AFK Detection Timer

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Archos

Member

09-11-2012

This thing needs to be changed. 7 seconds, when you easily could have been sitting there for 5-15 minutes, is simply not long enough. 30 seconds would be more appropriate by a long shot. You can always shorten the wait once you get into champion select by locking in, so you lose virtually nothing by having people wait 30 seconds to put you back in queue if not everyone shows up. You need to have time to *quickly* run to the bathroom, get a drink, or answer the door.

Also, not being able to chat when that thing pops is BS.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Orphane

Senior Member

09-11-2012

Oh, you mean the queue accept timer. Yeah it could stand to be longer. 20-30 seconds would be fine, probably.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

LunaCarte

Junior Member

09-12-2012

I dont mind it that much, but I see where you're coming from.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

naotasan

Senior Member

09-12-2012

I would be so happy if it was about 15 seconds. 20+ might be a bit long, I say we test it out at 15 seconds.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

FDru

Senior Member

09-12-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by naotasan View Post
I would be so happy if it was about 15 seconds. 20+ might be a bit long, I say we test it out at 15 seconds.
They gave us 30 seconds to enter champ select under the old system, and I don't see anything wrong with giving us 30 seconds under the new one.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

naotasan

Senior Member

09-12-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by FDru View Post
They gave us 30 seconds to enter champ select under the old system, and I don't see anything wrong with giving us 30 seconds under the new one.
In the old one you were forced into the lobby.

30 seconds to wait for some afk guy seems a bit much where you aren't forced to go into the lobby.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

DG TheFeedski

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

09-12-2012

I think all Dominion players would agree that the "AKF detection timer" is too short, unfortunately we aren't Riot's target audience. Now before all of you get mad, you have to realize Riot is a business and the number one most played game in the world. They cater to the majority. Sadly, Dominion isn't the majority. While I think it's a very good addition to SR, it just doesn't work as well for Dominion. We are looking at 30 seconds queues vs 1 hour queues. While it was a great idea for the other modes, it just doesn't work as well for Dominion since the player base isn't as large.

Now that that's out of the way, I do agree it could be a BIT longer without affecting the SR players too much. 10 seconds is a bit short in all honesty. While I see where Riot is coming from, I think they could more easily cater to both modes by extending the timer 5 or 10 seconds. It allows us Dominion players a bit of extra time in case we have to step away for a quick moment during our long queues, and really doesn't hinder the SR community much.

A lot of Dominion players quickly jump the gun to hate on Riot, but you really have to understand they are just doing what the majority wants. It doesn't mean they hate us, it doesn't mean they don't support Dominion, it means they are a business, and any successful business will listen to what the majority of their customer's want, unfortunately, their majority is SR.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Goronok

Senior Member

09-12-2012

Their majority is SR because they support that mode and discourage the other modes actively. In a competitive game, having a ranked mode means that's what will be popular. Having a ranked version that's featured in tournaments will make it more popular.

If Dominion had a ranked mode and was featured in major tournaments, I seriously doubt the queue times would be a quarter as long as they are now.

So yes... we can blame Riot. We can blame them all day long.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

LunarisDream

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

09-13-2012

7 seconds is annoying enough when people wait until the last second to accept because they suck. Imagine 30 seconds.
This short time is much better at fleshing out AFKers, especially in ranked. And if you have to go to the bathroom, just go and rejoin the queue later - you'd be waiting for the same half minute.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Archos

Member

09-16-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by LunarisDream View Post
7 seconds is annoying enough when people wait until the last second to accept because they suck. Imagine 30 seconds.
This short time is much better at fleshing out AFKers, especially in ranked. And if you have to go to the bathroom, just go and rejoin the queue later - you'd be waiting for the same half minute.
You're afraid that you're going to get trolled getting into a game by having someone wait until the last second to select. In other words, you're afraid people will abuse the system for their own enjoyment. I can't guarantee that people won't do this, but I can guarantee that trolls are out there and making you wait an extra 23 seconds to get into champ select is probably one of the least malicious things that can be done to detriment your game experience. Also, why is someone accepting at the last second automatically them "sucking" and not their lack of attention or a legitimate afk?

This post seems driven by an SR perspective, or I'll at least interpret it this way in order to save face for everyone. We're typically not talking about a 30 second queue time. We're talking about queue durations equal to half of a game. If enough other people join in the time it takes you to rejoin, you can easily be looking at the same duration wait.

Perhaps a feasible solution would be to increase the duration for dominion. It would be simple enough to call a differently named function.