Boards›Player Behavior

Help me understand "no" votes

The SandMan NDS·6/16/2017, 6:19:53 PM·12 votes·1,223 views

So I'm in a game, jungler is dc'd from min 4-20 and again at round 25mins. Every lane loses. at 15 mins it's 12-3, 5-0 towers and a 4v5 game. I start a surrender vote and 2 people vote no. Their excuse? "I'm having fun, plus we outscale".

They drag the game out to 29 mins, we lose still 4v5, 9-1 towers, something like 29-6 in kills.

I'm the jerk for being frustrated at their wasting of my time.

My argument is pretty straight forward. It's bad sportsmanship to force people to play out an obvious loss. When the game is over, you knock over your king and start again. In the 15 mins they forced everyone to play out, we could have all been starting a new, hopefully more competitive game.

I have nothing against losing. I'll play out a game that still has a decent chance to win (decent can be even 15% or so). But once your only hope to win is that 2 of them randomly d/c, it's time to move on. People have a limited amount of time to dedicate to leisure, forcing them to waste that time is selfish.

The "never surrender no mater what" attitude confuses me. The point is to have fun. Games on either extreme are not fun. Being face stomped, or doing the stomping, isn't really fun.

Anyway, maybe I'm just venting.

50 Comments

TrulyBland6/16/2017, 6:47:17 PM9 votes

I'm having fun

At this point you have all the information you need. It's a vote for a reason.

Either way, it's interesting that you should mention some people not having a lot of time for gaming available, yet you seem to not be thinking about people who simply might not have enough time to reliably commit to playing another game. By surrendering a game where they are still having fun, you might actually be cutting away from their leisure time. Likewise, surrendering a game where you still see a possibility to win, however slim, can be extremely frustrating. So again by surrendering because you find the game unfun, you might be taking away from their enjoyment of the game.

Your fun and your time is not more important than anybody else's.

Martensitic6/16/2017, 6:22:29 PM8 votes

There is nothing to understand.

Its a vote. People don't have to justify how they vote.

The much better question is, why a minority "no" - vote can force the continuation of the game against the wish of a majority to end it.

Jo0o6/16/2017, 6:44:12 PM8 votes

Comebacks are super satisfying to be a part of. If you can survive into the late game, early kill advantages disappear and a single good team fight can wildly swing the game and possibly just end it outright.

Your situation specifically may have been impossible, but shit, I've won similar games. At most you lost what, 9 minutes of your life? 14 if you count the potential to unanimously FF at 15? Less if you didn't immediately start the vote the second it was available? That's not much to ask for people to have a fighting chance to pull victory from the jaws of defeat.

Hawckey6/16/2017, 7:29:00 PM6 votes

Riot needs to make it a simple majority. Why do 2 people out of 5 determine what is right for the other 3? The fact that it has to be a unanimous vote at 15 is just completely retarded. Should be 4 to 1 at 15 and 3 to 2 at 20+

Brain Errör 4046/16/2017, 6:22:46 PM5 votes

I agree and I feel the same way. There's no other reason than, "We can still win!" I stand by "moderation in everything". There's only so much optimism a person can have before it becomes a fantasy.

Sir Fuzzi6/16/2017, 8:44:10 PM4 votes

4v5 is a perfectly acceptable reason to throw in the towel, those kinds of people probably reject surrenders no matter what.

Nautoday6/16/2017, 6:39:22 PM4 votes

This is probably because people have witnessed a 4v5 win... on several occasions actually. I've also witnessed 20k down in gold wins. If it's normal and somebody is playing a champ they want to practice, they'd rather just keep playing to keep practicing rather than ending, and starting at level 1 again. If it's ranked and somebody doesn't want to just give up LP without a fight, they'll vote no. I've had SEVERAL games that I've won after 3 of my teammates voted yes to surrender. Heck, I've even had a game where we had a 0/10 adc and I was 0/6 as support, that I had NO hope of ever winning so I AFK'd in base for 5-10 minutes while checking Tinder and giving people speed boosts as they left the fountain, and we managed to win that game as well. I've just had too many games that under no circumstance should we have won, but we did.

Zezockary6/16/2017, 6:43:07 PM4 votes

When you queue up you are promising your time until the game that starts is over to your team. If your team wants to play the game out for any reason what right do you have to make them stop when you already committed your time to them?

I have a lot of fun in losing games, and you will never learn how to play from behind if you just surrender at 20 every time you are losing. I have had 2 hour long games in the past and those are some of the best games I have ever had.

Also, I have a lot of fun in 4v5 situations, regardless of whether I am winning or losing. For a lot of people the game is more about winning or losing, it is about having fun in the experience.

