For the love of god, LOSS FORGIVEN WHEN SOMEONE DC'S FOR 10 MINS+?

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PogoPogoPogoPogo

Senior Member

11-01-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gladiator Rinn View Post
ok, and then this "stupid master yi" does disconnect, then he get's banned for leaving a ranked game...awesome, sounds like we're killing two birds with one stone here.
Wow. You missed 100% of the point.

In my example, Master Yi was having a bad game. He wasn't playing bad intentionally, it just wasn't working out for him that match. But if your idea for the system is in place, because Yi's teammates have incentive to get someone to leave (they don't lose Elo for a match their team got outplayed in), they harass Master Yi.

Master Yi wouldn't normally leave, and maybe in this case he doesn't. But the cases where the worst player on the losing team gets harassed will increase if the losing team doesn't lose Elo if someone disconnected. And at the end of the match, Yi can just report his teammates, and eventually the Tribunal will take care of them, but why should we subject Yi to this harassment in the first place? We're giving his teammates the incentive to harass him.

And what if Yi does leave? Okay, now his team is virtually guaranteed to loss, but they won't lose Elo. Master Yi, who was harassed into leaving, has an AFK/DC/Idle on his record, and after enough it will leave to punishment (even though he was harassed into leaving just so his teammates wouldn't lose Elo) and what's the worst part about all of this?

Master Yi won't have the opportunity to report his teammates. That's right. If you're not in the game when the inhibitor explodes, then you're not taken to the post-match lobby. And if you're not at the post-match lobby, you can't report your teammates.


So now we've created a system where the following three things are true:

a) Players on losing teams have incentive to harass teammates.
b) Players are punished for leaving due to the harassment from those incentivized teammates.
c) Players on losing teams who are most successful at harassing their teammates are also the least likely to get punished for their harassment.
d) The winning team still gains Elo, so their is a net Elo inflation.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Sky Mence

Senior Member

11-01-2012

Well most people just dc because their internet is trash
However ive seen people that ragequit because they have a terrible K/D/A/CS


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Wolvenlight

Member

11-02-2012

Okay. Pro/Con time.

Let's say we see a system implemented. Put in a time discrepancy, leaver/afker has to be gone/idle for 10+ or so/more minutes overall, or it's just another loss for the whole team. In this system, leavers:

-Gain 5 losses.
-Lose all ELO the rest of their teammates would lose.
-Enemy team still gets wins and ELO gain.
-Non-leaver players not punished for crummy game.
-Leaver has option (once game is over, otherwise they're told to reconnect and nothing else,) to give reason for leaving, (connection issues, IRL emergency, harassment, etc.) to be reviewed by any Tribunal case if reporting against leaver occurred. (The judges should be able to tell, or at least make an educated guess.)
-Multiple leavers have punishments spread between them. First leaver 3 losses, second 2 losses. Something like that.


Pros:

-Leavers and afkers punished for leaving.
-Losing team not punished for bad luck beyond their control.
-Harassment also has chance to get punished if Tribunal case leans in favor of leaver.
-No ELO inflation.
-Leaver has incentive, while being harassed, to put every bad person on his ignore list and stay in the game (if due to bad play, racism, chasing Singed/Poppy.)

Cons:

-Incentive for harassment.
-Chance for leavers with good reasons for ducking out to be punished.
-Dummy account creation incentive for ELO/Loss dumping when playing with friends.

Neutral:

-Team wide loss forgiveness becomes far less common.
-Punishment type can be decided by Riot.


Now, for every system put in place their may be pros and cons like this. The system I just suggested is very harsh towards leavers, maybe too harsh. But it's an idea that will improve the gaming experience of those left behind.

I know OPs suggestions may invite harassment towards unskilled players, but that only means we need to build on the system or create a new one. (Also League's community can be bad, but it isn't 100% THAT bad.) Saying everything is just fine as it is now is false. (Nobody has outright said that, but it's been implied.)

And with that; discuss.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PogoPogoPogoPogo

Senior Member

11-02-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolvenlight View Post
Let's say we see a system implemented. Put in a time discrepancy, leaver/afker has to be gone/idle for 10+ or so/more minutes overall, or it's just another loss for the whole team. In this system, leavers:

-Gain 5 losses.
-Lose all ELO the rest of their teammates would lose.
Two problems.

