Boards›Player Behavior

Remove decline bans Riot

The Boob Creamer·8/2/2016, 1:25:51 AM·1 votes·1,564 views

What the hell is with a decline ban. This makes absolutely zero sense. When a ranked queue comes up and the option to either accept or decline comes up, any player should be able to decline as many matches as they want to their heart's content. This is a ridiculous travesty. I couldn't get over that you actually lose LP for declining a fourth match. Let alone a time penalty. What kind of horrible nonsense is that?

How is someone declining a match for 10 times, 30 times, 10,000 times in a row, doing anything but inconveniencing the person declining it? You find another match almost immediately. This is a power-mad, power-hungry, officious and micromanaging bunch of absolute nonsense. There is no reason to need to attempt such a minor streamlining of matchmaking in such an extreme, hindering and negatively-reinforcing fashion.

It takes a mere second or two before the next person jumps in for a game. There is -NO- argument that you can make that people shouldn't be able to decline matches to their hearts content. I can see an argument for leaving during champion selection as that takes considerably more time, but even then that shouldn't cost people LP. I can see an argument for some possible negative reinforcement in that area by taking away time, as they are wasting everybody else's time. But that has nothing to do with decline bans.

There could be a number of reasons why someone would decline a game 9 to 90 to 900 times. Please, for the love of ****, where is the argument, logically, without resorting to some kind of legal positivist, or obedience to the state type of argument where it is ok to punish someone for a decline, which takes mere seconds out of the other queuer's lives. This is an absolutely preposterous proposition. Sorry about the cursing, but I'm so far down the road with this nonsense that I'm subsequently extremely upset with this.

How about some positive reinforcement? Why does it have to be negative? This is the core principle that riot always preaches about trying to remove toxicity and removing negativity. How can Riot stand in this position of sacrosanctity with regards to the abeyance of accounts for the most minor err you can think of. Why not give LP to people who rarely decline matches? I'd be all for that. That would be a great positive reinforcement for people accepting games.

I'm sure there are an innumerable amount of ways you could add in a positive reinforcement aspect to this game if you just put your collective minds to it. Which would have the effect of reinforcing the positive player attitudes instead of punishing players, which only serves to reinforce negativity. This is -such- the wrong angle to approach things from.

You always post all these statistics about players improvement from tribunal measures, but are you even counting players that stop playing on certain accounts and just migrate to another one? Has this fact accounted for every single possible obviating factor to posting a statistic that is surely spurious? I sincerely doubt this. Who is running this show?

Please change this Riot. Thanks, -Disgruntled, non-regular forum posting league player

30 Comments

Astôlfo8/2/2016, 1:57:30 AM4 votes

Because you're a troll if you do so?

Athina8/2/2016, 1:33:41 AM3 votes

You get punished because you are wasting the time of everyone else trying to get into that game for no reason at all. If you are just going to decline, don't queue at all. Queuing just to decline intentionally extends the wait time of everyone else next in line.

Kei1438/2/2016, 1:32:11 AM3 votes

I normally play fill, and I do get a queue right away if someone has declined it.

However, when I queue as any other laners (other than support), then I might have to requeue for 3 minutes. I had 4 people decline their matches consecutively and I waited a total of like 15 minutes or something. Keep in mind I'm in bronze, where majority of the players are.

Imagine this at a higher ELO, where they already experience hell in wait times. If not for "auto-fill" when a certain time limit hits, they might even be in queue for 90 minutes. Which is unacceptable.

Things that you don't think matter can make a major difference at the higher ELO games, and you don't have to go to challenjour to have crazy wait times.

Another thing is that you can ghost other players, seeing that you and they have the same game and you don't want to play with them, so you just keep denying it.

MagicFlyingLlama8/2/2016, 1:37:15 AM2 votes

Why would you queue and then decline. Why would riot not punish you for trolling, which is obviously what you are doing? Even this guy's name screams "bad troll"

Environmentalist8/2/2016, 1:35:33 AM2 votes

Not voting, nor reading the whole thing. Don't join a queue if you're going to decline. I didn't even know there was a decline ban, because I never decline. There is no need to.

Angry Monster8/2/2016, 1:35:33 AM2 votes

All you are doing is trolling by starting a lobby and saying Declined 4 times in a row. What justification could you possibly have for refusing that many times?

Rio Risotto8/2/2016, 4:41:50 AM2 votes

What the hell is with a intentional feeding punishment. This makes absolutely zero sense. When a ranked queue comes up and the option to either play like a human being or feed comes up, any player should be able to intentionally feed in as many matches as they want to their heart's content. This is a ridiculous travesty. I couldn't get over that you actually lose LP for feeding every. Let alone a time penalty. What kind of horrible nonsense is that?

How is someone feeding in a match for 10 times, 30 times, 10,000 times in a row, doing anything but inconveniencing the person feeding ? If you ragequit you find another match immidiately. This is a power-mad, power-hungry, officious and micromanaging bunch of absolute nonsense. There is no reason to need to attempt such a minor streamlining of matchmaking in such an extreme, hindering and negatively-reinforcing fashion. It takes a mere second or two before the next person jumps in for a game. There is -NO- argument that you can make that people shouldn't be able to feed in matches to their hearts content.

Ellis McPickle8/2/2016, 10:14:34 PM1 votes

Each time you decline a game you are wasting 10 seconds for the timer to accept to expire plus 2 more seconds to get into another game. For the 9 other players lives that is 108 seconds total wasted of other peoples lives. After 5 declines you have wasted a total of 9 minutes of other peoples lives. The game isn't all about you. Assuming another gamedoes pop immediately.

Reaper Soraka8/2/2016, 2:27:58 AM1 votes

How is someone declining a match for 10 times, 30 times, 10,000 times in a row, doing anything but inconveniencing the person declining it?

This is actually an inconvenience for the other 9 people that have to wait for the decline bar to fill before autosearching a new game. believe it or not, it was a pretty big problem before they added the feature; people (including myself) believed people were just doing it for fun (it really made no sense why it would happen so many games in a row.) Having it happen 20 games in a row, at 10 seconds per decline, starts to add up pretty fast.

There could be a number of reasons why someone would decline a game 9 to 90 to 900 times.

Sorry to come off harsh here, but I can't think of a better way to put it. Get your shit together before joining queue. There is no reason to search for a game a hundred times over if you aren't ready to play one.

The only people this feature really inconveniences is those who must wait 10-20mins for a queue, and miss it because they're preoccupied. I could see changing the penalty for players in queue for like 10mins+, but not any shorter.