ModAttysu The Poro6/16/2017, 11:50:45 PM3 votes

Well; sometimes people can really believe a game can be won. I've done that never surrender mentality before, and we've clutch won a few games before. It's rare, but it happens. There are also times where people still have fun, even if they are losing.

scazzman6/16/2017, 9:28:57 PM3 votes

My issue is the people who will deliberately vote no just to troll and waste time. Maybe after a certain number of votes that have ended 3/2. Allow people to afk without penalty other then LP loss

Khâmul6/16/2017, 7:37:17 PM2 votes

In a ranked game, everything can happen.enemy team does a stupid action,one enemy disconnect,your 0/15 adc's big brother god adc main is replacing him etc... so never surrender,the only "defeat" allowed is when they destroy your nexus. If you don't surrender in these games,you may have less than 1% chances to win(it can be promos,or against people with higher MMR,but if you surrender,be sure that it'll be 0%. Some people don't think it's a waste of time (i'm one of them),And if you think the game is lost,i think it would be the best time to try the riskiest strategies.

And in normal..it's just people having fun so let them be. In your perspective,you consider it's bad sportmanship to force people to play out..As a dude who does a lot of sport,I consider that it's bad sportsmanship to force people to stop playing and no matter what,I prefer people who never surrender than people who start whinning/complaining after one difficulty.I'm glad my coach just tell them to fuck off when they behave like this. (i know this is extreme cases,but you see my point).

"The "never surrender no mater what" attitude confuses me. The point is to have fun. Games on either extreme are not fun. Being face stomped, or doing the stomping, isn't really fun. " Fun is not an absolute concept. Some people only like easy games,some like difficult games ,and some like unwinnable games (not that much but consider that they don't think the game is unwinnable, it's a good attitude lol)[i'm excluding trolls that do it just to annoy you]

You're not wrong ,but for another person's perspective,you're not right either.

MUSHROOM MIDGET6/17/2017, 5:27:20 AM1 votes

its a form of trolling. a lot of times the players are trying to make their teammates suffer

Escheton6/17/2017, 8:17:36 AM1 votes

There is more to the game than win/lose.

Some people only have time for one game, so they prefer to get the most out of it.

Some people like the challenge of making the most out of a bad situation.

Some people never say die.

Some people take any opportunity to learn from games where they aren't carrying but are still trying to be useful.

Some people prefer to play a lost game over spending another 10 minutes in queues. dodges and remakes.

Some people just want to see the world burn.

The JigSAW6/17/2017, 1:49:08 PM1 votes

Honestly this could be solved so quickly if they just allowed 3 people to surrender instead of 4. I can't tell you the amount of games where I had a similar situation and those two people refused to change their votes even when they were the ones usually feeding/dying the most. So what should have been a 20 minute game went on to 40-45 minutes and it was beyond frustrating to deal with.

The problem is what you do about it. If you flame you get reported, if you AFK you get reported, if you feed you get reported. 3/5 is 60% majority and would fix a lot of this, or at least have the option available if two or more people are premade/in the same club. I believe there are unwinnable games, period, and there are those rare occasions where everything is against you and still you pull off the upset. Riot needs to have a 3/5 majority for surrenders, even if its starting at 25 mins rather than 20. What do they have to lose? If three players do not want to play, there's really nothing you can do 2 vs 5 to win.

reaperteaser6/17/2017, 9:39:36 PM1 votes

4v5s arent unwinnable, if its ranked then never stop trying til the nexus esplodes, ranked is where you are supposed to give your best even if the odds aren't in your favor. normals is a different story but i agree 4v5s can be quite unfun. and it never hurts to ask for a truce from the enemy and see if one of their laners will farm til full build or something like this so the game becomes a 4v4 and less tilting for the afkers team. not saying it will happen every time but in hopeless situations just try to have fun with it, try a new build or new tactic. just remember when you hit that accept game option you accept all the drawbacks of whatever that game might entail

theracody6/17/2017, 4:27:40 AM1 votes

I almost always vote no unless the game is totally unwinnable except by a miracle. Usually it's more fun that way, I can practice a character or mechanic in a lower stress environment due to the lack of real hope for the game. Other times I believe there's a real chance to win. Sometimes I'm spiting someone who was complaining all game. And I always, /always/ vote no in ranked. There's always /some/ chance to win one of those, and I don't want to allow that chance to slip by when rankings come into play.

YerroFever6/17/2017, 4:35:45 AM1 votes

I've won 3v5's so that's why I don't say yes when I have competent teammates.