1) This system unfairly punishes people who disconnect from matches. While I agree that there should be a system of punishment for people who disconnect, the punishment for individual disconnects should not be anywhere near so harsh. Personally, I'm never interested in leaving a game early, but if lose my connection for some rare, freakish reason, I don't just get 1 loss and 1 game's worth of negative Elo, but 5?

And that simply doesn't work with the way the Elo system is designed to work. The Elo system is designed to assign me an Elo (which is supposed to be a reflection of my skill), yet I get punished 5 times for losing a match due to an unpreventable circumstance.

Now yes, it should be something that happens pretty rarely, but it will still drastically skew the Elo system. After all, five losses could mean as much as -70 Elo. That's almost down an entire bracket. That's way to drastic.



2) You've actually possibly made the incentive for harassment even worse now. Now, rather than waiting till the loss is inevitable, since the teammates need the player to have been DCed for 10 minutes (or whatever other arbitrary time amount), then the harassment will start as early as the 10 minute mark. If Master Yi struggled in his lane, he'll be harassed by teammates to leave during laning phase when the game is far from decided, that way his teammates can just surrender at 20 (if he left at 10) and not lose Elo.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

eLeeTeR

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

Senior Member

11-02-2012

yo dog... its not fair right right... but who said life is fair right right???

gotta get a thicker set of skin. man up. cmon braski right right!!


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Wolvenlight

Member

11-04-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by PogoPogoPogoPogo View Post
Two problems.

1) This system unfairly punishes people who disconnect from matches. While I agree that there should be a system of punishment for people who disconnect, the punishment for individual disconnects should not be anywhere near so harsh. Personally, I'm never interested in leaving a game early, but if lose my connection for some rare, freakish reason, I don't just get 1 loss and 1 game's worth of negative Elo, but 5?

And that simply doesn't work with the way the Elo system is designed to work. The Elo system is designed to assign me an Elo (which is supposed to be a reflection of my skill), yet I get punished 5 times for losing a match due to an unpreventable circumstance.

Now yes, it should be something that happens pretty rarely, but it will still drastically skew the Elo system. After all, five losses could mean as much as -70 Elo. That's almost down an entire bracket. That's way to drastic.



2) You've actually possibly made the incentive for harassment even worse now. Now, rather than waiting till the loss is inevitable, since the teammates need the player to have been DCed for 10 minutes (or whatever other arbitrary time amount), then the harassment will start as early as the 10 minute mark. If Master Yi struggled in his lane, he'll be harassed by teammates to leave during laning phase when the game is far from decided, that way his teammates can just surrender at 20 (if he left at 10) and not lose Elo.
Well, that's why I said that some of these would be subject to change and discussion, no system is perfect right off the bat. Or less we'd never need to balance champions.

1) For the first issue: That's why I included an option for leavers to give a reason for leaving for review in a Tribunal like system. If the reason was good enough, he could be forgiven all those losses, just like the normal loss forgiveness. This of course would review in game circumstances as well to conclude whether or not his reason is true or false. I simply disagree with your point about how ELO is supposed to work in this regard, because if someone leaves a game... Well, that's not very skillful OR team oriented of them. (More on that after 2.)

2) For this, you're right, which is why I mentioned how harsh I thought it was. However, there is an in game ignore feature for a reason, and harassment is that reason. Also, with harsh punishment for leaving, no (intelligent) player would choose to leave rather than just ignore everyone and carry on with the game until it's all over with. Finally, if you have an issue with the time, pick a time you think would work out better. 15 minutes? 20? 30? It's a balancing issue between too soon and too late. I said 10 minutes because someone else mentioned that being a good time. Personally I think a full 20 minutes would be better.


See, I'm glad you're pointing out these issues, because you make good points. Now let's say we put a system in place where this 5 loss system doesn't kick in unless you leave a certain number of times within a certain amount of time. What amount and what time? I'd leave that to Riot, but 5 times in a month long period sounds more than fair to me.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PogoPogoPogoPogo

Senior Member

11-04-2012

Can't leave it to the Tribunal to determine whether or not to punish for AFK. And giving a reason for leaving? No.

Here's why.

1) Hardly anyone will be honest for their reason for leaving. I mean, c'mon. They won't. Intentional feeding is already a bad enough case to try judging in the Tribunal. Whether or not the leave reason is legit is even worse. Now, if I leave for a legit reason when my team is losing, I get punished, but if I leave for any reason at all when my team is winning, I get pardoned.
2) If you're leaving for the only legitimate, excusable reason (an emergency), you don't have time to stop to type out a reason for leaving.


