Boards›Player Behavior

How to Reduce the LP Lost Due to AFK's In Rank: The Ideia

DryHumpedByJesus··1 votes·630 views

Hi guys, So I queued into a ranked game and I find myself with 2 afk from the start so i said goodbye to that hard gained LP (despite a good start we had to the lane ;( ). So I started think it got to be a better way then just hoping all the afk's get banned right :), so I came up with this ideia: -Reduced LP lost for that afk teammates ( like 4-7 LP) -Increased LP lost for the person afk (like 25-35 LP), taking into count if the afk had an impact in the game (like the time he was afk), (over 7.5 min /10min) and the player could send riot support an email if was the server problem or something like that (for the first time) (of course these cannot be abused if you cannot comprove that it was a server problem the LP lost will be carried through) Note that the other teammates still get reduce lp lost in these situation (the LP lost aply even if you experience connection problem (your internet fault, I think riot should when you press to queue to rank warn you to test your connection in a costume game) since it your responsibility to see if you have good enough internet :) ) And since playing with an Afk is stressful af and not enjoyable you get a little extra for winning: -Increased LP gained if you win a 4vs5, 3vs5 (whatever is the case) btw these is literally speaking like (+ 5-10 LP gained) -If you are the afk player in these winning team you still get penalize (if you are over 7.5 min/10 min afk, or a relevant percentage the game afk xP) you get smaller lp lost (like 10 -17 LP) to counter balance the extra LP gained by your teammates Tell me what you guys think :) Upvote if you like maybe it get a rioter atention XP I creted same post but i decided to change the tittle to be more appealing (i have not delete the other one, plz dont kill me)

14 Comments

alasarcher1 votes

If they implement this, should they also implement, if you win against team with afker, you only gain 4-7 LP?

DryHumpedByJesus1 votes

plus 4-7 means you were ment to win 21 lp you gain 25-28 XP Sorry i though i made myself clear :(

alasarcher1 votes

{quoted}

plus 4-7 means you were ment to win 21 lp you gain 25-28 XP Sorry i though i made myself clear :(

Im asking , if your opponent team has afk, according to your system, how many LP would you gain if u win 5v4?

DryHumpedByJesus1 votes

Sorry i didnt make myself clear there xP You would win the same amount (so for say let say an hipotetical person is getting smacked by someone and getting called out in all chat and they decide the game is lost so they will aafk to reduce the enemy lp gain that wouldn't be fair) so they LP gained for winning a 5vs 4 would be the same as winning a 5vs5

alasarcher1 votes

{quoted}

Sorry i didnt make myself clear there xP You would win the same amount (so for say let say an hipotetical person is getting smacked by someone and getting called out in all chat and they decide the game is lost so they will aafk to reduce the enemy lp gain that wouldn't be fair) so they LP gained for winning a 5vs 4 would be the same as winning a 5vs4

See. There is flaw in your system. It cant balance itself out. With your system, any player above bronze, without any skill could climb up to diamond easily. As long as you are competent enough to win all games against afkers, with low LP loss with afkers, you would need like 20-30% winrate in non afker skill based games to climb.

DryHumpedByJesus1 votes

I see ;( and penalizing the 5vs4 team is not fair :)

DryHumpedByJesus1 votes

yeah not diamond but would be way to easy to climb thanks :) i realize why this cannot be implemente now :) it would be unfair to the 5vs4 team because the only way to balance would be by lowering the LP earned by the team without afk :( guess i will need to wait until the afks will be all banned :) but i wonder would be possible if we just like took (-2LP) from every other teammate (for instance instead of losing 17 LP we lost 15 LP) and putting that aditional LP (-10LP) to the afk player? I think we would make the afk drop rankings quickly and or they get their act together or they would fall really fast :) and the MMR inflating would be that bad

Jubbinaut1 votes

Here's the problem with your proposal:

On average, players play with AFKs on the opposing team slightly more often than on their own.

So the net result of your system, as proposed, would be a significant inflation of MMR/LP for everyone (except consistent afkers).

If, for example, 18% (for ease of math) of a specific player's matches involved an AFK player, then on average ~10% of those would be against him (normal LP gain), and ~8% of those games would be with him (reduced LP loss).

