I just got demoted from gold three to gold four due to our adc leaving at about four minutes saying, "one second". My entire team did quite well but we couldn't compensate from the lack of an ad. I think in cases where someone is afk for a certain percentage of the game, it should count as loss prevented.
ModKnightsKemplar7 votesIt's because it would provide incentive for people to leave if they were losing.
If you're duo, and you can leave and save your buddy some lp, then you can cheat the system. Even if you weren't duo, people would try to bully people who were playing poorly into leaving, instead of trying to work together as a team to win. It would make it nearly impossible to advance, because half your games would be loss prevented from people doing this.
That's why you don't get loss prevented for an afk.
Northwake1 votesWell that's why it would have to be for a large portion of the game, in this case they were gone for about half an hour.
ModKnightsKemplar1 votesYou could still just leave after first blood, and then not have to deal with comeback wins. I don't see a way to prevent abuse.
OnlyYouCanHearMe1 votesPeople would still use smurf accounts to help their friends rank up. People would never have to lose any lp that way. They would either win their matches, or have the player on the disposable account afk and take the hit, and they would get loss prevented. So they would never actually demote in rank, and the entire rank system would get skewed horribly.
It's an unfortunate problem with relying on other players in a multiplayer game. Sometimes, you will have players who leave when you need them. Equally unfortunate is that many of the suggestions people have for addressing the issue are too easily exploited to be effective. But Riot does still look at this situation, and does consider all the options when looking for ways to punish the players who make the games so difficult for their teams by leaving, without causing an even bigger problem, or risk accidentally punishing innocent players.
One of the ways they have implemented rather recently was the Low Priority Queue, which does seem to be fairly effective at punishing people who leave games. Though some think it might be a bit overly harsh, having multiple games with a 20 minute wait before queuing likely does deter quite a few people from continuing to afk. And the good thing about how LPQ works, is that no one is given the five 20 minute waits for a first or second offense. So, it does allow for emergency situations, or things that are out of a player's control, like a family situation or a sudden power outage. If a player does not show a pattern of this sort of behavior, or a sudden escalation of it, they are not likely to face any sort of serious inconvenience. After all, it's only meant to be a deterrent to discourage people from leaving games, not a way to keep them from playing at all.
Great Muta1 votesIf you're duo, and you can leave and save your buddy some lp, then you can cheat the system. Even if you weren't duo, people would try to bully people who were playing poorly into leaving, instead of trying to work together as a team to win. It would make it nearly impossible to advance, because half your games would be loss prevented from people doing this.
Why is Dota able to handle this then with loss preventions? When people AFK, the game ends up not being counted and the person who does it get punished. It works in Dota. It will work in League.
I can also tell you, friends aren't going to sit around 20+ mins for leaverbuster penalties very long. People don't have time for this and everyone has different schedules. I will promise you that people are not going to wait 20 mins for 5-10 games for their friends to finish their leaver buster penalty, only to get it again.
ModKnightsKemplar2 votesThat's a fair point, I guess. I didn't know that DotA did that.
I still don't love it though. I don't want 20 minute penalties for the first offense, and I think that's what it would take to prevent this for ranked. Heck, even 20 minutes isn't a deterrent to a lot of people, I'll bet. You speak from the perspective of a busy person; I am as well. A lot of the younger players of this game aren't, though.
In addition, I think bullying people into leaving would still be a problem. As it is, the incentive is to encourage people to work together to try to win, since that's the only way to mitigate the loss. If that changed, I think people would get really toxic just to try to force an afk. I don't want that, either.
Great Muta1 votesHeck, even 20 minutes isn't a deterrent to a lot of people, I'll bet. You speak from the perspective of a busy person; I am as well. A lot of the younger players of this game aren't, though.
I've been on penalties or have been in games when my friends came on and even my very good friends do not have the patience to wait around for me to finish a game. Once in a while, but trust me, people are not going to do this consistently. People also often don't want to play anymore after games.
In addition, I think bullying people into leaving would still be a problem
Every action taken by Riot is going to have reactions, both positive and negative. There will be people who suffer somewhat innocently and there will be people who abuse it, just like there is now. You have to make a stance on decisions and be willing to get a side angry or else you can't solve anything.
People are already being bullied in this game and dealing with 4v5's.
ModKnightsKemplar2 votesTo point one, SOME people won't do that consistently. Some will.
To point two, they HAVE taken a stance and made one side angry. You're just on the angry side :)
Great Muta1 votesAnd some already are. So we should just never look into it?
Riot's only stance has been a half-hearted one that isn't really solving that much, while Dota is consistent and found a solution to a problem.
Martensitic1 votesWhy is Dota able to handle this then with loss preventions?
For the same reason why DoTA has less than 1/100th the players of League: Its a sh.t game.
https://sd.keepcalm-o-matic.co.uk/i-w600/did-you-miss-me-4.jpg
oSEXYPLATYPUSo1 votesso this game and this game alone is why you are gold 4 instead of gold 3 ?
Magical Player1 votesLoss prevented only prevents lp loss on the losing team winning team still gets a win +lp
So in theory you'd see an influx of lp into the system(bad news) 5 people gain lp 5 people lose lp, more or less balanced 5 win 1 lose 4 neutral(the loss forgiven you want) huge influx of lp for no losses It'd be slow but a new avg(of guessing plat) would come about as people being to abuse the system Would degrade the game overall(imo)
Dolasaur1 votesThe effect might be nontrivial immediately, but the long term effect it would have on MMR would be pretty minimal. If memory serves, your MMR doesn't change during loss prevention, whether you win or lose. So you'd have to either do this every single game in order to get a bunch of promotions, or you'd soon get to the point where you're getting +5 on a win and -30 on a loss. And it probably wouldn't be terribly difficult for Riot to datamine and find the people that both have ranks 3 divisions above their MMR and have loss prevention on >X% of their games, and then perform some enforcement (ban, rank reset, etc.).
Magical Player1 votesTo be clear the solution to the problem is to have more systems ...........
That isn't a good solution imo More systems always lead to more abuse