As for 2, it's not really about whether or not players WILL leave when harassed. It's the fact that using this system, players on a losing team have good incentive to try getting their teammates to leave game. Riot doesn't want players leaving games. Riot doesn't want players harassing teammates. Riot doesn't even want you to leave in order to save your teammates the Elo loss if you feel guilty for playing bad. Riot wants players to finish games.

The ONLY amount of time that'd really be acceptable is if the player simply never connected in the first place, in which case there's no incentive for anyone to leave a game they can see will be a loss anyway, and there's no incentive for anyone to harass anyone into leaving. But if you're not going to give the team with 4 players a loss, then you need to not play the game at all. You don't need to award the other team Elo, you don't need to give the 4man team a shot a free Elo if they somehow manage a win. You need to simply abandon the game if the disconnected player hasn't connected by X minutes into the game (1:30, 3, 5, 10, I don't care).


There's already system in place to deal with people who habitually disconnect/afk/idle games. It's called leaverbuster. It issues warnings and bans. This is the best way to deal with the issue and deal with people who are intentionally leaving.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Wolvenlight

Member

11-04-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by PogoPogoPogoPogo View Post
Can't leave it to the Tribunal to determine whether or not to punish for AFK. And giving a reason for leaving? No.

Here's why.

1) Hardly anyone will be honest for their reason for leaving. I mean, c'mon. They won't. Intentional feeding is already a bad enough case to try judging in the Tribunal. Whether or not the leave reason is legit is even worse. Now, if I leave for a legit reason when my team is losing, I get punished, but if I leave for any reason at all when my team is winning, I get pardoned.
2) If you're leaving for the only legitimate, excusable reason (an emergency), you don't have time to stop to type out a reason for leaving.


As for 2, it's not really about whether or not players WILL leave when harassed. It's the fact that using this system, players on a losing team have good incentive to try getting their teammates to leave game. Riot doesn't want players leaving games. Riot doesn't want players harassing teammates. Riot doesn't even want you to leave in order to save your teammates the Elo loss if you feel guilty for playing bad. Riot wants players to finish games.

The ONLY amount of time that'd really be acceptable is if the player simply never connected in the first place, in which case there's no incentive for anyone to leave a game they can see will be a loss anyway, and there's no incentive for anyone to harass anyone into leaving. But if you're not going to give the team with 4 players a loss, then you need to not play the game at all. You don't need to award the other team Elo, you don't need to give the 4man team a shot a free Elo if they somehow manage a win. You need to simply abandon the game if the disconnected player hasn't connected by X minutes into the game (1:30, 3, 5, 10, I don't care).


There's already system in place to deal with people who habitually disconnect/afk/idle games. It's called leaverbuster. It issues warnings and bans. This is the best way to deal with the issue and deal with people who are intentionally leaving.
Sorry, but neither of those reasons seemed good enough to me. Because the main goal of the system I'm proposing is to make the game more enjoyable for people who are stuck in a losing battle for 20 minutes only to have it end in the same marks a normal fair game would have. I don't really want the punishment to be harsh, but it's incentive to stay in the game, or to not start a game you might not be able to finish. (I agree with you that the best way players can not have to deal with this is not to join a game they don't have time for in the first place.)

1) Of course people who leave on purpose to troll or whatever won't be honest, but with every foreseeable issue that might come up (I might have not thought of 1 or 2), I gave a gear in my proposed system that deals with it. First leave in a while? Auto no punishment, it was probably an emergency, or internet issue, and you can still give a reason. History of leaving bad games, 3 to 5 in a week/month? (People who leave games constantly WILL exceed this in a day.) Then Tribunal Judgement kicks in, and those judging will know this, (If you think they won't, then remind them in a header in leave cases.) Tribunal isn't really all that difficult to judge, and if people are given the tools they need to figure out what's going on in the game before the leave happens, the judgment will be quite simple. Not foolproof, but accurate by a wide margin, and that's the point. Well, besides the main point being making the game more enjoyable for those who play and don't leave, as well as prevention of leaving/incentive to stay in game in the first place. If you think harassment will make players leave, then coupled with knowing how harsh it is to leave in the first place, it balances out to what it is now. As for things that are foolproof, you'd need to record every game, and that isn't really possible unless you're Blizzard or something.

