviors." So I naturally lost 18 LP, and got a D- for a 0/3/16 Blitzcrank game with good vision score and participation despite the time spent 'AFK'.

I understand LeaverBuster automatically punishing players that leave the game, but why does it effectively punish players that return to a game? I think the system could be changed to better encourage people to return, no matter the reason for the disconnect.

Some wall of text. I'm fairly certain my team didn't report me for it, as one of them expressed shock at the system punishing me in the post-game lobby, and none of them were asking in all chat for reports during the period that I was able to play after the crash. I did actually find that surprising because almost every ranked game I've played on LAN has someone in all chat asking for reports right before the game ends (which ironically, is against the Summoner's Code and a reportable offense itself). Obviously, there could've been someone saying something while I was attempting to reconnect that I wouldn't have been able to see, but another teammate welcomed me back to the game when I got back in, which leads to believe at least that person wasn't begging for me to be reported, too.

To repeat an earlier point, I don't understand why LeaverBuster doesn't appear to make any distinction between people who leave a game and people who return to a game. Obviously this is probably a fairly rare thing to have happen, especially because most games (I believe the old stat given by Riot was ~85%) with an AFK result in the team with an AFK losing. I could see checks being added to LeaverBuster for...

  1. Was X connected at the end of the game?
  2. Did X receive reports from teammates for leaving? The system could wait to tabulate LP gains/losses until those conditions are checked.

With results being...

  1. If the first is positive, but the second is negative, no punishment is meted out by LeaverBuster.
  2. If the first is negative, punishment is meted out.
  3. If the first is positive, and the second is positive, punishment is meted out.

If your team believes that you left, but came back and played for the win, you aren't punished. If your team believes you left, but came back only to try to avoid punishment through the new checks above, you are punished. I believe this system would be consistent with Riot's stated policies on player reform, punishment, and behavior.

This puts a sort of tribunal power into the hands of the teammates of the AFK, which could potentially be abused (such as reports in the case of a loss where the AFK returned and did appear to trying to play to win), but it would also help people who aren't necessarily deserving of punishment by an automated system, leading to lower number of arbitrary punishments overall. I think it would be better than the current system because the current system offers no incentive for a player to return to a game beyond the opinions of the other players. This is likely because the system cannot tell the difference between someone choosing to leave a game, and someone leaving due to an issue that isn't necessarily within their control, such as a crash or an internet/power outage, due to this inability, I've avoided making a distinction between people who leave of their own volition and people who leave due to something not 100% within their control, and I believe the argument remains strong without that distinction. I digress, back to incentive, I don't think that the opinions of the other players are enough for most people to bother rejoining and trying to win, due to the anonymous nature of the internet as a whole, and the words/actions that said anonymity often brings. So, LP gains and loot rewards remaining available if the suggested conditions are met would provide an incentive, even for people who may have initially chosen to leave, which also incentivizes reform, because immediate 'good' actions have the potential to be rewarded. All of this said, I do not see, and thus do not advocate, a change to the way people who leave and do not come back are treated by LeaverBuster, or how the system handles reports for people who are effectively AFK, but remain active by walking around a little bit to avoid being marked as AFK by the system.

I'm chock full of this stuff (criminal justice major) and need a job, penny for my thoughts, Riot?

3 Comments

AeroWaffle3/13/2018, 3:14:02 PM2 votes

If you're gone for 5 min, even if you return you were still gone those 5 min.

To your team it's irrelevant to why you were gone, only that you were. Leavebuster has a little bit of leeway to make up for the rare disconnect outside your control, but if you're still attempting to play the game when your connection is unstable it's a problem. So if you're experiencing problems frequently enough that you're getting hit by leavebuster you need to fix the problem.

sKz Aaron D3/13/2018, 3:30:53 PM2 votes

I don't experience problems often, this is the second time in four years of playing League that I've had this happen, I'm offering a possible solution to what I stated is a rare event in League as a whole, not just for myself. I've never been hit by LeaverBuster outside of those two occurrences.

I recognize that for my team, I was still not in the game for whatever the period of time was, that's why I had the idea for the second check, if your team reports you for the AFK. That way, if your team feels that your AFK (again, without distinction for why there was an AFK) negatively impacted their experience, it makes sure there is a human check. We know that people tend to more readily remember negative experiences over positive ones, so if your AFK had an outsized negative impact you will likely be reported on return, leading to the punishment by LeaverBuster. But if your teammates did not feel that negative impact, they would likely not report you, and thus you would not be punished. This idea still leans toward hitting poor behavior, but provides incentive for a player to return and try to help their team win, which is a step toward individual reform if they left, and makes punishment in the other rare instances of a disconnect outside of control less likely.

Edit: As a side note, I just noticed that the match is credited as a victory in my match history, not as a leave. That said, I'm not sure if the new client has the same functionality in match history as the old Adobe Air client did, which made the distinction for leaves rather than defeats and victories, and marked them with a loss color, or if this is simply because I was present for the victory, and that made it record as such despite the leave.

sKz Aaron D3/13/2018, 3:51:59 PM2 votes

As an example in why I believe a human check is better than just the automated system:

If a player is disconnected for 2 minutes, and that isn't long enough for LeaverBuster to flag a player, and the player returns, but the 2 minutes disconnected had an outsized negative impact, the player is not punished and receives rewards.

If a player is disconnected for 5 minutes, and that is long enough for LeaverBuster to flag a player, and the player returns, and the 5 minutes disconnected did not have outsized negative impact, the player is punished and does not receive rewards.

With human checks, those outcomes are most likely reversed, or potentially neither is punished, with the system still having the ability to punish both depending on perception of the event, it has the potential to be more fair in more instances than the current system.