Adding in his normal win/loss rates, he would wind up gaining LP that he frankly didn't earn.

To balance this, it would be necessary to penalize teams that win against an AFKer by the same rate - as Alasarcher suggested. Otherwise you're going a long way towards invalidating the very concept of Rankings - because the fastest/most efficient way to gain rank would be to ensure that other players AFK'd with regularity.

Actually, I hadn't even thought about that - this would actively reward drop-hackers.

DryHumpedByJesus1 votes

Didn't though about that :( However i dont think the inflation of the MMR/LP would be that significant because the AFK's percentage on the enemy team vs on your own team would be approximately 50%/50% (at least mathematical probability) and btw I'm one of the unlucky bastards that gets more afk on his team then on the enemy team

Jubbinaut2 votes

{quoted}

Didn't though about that :( However i dont think the inflation of the MMR/LP would be that significant because the AFK's percentage on the enemy team vs on your own team would be approximately 50%/50% (at least mathematical probability) and btw I'm one of the unlucky bastards that gets more afk on his team then on the enemy team

If there is an AFK in a game you're in - and you are not that AFK - there are a total of 9 other players that might be it. 4 of those players are on your team. 5 of them are on the enemy team.

So you have a 4/9 (44.44444%) probability of having an AFK on your team, or a 5/9 (55.55556%) probability of having an AFK on the enemy team.

In terms of mathematical probability, you are ~11% more likely for any given AFKer to be on the enemy team than on your own.

Keep in mind that over time, any artificial adjustment of MMR/LP will have huge consequences. An example:

Player A plays 100 games. His LP gains and losses are even at ~21. Of those 100 games, 18 involve an AFK player. The results of those AFK games follow.

  • Current System 44/55: Net change of +42 LP; Total loss of 168 LP; Total gain of 210 LP.
  • Current System 50/50: Net change of 0 LP; Total loss of 189; Total gain of 189.
  • Proposed Change 44/55: Net change of +178 LP; Total loss of 32 LP; Total gain of 210 LP.
  • Proposed Change 50/50: Net change of +153 LP; Total loss of 36 LP; Total gain of 189 LP.

I think it's worth noting that at the 44/55 rate, your proposed change would have Player A gaining more net LP than he would have lost at all in the current system.

If Player A has a 50/50 win rate outside of AFKs (so net +0LP over the other 82 games), the current system ensures he stays about where he is - which is appropriate, since if his "controllable" win-rate is 50/50, he's where he's supposed to be.

Your proposed system ensures he rises. Normally, I'd say "to be placed against more challenging opponents," but everyone else would be experiencing the same increase - so he'd simply be rising in ranks while facing generally the same group of opponents.

Which, altogether, means everyone goes up in ranks until ranks no longer have any significance.

DryHumpedByJesus1 votes

I already admited that these isn't applicable xP

DryHumpedByJesus1 votes

I guess these concept came from 2 very frustating games where if we had a complete team with would be a garanted win or at least 70% :(

Jubbinaut1 votes

I can certainly understand that. AFKs are frustrating as hell. But it's important to remember that in the long run, they don't really have much of an effect on you.

DryHumpedByJesus1 votes

Ok i can see a mistake in the way i expressed myself i mean to say you can only geot one no increased Lp lost claiming it was the servers fault without verification ( i dont know if they verifyand they probably do) i didnt mean you will not be able to get the normal lp lost from the server going down xP(btw if you reach out to riot i think they even "forgive" the LP lost if it was a server problem)

More from Player Behavior

The indefinite banning of Tyler1
Player Behavior4,799 comments
2,942
votes
14 day ban because playing Nunu Support with Smite is "stealing other people's roles"...?
Player Behavior1,525 comments
1,086
votes
Riot should add monthly status cards
Player Behavior241 comments
843
votes
Reminder that we haven't gotten our Summoner report cards yet :/
Player Behavior145 comments
619
votes
I'm not "triggered" by you throwing insults.
Player Behavior361 comments
548
votes
Black Alistar, King Rammus!!!!
Player Behavior462 comments
503
votes

More by DryHumpedByJesus

How to minimize the impact of afk on rank
Player Behavior4 comments
1
votes