2) Addressed in 1).

As for the issue of guilt making people leave... That wouldn't really affect anybody. Anecdotal evidence is bad evidence, but I personally can't remember a game where someone left because they felt bad for playing bad, or were harassed by people. It happens already, and people still stick around. They merely ignore the jerks and surrender at 20. And besides, this isn't for people who play bad, it's for people who leave on a constant basis. Once the line is crossed, the games start being loss forgiven for the victims and these people who constantly leave get that much more punishment.

(Granted, again, I agree with how harsh this system is. I'll also point out a problem in people creating multiple accounts to try and work around it. They'll all get banned, but trolls rarely care. However, a system that finds and stops this kind of behavior quickly makes it rather not fun to troll in the first place.)

Remember, the point is coming up with a system that HELPS players fighting a losing battle for 20 minutes not to feel like they're being punished for something beyond their control, while not jumping to punish those who have real life bad luck beyond THEIR control, but dealing with players who do this on a constant basis. Leaverbuster doesn't do these things. It's merely a punishment system.

As for your second to last paragraph, I'm not too sure what you were trying to say. But if we're still talking about my system; if everyone ducks out, it's just a normal 1 loss for everyone and the game ends quickly. Next game commence! However, if they stick around and try to win? They get loss forgiven if they lose. If they win? It's a normal win for everyone except the leaver, and a normal loss for the enemy team because who loses a game that much in their favor? (Barring the kind souls that let a team down a guy win.)

Anyway, this was just one idea I put forth. I have others

Alternative ideas:

1a) If a player DC's in the beginning of a game (anywhere between 1-5 minutes), the other 4 players have the option of an early loss forgiven surrender, so everyone can get to a more fun, fair game. If they want to risk staying in the game in hopes that the DC'd player comes back, or that the other team will just suck that much, it's on them if they lose.

1b) If a player leaves before the 20 minute mark but after the 1-5 minute mark, an early surrender can commence that doesn't loss forgive, merely ends a crummy game so people can move on to a better one. (These two are my favorite possible coupled systems, for while I'd personally stay, I would understand why people would want to leave. And it's still more forgiving for those games when someone might be gone the whole time and you'd rather not chance it.)

2) Leaverbuster logs all players in games with leavers and will later loss forgive if certain circumstances are met. Among which can be; Surrender at 20, multiple reports against leaver, tribunal cases passing guilty verdicts against leaver. (Issue with this one is ELO inflation, but honestly, ELO inflation is an inevitability anyway. Only way to combat it would be a constant ELO decay at all levels of ELO regardless of whether you're constantly playing ranked or not, perhaps coupled with an ELO ceiling, but that's another discussion entirely, and I'd hate to see a system like this implemented anyway.)

3) A vote in the champ selection screen to ditch a game before it starts if you get the feeling someone is a troll. This one is the least effective because effective trolls are subtle until people get stuck with or without them for 20 minutes. But it's something.

If you have any better ideas, please bring them forth. That's not me being snide, I mean that. This is all really a discussion of ideas that most likely will never get implemented anyway.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Dr Fuzzy Gloves

Senior Member

11-05-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by JulpaFTW View Post
In the long run. In the short run, it's annoying and unfair. Losing or gaining elo should depend on you and your team's skill and performance, not their presence.
and in this perfect world, there is no war, or famine, or disease..... oh wait....


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Dr Fuzzy Gloves

Senior Member

11-05-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by PogoPogoPogoPogo View Post
2) If you're leaving for the only legitimate, excusable reason (an emergency), you don't have time to stop to type out a reason for leaving.
not true, my wife was somewhere with her mother, collapsed, and her mom was on the way back with her, i received the call and was mid game (ranked), knowing i had about 10 minutes, i informed my team of the situation, played for another 5 minutes, buying as many wards as possible and ganking like mad trying to help my team get some sort of advantage that might help them win.

then had to leave.

the real kicker is i've played over 4000 games of LoL by now, i've maybe left 3 total, all for legitimate reasons. i told them to go ahead and report me as i felt the community needs to be fair and just, and only having 3 leaves in 4000 games, i felt my chances of a ban were pretty slim.

my point is, players with real emergencies can still be reported, if they dont leave often, who cares about 1 game of reports?